Literature DB >> 22482028

How can land-use modelling tools inform bioenergy policies?

Sarah C Davis1, Joanna I House, Rocio A Diaz-Chavez, Andras Molnar, Hugo Valin, Evan H Delucia.   

Abstract

Targets for bioenergy have been set worldwide to mitigate climate change. Although feedstock sources are often ambiguous, pledges in European nations, the United States and Brazil amount to more than 100 Mtoe of biorenewable fuel production by 2020. As a consequence, the biofuel sector is developing rapidly, and it is increasingly important to distinguish bioenergy options that can address energy security and greenhouse gas mitigation from those that cannot. This paper evaluates how bioenergy production affects land-use change (LUC), and to what extent land-use modelling can inform sound decision-making. We identified local and global internalities and externalities of biofuel development scenarios, reviewed relevant data sources and modelling approaches, identified sources of controversy about indirect LUC (iLUC) and then suggested a framework for comprehensive assessments of bioenergy. Ultimately, plant biomass must be managed to produce energy in a way that is consistent with the management of food, feed, fibre, timber and environmental services. Bioenergy production provides opportunities for improved energy security, climate mitigation and rural development, but the environmental and social consequences depend on feedstock choices and geographical location. The most desirable solutions for bioenergy production will include policies that incentivize regionally integrated management of diverse resources with low inputs, high yields, co-products, multiple benefits and minimal risks of iLUC. Many integrated assessment models include energy resources, trade, technological development and regional environmental conditions, but do not account for biodiversity and lack detailed data on the location of degraded and underproductive lands that would be ideal for bioenergy production. Specific practices that would maximize the benefits of bioenergy production regionally need to be identified before a global analysis of bioenergy-related LUC can be accomplished.

Keywords:  biofuels; ecosystem services; environmental economics; feedstocks; greenhouse gas; indirect land-use change

Year:  2011        PMID: 22482028      PMCID: PMC3262264          DOI: 10.1098/rsfs.2010.0023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Interface Focus        ISSN: 2042-8898            Impact factor:   3.906


  22 in total

1.  Soil carbon sequestration impacts on global climate change and food security.

Authors:  R Lal
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-06-11       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Sources of nitrate yields in the Mississippi River Basin.

Authors:  Mark B David; Laurie E Drinkwater; Gregory F McIsaac
Journal:  J Environ Qual       Date:  2010 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.751

3.  The global potential of bioenergy on abandoned agriculture lands.

Authors:  J Elliott Campbell; David B Lobell; Robert C Genova; Christopher B Field
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2008-08-01       Impact factor: 9.028

4.  Indirect emissions from biofuels: how important?

Authors:  Jerry M Melillo; John M Reilly; David W Kicklighter; Angelo C Gurgel; Timothy W Cronin; Sergey Paltsev; Benjamin S Felzer; Xiaodong Wang; Andrei P Sokolov; C Adam Schlosser
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-10-22       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Climate change. Fixing a critical climate accounting error.

Authors:  Timothy D Searchinger; Steven P Hamburg; Jerry Melillo; William Chameides; Petr Havlik; Daniel M Kammen; Gene E Likens; Ruben N Lubowski; Michael Obersteiner; Michael Oppenheimer; G Philip Robertson; William H Schlesinger; G David Tilman
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-10-23       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Carbon-negative biofuels from low-input high-diversity grassland biomass.

Authors:  David Tilman; Jason Hill; Clarence Lehman
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-12-08       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Long-term changes in mollisol organic carbon and nitrogen.

Authors:  Mark B David; Gregory F McIsaac; Robert G Darmody; Rex A Omonode
Journal:  J Environ Qual       Date:  2009-01-13       Impact factor: 2.751

Review 8.  Exploiting the potential of plants with crassulacean acid metabolism for bioenergy production on marginal lands.

Authors:  Anne M Borland; Howard Griffiths; James Hartwell; J Andrew C Smith
Journal:  J Exp Bot       Date:  2009-04-23       Impact factor: 6.992

Review 9.  Tequila production.

Authors:  M Cedeño
Journal:  Crit Rev Biotechnol       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 8.429

Review 10.  Competition for land.

Authors:  Pete Smith; Peter J Gregory; Detlef van Vuuren; Michael Obersteiner; Petr Havlík; Mark Rounsevell; Jeremy Woods; Elke Stehfest; Jessica Bellarby
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-09-27       Impact factor: 6.237

View more
  4 in total

1.  Biorenewables, the bio-based economy and sustainability.

Authors:  Richard Templer; Luuk van der Wielen
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 3.906

2.  Balance between climate change mitigation benefits and land use impacts of bioenergy: conservation implications for European birds.

Authors:  Laura Meller; Wilfried Thuiller; Samuel Pironon; Morgane Barbet-Massin; Andries Hof; Mar Cabeza
Journal:  Glob Change Biol Bioenergy       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 4.745

3.  Life-cycle analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from renewable jet fuel production.

Authors:  Sierk de Jong; Kay Antonissen; Ric Hoefnagels; Laura Lonza; Michael Wang; André Faaij; Martin Junginger
Journal:  Biotechnol Biofuels       Date:  2017-03-14       Impact factor: 6.040

4.  Land-use change and greenhouse gas emissions from corn and cellulosic ethanol.

Authors:  Jennifer B Dunn; Steffen Mueller; Ho-Young Kwon; Michael Q Wang
Journal:  Biotechnol Biofuels       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 6.040

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.