Bioenergy for climate change mitigation: Scale and sustainability
Katherine Calvin,
Annette Cowie,
Göran Berndes,
Almut Arneth,
Francesco Cherubini,
Joana Portugal‐Pereira,
Giacomo Grassi,
Jo House,
Francis X. Johnson,
Alexander Popp,
Mark Rounsevell,
Raphael Slade,
Pete Smith
Affiliations
Katherine Calvin
Joint Global Change Research InstitutePacific Northwest National Laboratory College Park MD USA
Annette Cowie
NSW Department of Primary Industries/University of New England Armidale NSW Australia
Göran Berndes
Department of Space, Earth and Environment Chalmers University of Technology Göteborg Sweden
Almut Arneth
Karlsruhe Institute of TechnologyInstitute of Meteorology and Climate Research/Atmospheric Environmental Research (IMK‐IFU) Garmisch‐Partenkirchen Germany
Francesco Cherubini
Industrial Ecology Program Department of Energy and Process Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Trondheim Norway
Joana Portugal‐Pereira
Energy Planning Program Graduate School of Engineering Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro Rio de Janeiro Brazil
Giacomo Grassi
Joint Research Centre European Commission Ispra Italy
Jo House
Cabot Institute Department of Geographical Sciences University of Bristol Bristol UK
Francis X. Johnson
Stockholm Environment Institute Stockholm Sweden
Alexander Popp
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)Member of the Leibniz Association Potsdam Germany
Mark Rounsevell
Karlsruhe Institute of TechnologyInstitute of Meteorology and Climate Research/Atmospheric Environmental Research (IMK‐IFU) Garmisch‐Partenkirchen Germany
Raphael Slade
Centre for Environmental Policy Imperial College London London UK
Pete Smith
Institute of Biological and Environmental Sciences University of Aberdeen Aberdeen UK
Abstract Many global climate change mitigation pathways presented in IPCC assessment reports rely heavily on the deployment of bioenergy, often used in conjunction with carbon capture and storage. We review the literature on bioenergy use for climate change mitigation, including studies that use top‐down integrated assessment models or bottom‐up modelling, and studies that do not rely on modelling. We summarize the state of knowledge concerning potential co‐benefits and adverse side effects of bioenergy systems and discuss limitations of modelling studies used to analyse consequences of bioenergy expansion. The implications of bioenergy supply on mitigation and other sustainability criteria are context dependent and influenced by feedstock, management regime, climatic region, scale of deployment and how bioenergy alters energy systems and land use. Depending on previous land use, widespread deployment of monoculture plantations may contribute to mitigation but can cause negative impacts across a range of other sustainability criteria. Strategic integration of new biomass supply systems into existing agriculture and forest landscapes may result in less mitigation but can contribute positively to other sustainability objectives. There is considerable variation in evaluations of how sustainability challenges evolve as the scale of bioenergy deployment increases, due to limitations of existing models, and uncertainty over the future context with respect to the many variables that influence alternative uses of biomass and land. Integrative policies, coordinated institutions and improved governance mechanisms to enhance co‐benefits and minimize adverse side effects can reduce the risks of large‐scale deployment of bioenergy. Further, conservation and efficiency measures for energy, land and biomass can support greater flexibility in achieving climate change mitigation and adaptation.
