Climate risks of bioenergy underestimated

Mar 09, 2012
Climate risks of bioenergy underestimated
Precision and completeness of bioenergy evaluation.

Energy from biomass presents underappreciated risks, new research published in Nature Climate Change shows.

"A precautionary approach is needed," says Ottmar Edenhofer, chief economist of the Potsdam Institute for Impact Research (PIK) and professor at the Technische Universität Berlin (TU Berlin). "Before further expanding bioenergy, science has to deliver a more comprehensive risk assessment to policy makers – dealing with the uncertainties inherent to projections of bioenergy use up to now. Novel kinds of risk management for land-use change are needed." One option would be to shift the burden-of-proof of meeting sustainability standards to the bioenergy producers.

Large-scale cultivation of bioenergy crops could lead to increased net greenhouse-gas emissions when, for instance, forests are cleared for agricultural use. At the same time, long-term scenarios suggest that replacing fossil fuels to achieve low CO2 stabilisation might require major deployment of bioenergy. The article provides a framework for reconciling these two seemingly disparate views and identifies key uncertainties underlying the debate.

"Bioenergy is a matter of heated debate," says Felix Creutzig, lead author of the article by scientists from TU Berlin, PIK, and the University of California in Berkeley. "Scientists need to be very clear about the assumptions that their analyses rest upon and the effect alternative assumptions may have on their conclusions when they aim to systematically explore the risks associated with alternative policy options. Policy makers may choose to only allow further bioenergy deployment under very restricted circumstances."

The net effect on climate of increasing production of bioenergy is highly uncertain. While current analyses are mostly good at accounting for historical emissions in the production of energy from , according to the study the effects of future large-scale deployment of biofuels on agricultural and transportation fuel markets are often ignored. For instance, increased biofuels feedstock production on agricultural land might drive global food prices up. This provides significant incentives to expand agricultural area at the expense of natural carbon sinks.

In contrast, many economic mitigation scenarios treat bioenergy as "carbon neutral" by assuming the implementation of policies to prevent deforestation and that technological progress will enable increased bioenergy yields per hectare. Whether these assumptions will prove correct is difficult to predict, and differing beliefs about such assumptions cause estimates of bioenergy potential to vary substantially – that is, by a factor of ten.

Comprehensive assessments of the climate benefits of bioenergy should try to explore the full range of possible outcomes and systematically integrate market effects, the researchers conclude.  This also includes more systematic assessments of the climate performance of bioenergy in imperfect worlds with, for example, limited technological progress or policies. Progress in this debate will require much greater interdisciplinary collaboration and coordination among researchers across the numerous scientific communities touched by bioenergy.

"This is one key challenge for upcoming scientific assessments," Edenhofer points out. "Projections of bioenergy use partially depend on value judgements – concerning energy security, climate change mitigation, food security, and biodiversity protection." When science succeeds in communicating all underlying assumptions and uncertainties to policy-makers, says Edenhofer, "then that can be a starting point for the important discussion on where we as a society want to go and which risks we are willing to take."

The analysis has been supported by the Michael Otto Stiftung and the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Explore further: Australia takes the next step in the fight against ocean plastic pollution

More information: Creutzig, F., et al. (Nature Climate Change, 2012): Reconciling top-down and bottom-up modelling on future bioenergy deployment. doi:10.1038/nclimate1416

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Agave fuels global excitement as a bioenergy crop

Jan 26, 2011

Scientists found that in 14 independent studies, the yields of two Agave species greatly exceeded the yields of other biofuel feedstocks, such as corn, soybean, sorghum, and wheat. Additionally, even more productive Agave ...

CO2 emissions from biomass combustion

Mar 16, 2011

An article in the current issue of Global Change Biology Bioenergy proposes a new method to account for CO2 emissions from biomass combustion in bioenergy systems.

Large differences in the climate impact of biofuels

Nov 15, 2011

When biomass is combusted the carbon that once was bound in the growing tree is released into the atmosphere. For this reason, bioenergy is often considered carbon dioxide neutral. Research at the University of Gothenburg, ...

Report suggests biomass energy won't harm food production

Dec 02, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- Biomass could cover 20% of the global energy supply without harming production of food, a new report released in the United Kingdom says. Reviewing over 90 international studies, the report was produced by ...

Abandoned farmlands are key to sustainable bioenergy

Jun 23, 2008

Biofuels can be a sustainable part of the world's energy future, especially if bioenergy agriculture is developed on currently abandoned or degraded agricultural lands, report scientists from the Carnegie Institution and ...

Recommended for you

Research team studies 'regime shifts' in ecosystems

2 hours ago

The prehistory of major ecological shifts spanning multiple millennia can be read in the fine print of microscopic algae, according to a new study led by researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

New policymaking tool for shift to renewable energy

6 hours ago

Multiple pathways exist to a low greenhouse gas future, all involving increased efficiency and a dramatic shift in energy supply away from fossil fuels. A new tool 'SWITCH' enables policymakers and planners to assess the ...

User comments : 4

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

rubberman
5 / 5 (4) Mar 09, 2012
Food or Fuel....the answer will depend on what country is asking the question. If done properly with the appropriate scrubbers and filters the burning of biomass is a viable energy supplement for any country with ample land capable of growing the various biomass crops. However, given the uncertainty of climate change, is it intelligent use of said land? I guess time will tell.
SteveL
3.7 / 5 (6) Mar 09, 2012
Water is getting to be an issue also. Biofuels can require a lot of potable, or even gray water, that might otherwise be used for crops. Nothing will be easy on the energy front and population control will become an ever more significant issue as traditional resources become scarce.
Sean_W
2.4 / 5 (5) Mar 10, 2012
The "precautionary approach/principle" again. Don't do anything unless you're certain nothing unexpected will happen. Getting out of bed being a primary violation of the precautionary principle. Since it's conceivable that people might shave off every inch of wilderness for biomass, let's not allow any biomass usage at all. You know... just in case that happens.
Callippo
1 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2012
This is the example, how the fight with global warming according to biofuel industry really appears: http://deforestat...orig.jpg It changes whole areas of tropical forests into sugar cane plantations, the soil of which will get depleted after few years and they will change into deserts.
http://news.monga...per.html The real impact of these activities for future is ignored: what drives the biofuel industry is the possibility to earn some money right now into account of further generations.