Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Quantifying the climate change effects of bioenergy systems: Comparison of 15 impact assessment methods
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering. IEA Bioenergy Task 38, Int Energy Agcy, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8101-8928
Landcare Res, Palmerston North, New Zealand..
IEA Bioenergy Task 38, Int Energy Agcy, Stockholm, Sweden.;Univ New England, NSW Dept Primary Ind, Armidale, NSW, Australia..
Slangerup, Slangerup, Denmark.;COWI AS, Lyngby, Denmark..
2019 (English)In: Global Change Biology Bioenergy, ISSN 1757-1693, E-ISSN 1757-1707, Vol. 11, no 5, p. 727-743Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Ongoing concern over climate change has led to interest in replacing fossil energy with bioenergy. There are different approaches to quantitatively estimate the climate change effects of bioenergy systems. In the present work, we have focused on a range of published impact assessment methods that vary due to conceptual differences in the treatment of biogenic carbon fluxes, the type of climate change impacts they address and differences in time horizon and time preference. Specifically, this paper reviews fifteen different methods and applies these to three hypothetical bioenergy case studies: (a) woody biomass grown on previously forested land; (b) woody biomass grown on previous pasture land; and (b) annual energy crop grown on previously cropped land. Our analysis shows that the choice of method can have an important influence on the quantification of climate change effects of bioenergy, particularly when a mature forest is converted to bioenergy use as it involves a substantial reduction in biomass carbon stocks. Results are more uniform in other case studies. In general, results are more sensitive to specific impact assessment methods when they involve both emissions and removals at different points in time, such as for forest bioenergy, but have a much smaller influence on agricultural bioenergy systems grown on land previously used for pasture or annual cropping. The development of effective policies for climate change mitigation through renewable energy use requires consistent and accurate approaches to identification of bioenergy systems that can result in climate change mitigation. The use of different methods for the same purpose: estimating the climate change effects of bioenergy systems, can lead to confusing and contradictory conclusions. A full interpretation of the results generated with different methods must be based on an understanding that the different methods focus on different aspects of climate change and represent different time preferences.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Wiley , 2019. Vol. 11, no 5, p. 727-743
National Category
Climate Research
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-249847DOI: 10.1111/gcbb.12593ISI: 000462873200004Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85060573919OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-249847DiVA, id: diva2:1306557
Note

QC 20190424

Available from: 2019-04-24 Created: 2019-04-24 Last updated: 2019-04-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Brandao, Miguel

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Brandao, Miguel
By organisation
Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering
In the same journal
Global Change Biology Bioenergy
Climate Research

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 36 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf