Quantifying the climate effects of bioenergy – Choice of reference system

In order to understand the climate effects of a bioenergy system, a comparison between the bioenergy system and a reference system is required. The reference system describes the situation that occurs in the absence of the bioenergy system with respect to the use of land, energy, and materials. The importance of reference systems is discussed in the literature but guidance on choosing suitable reference systems for assessing climate effects of bioenergy is limited. The reference system should align with the purpose of the study. Transparency of reference system assumptions is essential for proper interpretation of bioenergy assessments. This paper presents guidance for selecting suitable reference systems. Particular attention is given to choosing the land reference. If the goal is to study the climate effects of bioenergy as a part of total anthropogenic activity the reference system should illustrate what is expected in the absence of human activities. In such a case the suitable land reference is natural regeneration, and energy or material reference systems are not relevant. If the goal is to assess the effect of a change in bioenergy use, the reference system should incorporate human activities. In this case suitable reference systems describe the most likely alternative uses of the land, energy and materials in the absence of the change in bioenergy use. The definition of the reference system is furthermore subject to the temporal scope of the study. In practice, selecting and characterizing reference systems will involve various choices and uncertainties which should be considered carefully. It can be instructive to consider how alternative reference systems influence the results and conclusions drawn from bioenergy assessments.

[1]  Jari Liski,et al.  Indirect carbon dioxide emissions from producing bioenergy from forest harvest residues , 2011 .

[2]  G. Oladosu.  Estimates of the global indirect energy-use emission impacts of USA biofuel policy , 2012 .

[3]  Jacopo Giuntoli,et al.  Domestic heating from forest logging residues: environmental risks and benefits , 2015 .

[4]  Edgar G. Hertwich,et al.  Understanding the Climate Mitigation Benefits of Product Systems: Comment on “Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate‐Change Mitigation…” , 2014 .

[5]  S. Goddard,et al.  Biofuels from crop residue can reduce soil carbon and increase CO 2 emissions , 2014 .

[6]  R. Pielke,et al.  Impacts of regional land use and land cover on rainfall : an overview , 2006 .

[7]  D. Rajagopal.  Consequential Life Cycle Assessment of Policy Vulnerability to Price Effects , 2014 .

[8]  Kim Pingoud,et al.  Global warming potential factors and warming payback time as climate indicators of forest biomass use , 2012, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change.

[9]  Virginia H. Dale,et al.  Issues in using landscape indicators to assess land changes , 2013 .

[10]  M. Araújo,et al.  The concept of potential natural vegetation: an epitaph? , 2010 .

[11]  Mary Ann Curran,et al.  The international workshop on electricity data for life cycle inventories , 2005 .

[12]  A. Tillman,et al.  Normative ethics and methodology for life cycle assessment , 2005 .

[13]  Danièle Revel,et al.  IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation , 2011 .

[14]  Anders Hammer Strømman,et al.  Climate impacts of bioenergy: Inclusion of carbon cycle and albedo dynamics in life cycle impact assessment , 2012 .

[15]  W. Kurz,et al.  Could increased boreal forest ecosystem productivity offset carbon losses from increased disturbances? , 2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[16]  F. Creutzig,et al.  Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate‐Change Mitigation Benefits Misleads Policy Makers , 2014 .

[17]  M. Junginger,et al.  The ‘debt’ is in the detail: A synthesis of recent temporal forest carbon analyses on woody biomass for energy , 2013 .

[18]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Lights and shadows in consequential LCA , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[19]  A. Cowie,et al.  The decay of wood in landfills in contrasting climates in Australia. , 2015, Waste management.

[20]  C. Flachsland.  Mitigation of Climate Change: Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , 2015 .

[21]  R. Matthews,et al.  Review of literature on biogenic carbon and life cycle assessment of forest bioenergy. Final Task 1 report , 2014 .

[22]  A. Cowie,et al.  The Use of Life Cycle Assessment in the Support of Robust (Climate) Policy Making: Comment on “Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate‐Change Mitigation …” , 2014 .

[23]  Esther S. Parish,et al.  Environmental Indicators of Biofuel Sustainability: What About Context? , 2012, Environmental Management.

[24]  Katharina Helming,et al.  Do greenhouse gas emission calculations from energy crop cultivation reflect actual agricultural management practices? – A review of carbon footprint calculators , 2017 .

[25]  A. Lucier,et al.  Communicating About Bioenergy Sustainability , 2013, Environmental Management.

[26]  Leif Gustavsson,et al.  Towards a Standard Methodology for Greenhouse Gas Balances of Bioenergy Systems in Comparison with Fossil Energy Systems , 1997 .

[27]  Deepak Rajagopal,et al.  Implications of market-mediated emissions and uncertainty for biofuel policies. , 2013 .

[28]  N. Ramankutty,et al.  Estimating historical changes in global land cover: Croplands from 1700 to 1992 , 1999 .

[29]  Seungdo Kim,et al.  Indirect land use change for biofuels: Testing predictions and improving analytical methodologies , 2011 .

[30]  Sampo Soimakallio,et al.  Greenhouse gas balances of transportation biofuels, electricity and heat generation in Finland-Dealing with the uncertainties , 2009 .

[31]  Annie Levasseur,et al.  Key issues and options in accounting for carbon sequestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprinting , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[32]  C. Canham,et al.  Uncertainty in projecting GHG emissions from bioenergy , 2014 .

[33]  Michael Obersteiner,et al.  Fixing a Critical Climate Accounting Error , 2009, Science.

[34]  V. Dale,et al.  Scientific analysis is essential to assess biofuel policy effects: In response to the paper by Kim a , 2011 .

[35]  On the Importance of Baseline Setting in Carbon Offsets Markets , 2016 .

[36]  M. Ter-Mikaelian,et al.  The burning question: does forest bioenergy reduce carbon emissions? A review of common misconceptions about forest carbon accounting. , 2015 .

[37]  R. Clift,et al.  Soil Organic Carbon Changes in the Cultivation of Energy Crops: Implications for GHG Balances and Soil Quality for Use in LCA , 2011 .

[38]  Sampo Soimakallio,et al.  Foregone carbon sequestration due to land occupation—the case of agro-bioenergy in Finland , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[39]  Mark A. Delucchi,et al.  Response to Comments on “Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate‐Change Mitigation …” , 2014 .

[40]  N. H. Ravindranath,et al.  Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) , 2014 .

[41]  Anders Hammer Strømman,et al.  The role of forest residues in the accounting for the global warming potential of bioenergy , 2013 .

[42]  Leif Gustavsson,et al.  Carbon Dioxide Balance of Wood Substitution: Comparing Concrete- and Wood-Framed Buildings , 2006 .

[43]  Virginia H. Dale,et al.  In Defense of Biofuels, Done Right , 2009 .

[44]  O. Edenhofer,et al.  Climate change 2014 : mitigation of climate change , 2014 .

[45]  Implications of a ‘carbon debt' on bioenergy's potential to mitigate climate change , 2013 .

[46]  Francesco Cherubini,et al.  Energy- and greenhouse gas-based LCA of biofuel and bioenergy systems: Key issues, ranges and recommendations , 2009 .

[47]  L. Gustavsson,et al.  Time-dependent radiative forcing effects of forest fertilization and biomass substitution , 2012, Biogeochemistry.

[48]  E. Robert,et al.  Indirect Land Use Change From Increased Biofuels Demand - Comparison of Models and Results for Marginal Biofuels Production from Different Feedstocks , 2010 .

[49]  C. Bauer,et al.  Key Elements in a Framework for Land Use Impact Assessment Within LCA (11 pp) , 2007 .

[50]  M. Kaltschmitt,et al.  Life cycle analysis of biofuels under different environmental aspects , 1997 .

[51]  H. Haberl.  Net land-atmosphere flows of biogenic carbon related to bioenergy: towards an understanding of systemic feedbacks , 2013, Global change biology. Bioenergy.

[52]  Christopher Doll,et al.  Renewable energy and biodiversity: Implications for transitioning to a Green Economy , 2017 .

[53]  Leif Gustavsson,et al.  Project-based Greenhouse Gas Accounting : guiding principles with a focus on baselines and additionality , 2000 .

[54]  David Pennington,et al.  Recent developments in Life Cycle Assessment. , 2009, Journal of environmental management.

[55]  H. Belshaw,et al.  The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations , 1947, International Organization.

[56]  T. Koellner,et al.  UNEP-SETAC guideline on global land use impact assessment on biodiversity and ecosystem services in LCA , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[57]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Attributional life cycle assessment: is a land-use baseline necessary? , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[58]  J. Kiviluoma,et al.  The complexity and challenges of determining GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions from grid electricity consumption and conservation in LCA (life cycle assessment) – A methodological review , 2011 .

[59]  H. MacLean,et al.  Forest bioenergy or forest carbon? Assessing trade-offs in greenhouse gas mitigation with wood-based fuels. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[60]  Claudia Cambero,et al.  Strategic optimization of forest residues to bioenergy and biofuel supply chain , 2015 .

[61]  Daniel Tschudi,et al.  Baseline effects on carbon footprints of biofuels: The case of wood , 2012 .

[62]  J. Fuglestvedt,et al.  Alternatives to the Global Warming Potential for Comparing Climate Impacts of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases , 2005 .

[63]  Michel G.J. den Elzen,et al.  Exploring IMAGE model scenarios that keep greenhouse gas radiative forcing below 3 W/m2 in 2100 , 2010 .

[64]  K. Pingoud,et al.  Climate Change Mitigation Challenge for Wood Utilization-The Case of Finland. , 2016, Environmental science & technology.

[65]  V. Dale,et al.  Land Use and the Carbon Cycle: Modeling for Integrating Science and Management , 2013 .

[66]  Bjart Holtsmark.  Quantifying the global warming potential of CO2 emissions from wood fuels , 2015 .

[67]  Fausto Freire,et al.  Life-cycle studies of biodiesel in Europe: A review addressing the variability of results and modeling issues , 2011 .

[68]  Hans-Jürgen Dr. Klüppel,et al.  The Revision of ISO Standards 14040-3 - ISO 14040: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework - ISO 14044: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines , 2005 .

[69]  L. Sokka,et al.  Approaches for inclusion of forest carbon cycle in life cycle assessment – a review , 2013 .

[70]  S. Suh,et al.  On the uncanny capabilities of consequential LCA , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[71]  N. H. Ravindranath,et al.  Bioenergy and climate change mitigation: an assessment , 2015 .

[72]  L. Gustavsson,et al.  Variability in energy and carbon dioxide balances of wood and concrete building materials , 2006 .

[73]  Leif Gustavsson,et al.  Climate change effects of forestry and substitution of carbon-intensive materials and fossil fuels , 2017 .

[74]  N. Halberg,et al.  LCA of soybean meal , 2008 .

[75]  L. Gustavsson,et al.  Climate mitigation comparison of woody biomass systems with the inclusion of land-use in the reference fossil system , 2014 .

[76]  S. Soimakallio.  Toward a more comprehensive greenhouse gas emissions assessment of biofuels: the case of forest-based fischer-tropsch diesel production in Finland. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[77]  M. Thring.  World Energy Outlook , 1977 .

[78]  Gert-Jan Nabuurs,et al.  European forests show no carbon debt, only a long parity effect☆ , 2017 .

[79]  A. Lugo,et al.  Climate Change and Forest Disturbances , 2001 .

[80]  S. Polasky,et al.  Land Clearing and the Biofuel Carbon Debt , 2008, Science.

[81]  E. Boutrif,et al.  Institutions Involved in Food Safety: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) , 2014 .

[82]  Jacinto F. Fabiosa,et al.  Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change , 2008, Science.

[83]  David Zilberman,et al.  Indirect fuel use change (IFUC) and the lifecycle environmental impact of biofuel policies , 2011 .

[84]  A. Angelsen,et al.  A causal analysis framework for land-use change and the potential role of bioenergy policy , 2016 .

[85]  Sanna Syri,et al.  Effort sharing in ambitious, global climate change mitigation scenarios , 2010 .

[86]  A. Walter,et al.  Bioenergy and Biodiversity: Key Lessons from the Pan American Region , 2015, Environmental Management.

[87]  K K O T U O M I,et al.  Indirect carbon dioxide emissions from producing bioenergy from forest harvest residues , 2011 .

[88]  N. Bird,et al.  Is woody bioenergy carbon neutral? A comparative assessment of emissions from consumption of woody bioenergy and fossil fuel , 2012 .

[89]  E. Hertwich,et al.  CO2 emissions from biomass combustion for bioenergy: atmospheric decay and contribution to global warming , 2011 .