Net carbon fluxes at stand and landscape scales from wood bioenergy harvests in the US Northeast

The long‐term greenhouse gas emissions implications of wood biomass (‘bioenergy’) harvests are highly uncertain yet of great significance for climate change mitigation and renewable energy policies. Particularly uncertain are the net carbon (C) effects of multiple harvests staggered spatially and temporally across landscapes where bioenergy is only one of many products. We used field data to formulate bioenergy harvest scenarios, applied them to 362 sites from the Forest Inventory and Analysis database, and projected growth and harvests over 160 years using the Forest Vegetation Simulator. We compared the net cumulative C fluxes, relative to a non‐bioenergy baseline, between scenarios when various proportions of the landscape are harvested for bioenergy: 0% (non‐bioenergy); 25% (BIO25); 50% (BIO50); or 100% (BIO100), with three levels of intensification. We accounted for C stored in aboveground forest pools and wood products, direct and indirect emissions from wood products and bioenergy, and avoided direct and indirect emissions from fossil fuels. At the end of the simulation period, although 82% of stands were projected to maintain net positive C benefit, net flux remained negative (i.e., net emissions) compared to non‐bioenergy harvests for the entire 160‐year simulation period. BIO25, BIO50, and BIO100 scenarios resulted in average annual emissions of 2.47, 5.02, and 9.83 Mg C ha^?1, respectively. Using bioenergy for heating decreased the emissions relative to electricity generation as did removing additional slash from thinnings between regeneration harvests. However, all bioenergy scenarios resulted in increased net emissions compared to the non‐bioenergy harvests. Stands with high initial aboveground live biomass may have higher net emissions from bioenergy harvest. Silvicultural practices such as increasing rotation length and structural retention may result in lower C fluxes from bioenergy harvests. Finally, since passive management resulted in the greatest net C storage, we recommend designation of unharvested reserves to offset emissions from harvested stands.     

Climate change mitigation potential of local use of harvest residues for bioenergy in Canada

We estimate the mitigation potential of local use of bioenergy from harvest residues for the 2.3 × 10⁶ km² (232 Mha) of Canada's managed forests from 2017 to 2050 using three models: Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector (CBM‐CFS3), a harvested wood products (HWP) model that estimates bioenergy emissions, and a model of emission substitution benefits from the use of bioenergy. We compare the use of harvest residues for local heat and electricity production relative to a base case scenario and estimate the climate change mitigation potential at the forest management unit level. Results demonstrate large differences between and within provinces and territories across Canada. We identify regions with increasing benefits to the atmosphere for many decades into the future and regions where no net benefit would occur over the 33‐year study horizon. The cumulative mitigation potential for regions with positive mitigation was predicted to be 429 Tg CO₂e in 2050, with 7.1 TgC yr ^?1 of harvest residues producing bioenergy that met 3.1% of the heat demand and 2.9% of the electricity demand for 32.1 million people living within these regions. Our results show that regions with positive mitigation produced bioenergy, mainly from combined heat and power facilities, with emissions intensities that ranged from roughly 90 to 500 kg CO₂e MWh^?1. Roughly 40% of the total captured harvest residue was associated with regions that were predicted to have a negative cumulative mitigation potential in 2050 of ?152 Tg CO₂e. We conclude that the capture of harvest residues to produce local bioenergy can reduce GHG emissions in populated regions where bioenergy, mainly from combined heat and power facilities, offsets fossil fuel sources (fuel oil, coal and petcoke, and natural gas).     

Damaged forests provide an opportunity to mitigate climate change

British Columbia (BC) forests are estimated to have become a net carbon source in recent years due to tree death and decay caused primarily by mountain pine beetle (MPB) and related post‐harvest slash burning practices. BC forest biomass has also become a major source of wood pellets, exported primarily for bioenergy to Europe, although the sustainability and net carbon emissions of forest bioenergy in general are the subject of current debate. We simulated the temporal carbon balance of BC wood pellets against different reference scenarios for forests affected by MPB in the interior BC timber harvesting area using the Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector (CBM‐CFS3). We evaluated the carbon dynamics for different insect‐mortality levels, at the stand‐ and landscape level, taking into account carbon storage in the ecosystem, wood products and fossil fuel displacement. Our results indicate that current harvesting practices, in which slash is burnt and only sawdust used for pellet production, require between 20–25 years for beetle‐impacted pine and 37–39 years for spruce‐dominated systems to reach pre‐harvest carbon levels (i.e. break‐even) at the stand‐level. Using pellets made from logging slash to replace coal creates immediate net carbon benefits to the atmosphere of 17–21 tonnes C ha^?1, shortening these break‐even times by 9–20 years and resulting in an instant carbon break‐even level on stands most severely impacted by the beetle. Harvesting pine dominated sites for timber while using slash for bioenergy was also found to be more carbon beneficial than a protection reference scenario on both stand‐ and landscape level. However, harvesting stands exclusively for bioenergy resulted in a net carbon source unless the system contained a high proportion of dead trees (>85%). Systems with higher proportions of living trees provide a greater climate change mitigation if used for long lived wood products.     

Under what circumstances can the forest sector contribute to 2050 climate change mitigation targets? A study from forest ecosystems to landfill methane emissions for the province of Quebec,Canada

Meeting climate change mitigation targets by 2050, as outlined in international pledges, involves determining optimal strategies for forest management, wood supply, the substitution of greenhouse gas-intensive materials and energy sources, and wood product disposal. Our study quantified the cumulative mitigation potential by 2050 of the forest sector in the province of Quebec, Canada, using several alternative strategies and assessed under what circumstances the sector could contribute to the targets. We used the Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector to project ecosystems emissions and sequestration of seven alternative and one baseline (business-as-usual [BaU]) forest management scenarios over the 2018–2050 period. Three baskets of wood products were used in a Harvested Wood Products model to predict wood product emissions. The mitigation potential was determined by comparing the cumulative CO₂e budget of each alternative scenario to the BaU. The proportion of methane emissions from landfills (RCH₄%) and the required displacement factor (RDF) to achieve mitigation benefits were assessed both independently and jointly. The fastest and most efficient way to improve mitigation outcomes of the forest sector of Quebec is to reduce end-of-life methane emissions from wood products. By reducing methane emissions, the RDF for achieving mitigation benefits through intensification strategies can be reduced from 1.2–2.3 to 0–0.9 tC/tC, thus reaching the current provincial mean DF threshold (0.9). Both a reduction and an increase in the harvested volume have the potential to provide mitigation benefits with adequate RCH₄% and RDF. Increased carbon sequestration in ecosystems, innovations in long-lived wood products, and optimal substitution in markets offer potential avenues for the forest sector to contribute to mitigation benefits but are subject to significant uncertainties. Methane emission reduction at the end of wood product service life is emerging as a valuable approach to enhance mitigation benefits of the forest sector.     

Carbon debt and carbon sequestration parity in forest bioenergy production

The capacity for forests to aid in climate change mitigation efforts is substantial but will ultimately depend on their management. If forests remain unharvested, they can further mitigate the increases in atmospheric CO₂ that result from fossil fuel combustion and deforestation. Alternatively, they can be harvested for bioenergy production and serve as a substitute for fossil fuels, though such a practice could reduce terrestrial C storage and thereby increase atmospheric CO₂ concentrations in the near‐term. Here, we used an ecosystem simulation model to ascertain the effectiveness of using forest bioenergy as a substitute for fossil fuels, drawing from a broad range of land‐use histories, harvesting regimes, ecosystem characteristics, and bioenergy conversion efficiencies. Results demonstrate that the times required for bioenergy substitutions to repay the C Debt incurred from biomass harvest are usually much shorter (< 100 years) than the time required for bioenergy production to substitute the amount of C that would be stored if the forest were left unharvested entirely, a point we refer to as C Sequestration Parity. The effectiveness of substituting woody bioenergy for fossil fuels is highly dependent on the factors that determine bioenergy conversion efficiency, such as the C emissions released during the harvest, transport, and firing of woody biomass. Consideration of the frequency and intensity of biomass harvests should also be given; performing total harvests (clear‐cutting) at high‐frequency may produce more bioenergy than less intensive harvesting regimes but may decrease C storage and thereby prolong the time required to achieve C Sequestration Parity.     

An assessment of biomass for bioelectricity and biofuel,and for greenhouse gas emission reduction in Australia

We provide a quantitative assessment of the prospects for current and future biomass feedstocks for bioenergy in Australia, and associated estimates of the greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation resulting from their use for production of biofuels or bioelectricity. National statistics were used to estimate current annual production from agricultural and forest production systems. Crop residues were estimated from grain production and harvest index. Wood production statistics and spatial modelling of forest growth were used to estimate quantities of pulpwood, in‐forest residues, and wood processing residues. Possible new production systems for oil from algae and the oil‐seed tree Pongamia pinnata, and of lignocellulosic biomass production from short‐rotation coppiced eucalypt crops were also examined. The following constraints were applied to biomass production and use: avoiding clearing of native vegetation; minimizing impacts on domestic food security; retaining a portion of agricultural and forest residues to protect soil; and minimizing the impact on local processing industries by diverting only the export fraction of grains or pulpwood to bioenergy. We estimated that it would be physically possible to produce 9.6 GL yr^?1 of first generation ethanol from current production systems, replacing 6.5 GL yr^?1 of gasoline or 34% of current gasoline usage. Current production systems for waste oil, tallow and canola seed could produce 0.9 GL yr^?1 of biodiesel, or 4% of current diesel usage. Cellulosic biomass from current agricultural and forestry production systems (including biomass from hardwood plantations maturing by 2030) could produce 9.5 GL yr^?1 of ethanol, replacing 6.4 GL yr^?1 of gasoline, or ca. 34% of current consumption. The same lignocellulosic sources could instead provide 35 TWh yr^?1, or ca. 15% of current electricity production. New production systems using algae and P. pinnata could produce ca. 3.96 and 0.9 GL biodiesel yr^?1, respectively. In combination, they could replace 4.2 GL yr^?1 of fossil diesel, or 23% of current usage. Short‐rotation coppiced eucalypt crops could provide 4.3 GL yr^?1 of ethanol (2.9 GL yr^?1 replacement, or 15% of current gasoline use) or 20.2 TWh yr^?1 of electricity (9% of current generation). In total, first and second generation fuels from current and new production systems could mitigate 26 Mt CO₂‐e, which is 38% of road transport emissions and 5% of the national emissions. Second generation fuels from current and new production systems could mitigate 13 Mt CO₂‐e, which is 19% of road transport emissions and 2.4% of the national emissions lignocellulose from current and new production systems could mitigate 48 Mt CO₂‐e, which is 28% of electricity emissions and 9% of the national emissions. There are challenging sustainability issues to consider in the production of large amounts of feedstock for bioenergy in Australia. Bioenergy production can have either positive or negative impacts. Although only the export fraction of grains and sugar was used to estimate first generation biofuels so that domestic food security was not affected, it would have an impact on food supply elsewhere. Environmental impacts on soil, water and biodiversity can be significant because of the large land base involved, and the likely use of intensive harvest regimes. These require careful management. Social impacts could be significant if there were to be large‐scale change in land use or management. In addition, although the economic considerations of feedstock production were not covered in this article, they will be the ultimate drivers of industry development. They are uncertain and are highly dependent on government policies (e.g. the price on carbon, GHG mitigation and renewable energy targets, mandates for renewable fuels), the price of fossil oil, and the scale of the industry.     

Carbon balance indicator for forest bioenergy scenarios

A carbon (C) balance indicator is presented for the evaluation of forest bioenergy scenarios as a means to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A bioenergy‐intensive scenario with a greater harvest is compared to a baseline scenario. The relative carbon indicator (RC) is defined as the ratio between the difference in terrestrial C stocks – that is the C debt – and the difference in cumulative bioenergy harvest between the scenarios, over a selected time frame T. A value of zero indicates no C debt from additional biomass harvests, while a value of one indicates a C debt equal to the amount of additionally harvested biomass C. Multiplying the RC indicator by the smokestack emission factor of biomass (approximately 110 t CO₂/TJ) provides the net cumulative CO₂ emission factor of the biomass combustion as a function of T, allowing a direct comparison with the emission factors of comparable fossil fuels. The indicator is applied to bioenergy cases in Finland, where typically the rotation length of managed forests is long and the decay rate of harvest residues is slow. The country‐level examples illustrate that although Finnish forests remain as a C sink in each of the considered scenarios, the efforts of increasing forest bioenergy may still increase the atmospheric CO₂ concentrations in comparison with the baseline scenario and use of fossil fuels. The results also show that the net emission factor depends – besides on forest‐growth or residue‐decay dynamics – on the timing and evolution of harvests as well. Unlike for the constant fossil C emission factor, the temporal profile of bioenergy use is of great importance for the net emission factor of biomass.     

Transient trade‐off between climate benefit and biodiversity loss of harvesting stumps for bioenergy

To replace fossil fuel and thereby mitigate climate change, harvesting of wood such as stumps for bioenergy will likely increase. Coarse deadwood is an important resource for biodiversity and stumps comprise the main part of the coarse deadwood in managed forests. We provide the first integrated analysis of the long‐term climate and biodiversity impacts of a whole landscape. We simultaneously project climate and biodiversity impacts of harvesting stumps to substitute for fossil coal, assuming scenarios with different proportions of the landscape with stump harvest (10, 50, 80%) the coming 50 years. A life cycle approach was used to calculate future global temperature changes and future metapopulation changes in six epixylic lichens. Metapopulation dynamics were projected using colonization and extinction models based on times series data. Harvesting stumps from ≥50% of the clear‐cut forest land benefits climate with a net global temperature reduction >0.5·10^?9 K ha^?1 after 50 years if assuming substitution of fossil coal. For all scenarios, using stump bioenergy leads to immediate (within 1 year) reductions in temperature of 50% compared to using fossil coal, increasing to 70% reduction after 50 years. However, large‐scale stump harvest inflicted substantial metapopulation declines for five of six lichens. High stump harvest levels (≥50%) put common lichens at risk of becoming red‐listed following the IUCN criteria. The net temperature reduction (cooling effect) from substituting fossil coal with stumps harvested for bioenergy increased over time, while lichen metapopulations stabilized at lower equilibria after two to three decades. This indicates that trade‐offs between climate and metapopulations of commons species are transient, where climate benefits become more prevalent in the long term. As both objectives are important for meeting (inter‐)national climate and biodiversity targets, integrated analyses such as this should be encouraged and urged to guide policymaking about large‐scale implementation of stump harvest.     

Wood pellets,what else? Greenhouse gas parity times of European electricity from wood pellets produced in the south‐eastern United States using different softwood feedstocks

Several EU countries import wood pellets from the south‐eastern United States. The imported wood pellets are (co‐)fired in power plants with the aim of reducing overall greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electricity and meeting EU renewable energy targets. To assess whether GHG emissions are reduced and on what timescale, we construct the GHG balance of wood‐pellet electricity. This GHG balance consists of supply chain and combustion GHG emissions, carbon sequestration during biomass growth and avoided GHG emissions through replacing fossil electricity. We investigate wood pellets from four softwood feedstock types: small roundwood, commercial thinnings, harvest residues and mill residues. Per feedstock, the GHG balance of wood‐pellet electricity is compared against those of alternative scenarios. Alternative scenarios are combinations of alternative fates of the feedstock materials, such as in‐forest decomposition, or the production of paper or wood panels like oriented strand board (OSB). Alternative scenario composition depends on feedstock type and local demand for this feedstock. Results indicate that the GHG balance of wood‐pellet electricity equals that of alternative scenarios within 0–21 years (the GHG parity time), after which wood‐pellet electricity has sustained climate benefits. Parity times increase by a maximum of 12 years when varying key variables (emissions associated with paper and panels, soil carbon increase via feedstock decomposition, wood‐pellet electricity supply chain emissions) within maximum plausible ranges. Using commercial thinnings, harvest residues or mill residues as feedstock leads to the shortest GHG parity times (0–6 years) and fastest GHG benefits from wood‐pellet electricity. We find shorter GHG parity times than previous studies, for we use a novel approach that differentiates feedstocks and considers alternative scenarios based on (combinations of) alternative feedstock fates, rather than on alternative land uses. This novel approach is relevant for bioenergy derived from low‐value feedstocks.     

Factors contributing to carbon fluxes from bioenergy harvests in the U.S. Northeast: an analysis using field data

With growing interest in wood bioenergy there is uncertainty over greenhouse gas emissions associated with offsetting fossil fuels. Although quantifying postharvest carbon (C) fluxes will require accurate data, relatively few studies have evaluated these using field data from actual bioenergy harvests. We assessed C reductions and net fluxes immediately postharvest from whole‐tree harvests (WTH), bioenergy harvests without WTH, and nonbioenergy harvests at 35 sites across the northeastern United States. We compared the aboveground forest C in harvested with paired unharvested sites, and analyzed the C transferred to wood products and C emissions from energy generation from harvested sites, including indirect emissions from harvesting, transporting, and processing. All harvests reduced live tree C; however, only bioenergy harvests using WTH significantly reduced C stored in snags (P < 0.01). On average, WTH sites also decreased downed coarse woody debris C while the other harvest types showed increases, although these results were not statistically significant. Bioenergy harvests using WTH generated fewer wood products and resulted in more emissions released from bioenergy than the other two types of harvests, which resulted in a greater net flux of C (P < 0.01). A Classification and Regression Tree analysis determined that it was not the type of harvest or amount of bioenergy generated, but rather the type of skidding machinery and specifics of silvicultural treatment that had the largest impact on net C flux. Although additional research is needed to determine the impact of bioenergy harvesting over multiple rotations and at landscape scales, we conclude that operational factors often associated with WTH may result in an overall intensification of C fluxes. The intensification of bioenergy harvests, and subsequent C emissions, that result from these operational factors could be reduced if operators select smaller equipment and leave a portion of tree tops on site.     

Is woody bioenergy carbon neutral? A comparative assessment of emissions from consumption of woody bioenergy and fossil fuel

Under the current accounting systems, emissions produced when biomass is burnt for energy are accounted as zero, resulting in what is referred to as the ‘carbon neutrality’ assumption. However, if current harvest levels are increased to produce more bioenergy, carbon that would have been stored in the biosphere might be instead released in the atmosphere. This study utilizes a comparative approach that considers emissions under alternative energy supply options. This approach shows that the emission benefits of bioenergy compared to use of fossil fuel are time‐dependent. It emerges that the assumption that bioenergy always results in zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions compared to use of fossil fuels can be misleading, particularly in the context of short‐to‐medium term goals. While it is clear that all sources of woody bioenergy from sustainably managed forests will produce emission reductions in the long term, different woody biomass sources have various impacts in the short‐medium term. The study shows that the use of forest residues that are easily decomposable can produce GHG benefits compared to use of fossil fuels from the beginning of their use and that biomass from dedicated plantations established on marginal land can be carbon neutral from the beginning of its use. However, the risk of short‐to‐medium term negative impacts is high when additional fellings are extracted to produce bioenergy and the proportion of felled biomass used for bioenergy is low, or when land with high C stocks is converted to low productivity bioenergy plantations. The method used in the study provides an instrument to identify the time‐dependent pattern of emission reductions for alternative bioenergy sources. In this way, decision makers can evaluate which bioenergy options are most beneficial for meeting short‐term GHG emission reduction goals and which ones are more appropriate for medium to longer term objectives.     

Plant roots and GHG mitigation in native perennial bioenergy cropping systems

Native perennial bioenergy crops can mitigate greenhouse gases (GHG) by displacing fossil fuels with renewable energy and sequestering atmospheric carbon (C) in soil and roots. The relative contribution of root C to net GHG mitigation potential has not been compared in perennial bioenergy crops ranging in species diversity and N fertility. We measured root biomass, C, nitrogen (N), and soil organic carbon (SOC) in the upper 90 cm of soil for five native perennial bioenergy crops managed with and without N fertilizer. Bioenergy crops ranged in species composition and were annually harvested for 6 (one location) and 7 years (three locations) following the seeding year. Total root biomass was 84% greater in switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) and a four‐species grass polyculture compared to high‐diversity polycultures; the difference was driven by more biomass at shallow soil depth (0–30 cm). Total root C (0–90 cm) ranged from 3.7 Mg C ha^?1 for a 12‐species mixture to 7.6 Mg C ha^?1 for switchgrass. On average, standing root C accounted for 41% of net GHG mitigation potential. After accounting for farm and ethanol production emissions, net GHG mitigation potential from fossil fuel offsets and root C was greatest for switchgrass (?8.4 Mg CO2e ha^?1 yr^?1) and lowest for high‐diversity mixtures (?4.5 Mg CO2e ha^?1 yr^?1). Nitrogen fertilizer did not affect net GHG mitigation potential or the contribution of roots to GHG mitigation for any bioenergy crop. SOC did not change and therefore did not contribute to GHG mitigation potential. However, associations among SOC, root biomass, and root C : N ratio suggest greater long‐term C storage in diverse polycultures vs. switchgrass. Carbon pools in roots have a greater effect on net GHG mitigation than SOC in the short‐term, yet variation in root characteristics may alter patterns in long‐term C storage among bioenergy crops.     

Competing uses of biomass for energy and chemicals: implications for long‐term global CO2 mitigation potential

Biomass is considered a low carbon source for various energy or chemical options. This paper assesses it's different possible uses, the competition between these uses, and the implications for long‐term global energy demand and energy system emissions. A scenario analysis is performed using the TIMER energy system model. Under baseline conditions, 170 EJ yr^?1 of secondary bioenergy is consumed in 2100 (approximately 18% of total secondary energy demand), used primarily in the transport, buildings and nonenergy (chemical production) sectors. This leads to a reduction of 9% of CO₂ emissions compared to a counterfactual scenario where no bioenergy is used. Bioenergy can contribute up to 40% reduction in emissions at carbon taxes greater than 500/tC. As higher CO₂ taxes are applied, bioenergy is increasingly diverted towards electricity generation. Results are more sensitive to assumptions about resource availability than technological parameters. To estimate the effectiveness of bioenergy in specific sectors, experiments are performed in which bioenergy is only allowed in one sector at a time. The results show that cross‐sectoral leakage and emissions from biomass conversion limit the total emission reduction possible in each sector. In terms of reducing emissions per unit of bioenergy use, we show that the use of bioelectricity is the most effective, especially when used with carbon capture and storage. However, this technology only penetrates at a high carbon price (>100/tC) and competition with transport fuels may limit its adoption.     

The climate change mitigation effect of bioenergy from sustainably managed forests in Central Europe

We compare sustainably managed with unmanaged forests in terms of their contribution to climate change mitigation based on published data. For sustainably managed forests, accounting of carbon (C) storage based on ecosystem biomass and products as required by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is not sufficient to quantify their contribution to climate change mitigation. The ultimate value of biomass is its use for biomaterials and bioenergy. Taking Germany as an example, we show that the average removals of wood from managed forests are higher than stated by official reports, ranging between 56 and 86 mill. m³ year^?1 due to the unrecorded harvest of firewood. We find that removals from one hectare can substitute 0.87 m³ ha^?1 year^?1 of diesel, or 7.4 MWh ha^?1 year^?1, taking into account the unrecorded firewood, the use of fuel for harvesting and processing, and the efficiency of energy conversion. Energy substitution ranges between 1.9 and 2.2 t CO_{2 equiv.} ha^?1 year^?1 depending on the type of fossil fuel production. Including bioenergy and carbon storage, the total mitigation effect of managed forest ranges between 3.2 and 3.5 t CO_{2 equiv.} ha^?1 year^?1. This is more than previously reported because of the full accounting of bioenergy. Unmanaged nature conservation forests contribute via C storage only about 0.37 t CO_{2 equiv.}  ha^?1 year^?1 to climate change mitigation. There is no fossil fuel substitution. Therefore, taking forests out of management reduces climate change mitigation benefits substantially. There should be a mitigation cost for taking forest out of management in Central Europe. Since the energy sector is rewarded for the climate benefits of bioenergy, and not the forest sector, we propose that a CO₂ tax is used to award the contribution of forest management to fossil fuel substitution and climate change mitigation. This would stimulate the production of wood for products and energy substitution.     

Food vs. fuel: the use of land for lignocellulosic ‘next generation’ energy crops that minimize competition with primary food production

This review addresses the main issues concerning anticipated demands for the use of land for food and for bioenergy. It should be possible to meet increasing demands for food using existing and new technologies although this may not be easily or cheaply accomplished. The alleviation of hunger depends on food accessibility as well as food availability. Modern civilizations also require energy. This article presents the vision for bioenergy in terms of four major gains for society: a reduction in C emissions from the substitution of fossil fuels with appropriate energy crops; a significant contribution to energy security by reductions in fossil fuel dependence, for example, to meet government targets; new options that stimulate rural and urban economic development, and reduced dependence of global agriculture on fossil fuels. This vision is likely to be best fulfilled by the use of dedicated perennial bioenergy crops. We outline a number of factors that need to be taken into account in estimating the land area available for bioenergy. In terms of provisioning services, the value of biofuels is estimated at $54.7?$330 bn per year at a crude oil price of $100 per barrel. In terms of regulatory services, the value of carbon emissions saved is estimated at $56?$218 bn at a carbon price of $40 per tonne. Although global government subsidies for biofuels have been estimated at $20 bn (IEA, 2010b), these are dwarfed by subsidies for fossil fuel consumption ($312 bn; IEA, 2010b) and by total agricultural support for food and commodity crops ($383.7 bn in 2009; OECD, 2010).     

Implications of productivity and nutrient requirements on greenhouse gas balance of annual and perennial bioenergy crops

Biomass from dedicated crops is expected to contribute significantly to the replacement of fossil resources. However, sustainable bioenergy cropping systems must provide high biomass production and low environmental impacts. This study aimed at quantifying biomass production, nutrient removal, expected ethanol production, and greenhouse gas (GHG) balance of six bioenergy crops: Miscanthus × giganteus, switchgrass, fescue, alfalfa, triticale, and fiber sorghum. Biomass production and N, P, K balances (input‐output) were measured during 4 years in a long‐term experiment, which included two nitrogen fertilization treatments. These results were used to calculate a posteriori ‘optimized’ fertilization practices, which would ensure a sustainable production with a nil balance of nutrients. A modified version of the cost/benefit approach proposed by Crutzen et al. (2008), comparing the GHG emissions resulting from N‐P‐K fertilization of bioenergy crops and the GHG emissions saved by replacing fossil fuel, was applied to these ‘optimized’ situations. Biomass production varied among crops between 10.0 (fescue) and 26.9 t DM ha^?1 yr^?1 (miscanthus harvested early) and the expected ethanol production between 1.3 (alfalfa) and 6.1 t ha^?1 yr^?1 (miscanthus harvested early). The cost/benefit ratio ranged from 0.10 (miscanthus harvested late) to 0.71 (fescue); it was closely correlated with the N/C ratio of the harvested biomass, except for alfalfa. The amount of saved CO₂ emissions varied from 1.0 (fescue) to 8.6 t CO₂eq ha^?1 yr^?1 (miscanthus harvested early or late). Due to its high biomass production, miscanthus was able to combine a high production of ethanol and a large saving of CO₂ emissions. Miscanthus and switchgrass harvested late gave the best compromise between low N‐P‐K requirements, high GHG saving per unit of biomass, and high productivity per hectare.     

Impact of structural changes in wood‐using industries on net carbon emissions in Finland

Forests and forest industries can contribute to climate change mitigation by sequestering carbon from the atmosphere, by storing it in biomass, and by fabricating products that substitute more greenhouse gas emission intensive materials and energy. The objectives of the study are to specify alternative scenarios for the diversification of wood product markets and to determine how an increasingly diversified market structure could impact the net carbon emissions (NCEs) of forestry in Finland. The NCEs of the Finnish forest sector were modelled for the period 2016–2056 by using a forest management simulation and optimization model for the standing forests and soil and separate models for product carbon storage and substitution impacts. The annual harvest was fixed at approximately 70 Mm³, which was close to the level of roundwood removals for industry and energy in 2016. The results show that the substitution benefits for a reference scenario with the 2016 market structure account for 9.6 Mt C (35.2 Mt CO₂ equivalent [CO₂ eq]) in 2056, which could be further increased by 7.1 Mt C (26 Mt CO₂ eq) by altering the market structure. As a key outcome, increasing the use of by‐products for textiles and wood–plastic composites in place of kraft pulp and biofuel implies greater overall substitution credits compared to increasing the level of log harvest for construction.     

Range and uncertainties in estimating delays in greenhouse gas mitigation potential of forest bioenergy sourced from Canadian forests

Accurately assessing the delay before the substitution of fossil fuel by forest bioenergy starts having a net beneficial impact on atmospheric CO₂ is becoming important as the cost of delaying GHG emission reductions is increasingly being recognized. We documented the time to carbon (C) parity of forest bioenergy sourced from different feedstocks (harvest residues, salvaged trees, and green trees), typical of forest biomass production in Canada, used to replace three fossil fuel types (coal, oil, and natural gas) in heating or power generation. The time to C parity is defined as the time needed for the newly established bioenergy system to reach the cumulative C emissions of a fossil fuel, counterfactual system. Furthermore, we estimated an uncertainty period derived from the difference in C parity time between predefined best‐ and worst‐case scenarios, in which parameter values related to the supply chain and forest dynamics varied. The results indicate short‐to‐long ranking of C parity times for residues < salvaged trees < green trees and for substituting the less energy‐dense fossil fuels (coal < oil < natural gas). A sensitivity analysis indicated that silviculture and enhanced conversion efficiency, when occurring only in the bioenergy system, help reduce time to C parity. The uncertainty around the estimate of C parity time is generally small and inconsequential in the case of harvest residues but is generally large for the other feedstocks, indicating that meeting specific C parity time using feedstock other than residues is possible, but would require very specific conditions. Overall, the use of single parity time values to evaluate the performance of a particular feedstock in mitigating GHG emissions should be questioned given the importance of uncertainty as an inherent component of any bioenergy project.     

Is Use of Both Pulpwood and Logging Residues Instead of Only Logging Residues for Bioenergy Development a Viable Carbon Mitigation Strategy?

This study adopts an integrated life-cycle approach to assess overall carbon saving related with the utilization of wood pellets manufactured using pulpwood and logging residues for electricity generation. Carbon sequestered in wood products and wood present in landfills and avoided carbon emissions due to substitution of grid electricity with the electricity generated using wood pellets are considered part of overall carbon savings. Estimated value of overall carbon saving is compared with the overall carbon saving related to the current use of pulpwood and logging residues. The unit of analysis is a hectare of slash pine (Pinus elliottii) plantation in southern USA. All carbon flows are considered starting from forest management to the decay of wood products in landfills. Exponential decay function is used to ascertain carbon sequestered in wood products and wood present in landfills. Non-biogenic carbon emissions due to burning of wood waste at manufacturing facilities, wood pellets at a power plant, and logging residues on forestlands are also considered. Impacts of harvest age and forest management intensity on overall carbon saving are analyzed as well. The use of pulpwood for bioenergy development reduces carbon sequestered in wood products and wood present in landfills (up to 1.6 metric tons/ha) relative to a baseline when pulpwood is used for paper making and logging residues are used for manufacturing wood pellets. Avoided carbon emissions because of displacement of grid electricity from the electricity generated using wood pellets derived from pulpwood fully compensate the loss of carbon sequestered in wood products and wood present in landfills. The use of both pulpwood and logging residues for bioenergy development is beneficial from carbon perspective. Harvest age is more important in determining overall carbon saving than forest management intensity.     

Trade‐offs between land and water requirements for large‐scale bioenergy production

Bioenergy is expected to play an important role in the future energy mix as it can substitute fossil fuels and contribute to climate change mitigation. However, large‐scale bioenergy cultivation may put substantial pressure on land and water resources. While irrigated bioenergy production can reduce the pressure on land due to higher yields, associated irrigation water requirements may lead to degradation of freshwater ecosystems and to conflicts with other potential users. In this article, we investigate the trade‐offs between land and water requirements of large‐scale bioenergy production. To this end, we adopt an exogenous demand trajectory for bioenergy from dedicated energy crops, targeted at limiting greenhouse gas emissions in the energy sector to 1100 Gt carbon dioxide equivalent until 2095. We then use the spatially explicit global land‐ and water‐use allocation model MAgPIE to project the implications of this bioenergy target for global land and water resources. We find that producing 300 EJ yr^?1 of bioenergy in 2095 from dedicated bioenergy crops is likely to double agricultural water withdrawals if no explicit water protection policies are implemented. Since current human water withdrawals are dominated by agriculture and already lead to ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss, such a doubling will pose a severe threat to freshwater ecosystems. If irrigated bioenergy production is prohibited to prevent negative impacts of bioenergy cultivation on water resources, bioenergy land requirements for meeting a 300 EJ yr^?1 bioenergy target increase substantially (+ 41%) – mainly at the expense of pasture areas and tropical forests. Thus, avoiding negative environmental impacts of large‐scale bioenergy production will require policies that balance associated water and land requirements.