Global change synergies and trade‐offs between renewable energy and biodiversity

Reliance on fossil fuels is causing unprecedented climate change and is accelerating environmental degradation and global biodiversity loss. Together, climate change and biodiversity loss, if not averted urgently, may inflict severe damage on ecosystem processes, functions and services that support the welfare of modern societies. Increasing renewable energy deployment and expanding the current protected area network represent key solutions to these challenges, but conflicts may arise over the use of limited land for energy production as opposed to biodiversity conservation. Here, we compare recently identified core areas for the expansion of the global protected area network with the renewable energy potential available from land‐based solar photovoltaic, wind energy and bioenergy (in the form of Miscanthus × giganteus). We show that these energy sources have very different biodiversity impacts and net energy contributions. The extent of risks and opportunities deriving from renewable energy development is highly dependent on the type of renewable source harvested, the restrictions imposed on energy harvest and the region considered, with Central America appearing at particularly high potential risk from renewable energy expansion. Without restrictions on power generation due to factors such as production and transport costs, we show that bioenergy production is a major potential threat to biodiversity, while the potential impact of wind and solar appears smaller than that of bioenergy. However, these differences become reduced when energy potential is restricted by external factors including local energy demand. Overall, we found that areas of opportunity for developing solar and wind energy with little harm to biodiversity could exist in several regions of the world, with the magnitude of potential impact being particularly dependent on restrictions imposed by local energy demand. The evidence provided here helps guide sustainable development of renewable energy and contributes to the targeting of global efforts in climate mitigation and biodiversity conservation.     

Afforestation for climate change mitigation: Potentials,risks and trade‐offs

Afforestation is considered a cost‐effective and readily available climate change mitigation option. In recent studies afforestation is presented as a major solution to limit climate change. However, estimates of afforestation potential vary widely. Moreover, the risks in global mitigation policy and the negative trade‐offs with food security are often not considered. Here we present a new approach to assess the economic potential of afforestation with the IMAGE 3.0 integrated assessment model framework. In addition, we discuss the role of afforestation in mitigation pathways and the effects of afforestation on the food system under increasingly ambitious climate targets. We show that afforestation has a mitigation potential of 4.9 GtCO₂/year at 200 US$/tCO₂ in 2050 leading to large‐scale application in an SSP2 scenario aiming for 2°C (410 GtCO₂ cumulative up to 2100). Afforestation reduces the overall costs of mitigation policy. However, it may lead to lower mitigation ambition and lock‐in situations in other sectors. Moreover, it bears risks to implementation and permanence as the negative emissions are increasingly located in regions with high investment risks and weak governance, for example in Sub‐Saharan Africa. Afforestation also requires large amounts of land (up to 1,100 Mha) leading to large reductions in agricultural land. The increased competition for land could lead to higher food prices and an increased population at risk of hunger. Our results confirm that afforestation has substantial potential for mitigation. At the same time, we highlight that major risks and trade‐offs are involved. Pathways aiming to limit climate change to 2°C or even 1.5°C need to minimize these risks and trade‐offs in order to achieve mitigation sustainably.     

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.     

Land use efficiency: anticipating future demand for land‐sector greenhouse gas emissions abatement and managing trade‐offs with agriculture,water, and biodiversity

Competition for land is increasing, and policy needs to ensure the efficient supply of multiple ecosystem services from land systems. We modelled the spatially explicit potential future supply of ecosystem services in Australia's intensive agricultural land in response to carbon markets under four global outlooks from 2013 to 2050. We assessed the productive efficiency of greenhouse gas emissions abatement, agricultural production, water resources, and biodiversity services and compared these to production possibility frontiers (PPFs). While interacting commodity markets and carbon markets produced efficient outcomes for agricultural production and emissions abatement, more efficient outcomes were possible for water resources and biodiversity services due to weak price signals. However, when only two objectives were considered as per typical efficiency assessments, efficiency improvements involved significant unintended trade‐offs for the other objectives and incurred substantial opportunity costs. Considering multiple objectives simultaneously enabled the identification of land use arrangements that were efficient over multiple ecosystem services. Efficient land use arrangements could be selected that meet society's preferences for ecosystem service provision from land by adjusting the metric used to combine multiple services. To effectively manage competition for land via land use efficiency, market incentives are needed that effectively price multiple ecosystem services.     

Trade‐offs for food production,nature conservation and climate limit the terrestrial carbon dioxide removal potential

Large‐scale biomass plantations (BPs) are a common factor in climate mitigation scenarios as they promise double benefits: extracting carbon from the atmosphere and providing a renewable energy source. However, their terrestrial carbon dioxide removal (tCDR) potentials depend on important factors such as land availability, efficiency of capturing biomass‐derived carbon and the timing of operation. Land availability is restricted by the demands of future food production depending on yield increases and population growth, by requirements for nature conservation and, with respect to climate mitigation, avoiding unfavourable albedo changes. We integrate these factors in one spatially explicit biogeochemical simulation framework to explore the tCDR opportunity space on land available after these constraints are taken into account, starting either in 2020 or 2050, and lasting until 2100. We find that assumed future needs for nature protection and food production strongly limit tCDR potentials. BPs on abandoned crop and pasture areas (~1,300 Mha in scenarios of either 8.0 billion people and yield gap reductions of 25% until 2020 or 9.5 billion people and yield gap reductions of 50% until 2050) could, theoretically, sequester ~100 GtC in land carbon stocks and biomass harvest by 2100. However, this potential would be ~80% lower if only cropland was available or ~50% lower if albedo decreases were considered as a factor restricting land availability. Converting instead natural forest, shrubland or grassland into BPs could result in much larger tCDR potentials ? but at high environmental costs (e.g. biodiversity loss). The most promising avenue for effective tCDR seems to be improvement of efficient carbon utilization pathways, changes in dietary trends or the restoration of marginal lands for the implementation of tCDR.     

Synergies and trade‐offs between renewable energy expansion and biodiversity conservation – a cross‐national multifactor analysis

Increased deployment of renewable energy can contribute towards mitigating climate change and improving air quality, wealth and development. However, renewable energy technologies are not free of environmental impacts; thus, it is important to identify opportunities and potential threats from the expansion of renewable energy deployment. Currently, there is no cross‐national comprehensive analysis linking renewable energy potential simultaneously to socio‐economic and political factors and biodiversity priority locations. Here, we quantify the relationship between the fraction of land‐based renewable energy (including solar photovoltaic, wind and bioenergy) potential available outside the top biodiversity areas (i.e. outside the highest ranked 30% priority areas for biodiversity conservation) within each country, with selected socio‐economic and geopolitical factors as well as biodiversity assets. We do so for two scenarios that identify priority areas for biodiversity conservation alternatively in a globally coordinated manner vs. separately for individual countries. We show that very different opportunities and challenges emerge if the priority areas for biodiversity protection are identified globally or designated nationally. In the former scenario, potential for solar, wind and bioenergy outside the top biodiversity areas is highest in developing countries, in sparsely populated countries and in countries of low biodiversity potential but with high air pollution mortality. Conversely, when priority areas for biodiversity protection are designated nationally, renewable energy potential outside the top biodiversity areas is highest in countries with good governance but also in countries with high biodiversity potential and population density. Overall, these results identify both clear opportunities but also risks that should be considered carefully when making decisions about renewable energy policies.     

Expanding population edges: theories,traits, and trade‐offs

Recent patterns of global change have highlighted the importance of understanding the dynamics and mechanisms of species range shifts and expansions. Unique demographic features, spatial processes, and selective pressures can result in the accumulation and evolution of distinctive phenotypic traits at the leading edges of expansions. We review the characteristics of expanding range margins and highlight possible mechanisms for the appearance of phenotypic differences between individuals at the leading edge and core of the range. The development of life history traits that increase dispersal or reproductive ability is predicted by theory and supported with extensive empirical evidence. Many examples of rapid phenotypic change are associated with trade‐offs that may influence the persistence of the trait once expansion ends. Accounting for the effects of edge phenotypes and related trade‐offs could be critical for predicting the spread of invasive species and population responses to climate change.     

Including albedo in time‐dependent LCA of bioenergy

Albedo change during feedstock production can substantially alter the life cycle climate impact of bioenergy. Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies have compared the effects of albedo and greenhouse gases (GHGs) based on global warming potential (GWP). However, using GWP leads to unequal weighting of climate forcers that act on different timescales. In this study, albedo was included in the time‐dependent LCA, which accounts for the timing of emissions and their impacts. We employed field‐measured albedo and life cycle emissions data along with time‐dependent models of radiative transfer, biogenic carbon fluxes and nitrous oxide emissions from soil. Climate impacts were expressed as global mean surface temperature change over time (?T) and as GWP. The bioenergy system analysed was heat and power production from short‐rotation willow grown on former fallow land in Sweden. We found a net cooling effect in terms of ?T per hectare (?3.8 × 10^–11 K in year 100) and GWP₁₀₀ per MJ fuel (?12.2 g CO₂e), as a result of soil carbon sequestration via high inputs of carbon from willow roots and litter. Albedo was higher under willow than fallow, contributing to the cooling effect and accounting for 34% of GWP₁₀₀, 36% of ?T in year 50 and 6% of ?T in year 100. Albedo dominated the short‐term temperature response (10–20 years) but became, in relative terms, less important over time, owing to accumulation of soil carbon under sustained production and the longer perturbation lifetime of GHGs. The timing of impacts was explicit with ?T, which improves the relevance of LCA results to climate targets. Our method can be used to quantify the first‐order radiative effect of albedo change on the global climate and relate it to the climate impact of GHG emissions in LCA of bioenergy, alternative energy sources or land uses.     

Coupling Input‐Output Tables with Macro‐Life Cycle Assessment to Assess Worldwide Impacts of Biofuels Transport Policies

Many countries see biofuels as a replacement to fossil fuels to mitigate climate change. Nevertheless, some concerns remain about the overall benefits of biofuels policies. More comprehensive tools seem required to evaluate indirect effects of biofuel policies. This article proposes a method to evaluate large‐scale biofuel policies that is based on life cycle assessment (LCA), environmental extensions of input‐output (I‐O) tables, and a general equilibrium model. The method enables the assessment of indirect environmental effects of biofuels policies, including land‐use changes (LUCs), in the context of economic and demographic growth. The method is illustrated with a case study involving two scenarios. The first one describes the evolution of the world economy from 2006 to 2020 under business as usual (BAU) conditions (including demographic and dietary preferences changes), and the second integrates biofuel policies in the United States and the European Union (EU). Results show that the biofuel scenario, originally designed to mitigate climate change, results in more greenhouse gas emissions when compared to the BAU scenario. This is mainly due to emissions associated with global LUCs. The case study shows that the method enables a broader consideration for environmental effects of biofuel policies than usual LCA: Global economic variations calculated by a general equilibrium economic model and LUC emissions can be evaluated. More work is needed, however, to include new biofuel production technologies and reduce the uncertainty of the method.     

Trade‐offs between carbon stocks and biodiversity in European temperate forests

Policies to mitigate climate change and biodiversity loss often assume that protecting carbon‐rich forests provides co‐benefits in terms of biodiversity, due to the spatial congruence of carbon stocks and biodiversity at biogeographic scales. However, it remains unclear whether this holds at the scales relevant for management, and particularly large knowledge gaps exist for temperate forests and for taxa other than trees. We built a comprehensive dataset of Central European temperate forest structure and multi‐taxonomic diversity (beetles, birds, bryophytes, fungi, lichens, and plants) across 352 plots. We used Boosted Regression Trees (BRTs) to assess the relationship between above‐ground live carbon stocks and (a) taxon‐specific richness, (b) a unified multidiversity index. We used Threshold Indicator Taxa ANalysis to explore individual species’ responses to changing above‐ground carbon stocks and to detect change‐points in species composition along the carbon‐stock gradient. Our results reveal an overall weak and highly variable relationship between richness and carbon stock at the stand scale, both for individual taxonomic groups and for multidiversity. Similarly, the proportion of win‐win and trade‐off species (i.e., species favored or disadvantaged by increasing carbon stock, respectively) varied substantially across taxa. Win‐win species gradually replaced trade‐off species with increasing carbon, without clear thresholds along the above‐ground carbon gradient, suggesting that community‐level surrogates (e.g., richness) might fail to detect critical changes in biodiversity. Collectively, our analyses highlight that leveraging co‐benefits between carbon and biodiversity in temperate forest may require stand‐scale management that prioritizes either biodiversity or carbon in order to maximize co‐benefits at broader scales. Importantly, this contrasts with tropical forests, where climate and biodiversity objectives can be integrated at the stand scale, thus highlighting the need for context‐specificity when managing for multiple objectives. Accounting for critical change‐points of target taxa can help to deal with this specificity, by defining a safe operating space to manipulate carbon while avoiding biodiversity losses.     

Soil carbon sequestration due to post‐Soviet cropland abandonment: estimates from a large‐scale soil organic carbon field inventory

The break‐up of the Soviet Union in 1991 triggered cropland abandonment on a continental scale, which in turn led to carbon accumulation on abandoned land across Eurasia. Previous studies have estimated carbon accumulation rates across Russia based on large‐scale modelling. Studies that assess carbon sequestration on abandoned land based on robust field sampling are rare. We investigated soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks using a randomized sampling design along a climatic gradient from forest steppe to Sub‐Taiga in Western Siberia (Tyumen Province). In total, SOC contents were sampled on 470 plots across different soil and land‐use types. The effect of land use on changes in SOC stock was evaluated, and carbon sequestration rates were calculated for different age stages of abandoned cropland. While land‐use type had an effect on carbon accumulation in the topsoil (0–5 cm), no independent land‐use effects were found for deeper SOC stocks. Topsoil carbon stocks of grasslands and forests were significantly higher than those of soils managed for crops and under abandoned cropland. SOC increased significantly with time since abandonment. The average carbon sequestration rate for soils of abandoned cropland was 0.66 Mg C ha^?1 yr^?1 (1–20 years old, 0–5 cm soil depth), which is at the lower end of published estimates for Russia and Siberia. There was a tendency towards SOC saturation on abandoned land as sequestration rates were much higher for recently abandoned (1–10 years old, 1.04 Mg C ha^?1 yr^?1) compared to earlier abandoned crop fields (11–20 years old, 0.26 Mg C ha^?1 yr^?1). Our study confirms the global significance of abandoned cropland in Russia for carbon sequestration. Our findings also suggest that robust regional surveys based on a large number of samples advance model‐based continent‐wide SOC prediction.     

Spatial modeling of techno‐economic potential of biojet fuel production in Brazil

It is expected that Brazil could play an important role in biojet fuel (BJF) production in the future due to the long experience in biofuel production and the good agro‐ecological conditions. However, it is difficult to quantify the techno‐economic potential of BJF because of the high spatiotemporal variability of available land, biomass yield, and infrastructure as well as the technological developments in BJF production pathways. The objective of this research is to assess the recent and future techno‐economic potential of BJF production in Brazil and to identify location‐specific optimal combinations of biomass crops and technological conversion pathways. In total, 13 production routes (supply chains) are assessed through the combination of various biomass crops and BJF technologies. We consider temporal land use data to identify potential land availability for biomass production. With the spatial distribution of the land availability and potential yield of biomass crops, biomass production potential and costs are calculated. The BJF production cost is calculated by taking into account the development in the technological pathways and in plant scales. We estimate the techno‐economic potential by determining the minimum BJF total costs and comparing this with the range of fossil jet fuel prices. The techno‐economic potential of BJF production ranges from 0 to 6.4 EJ in 2015 and between 1.2 and 7.8 EJ in 2030, depending on the reference fossil jet fuel price, which varies from 19 to 65 US$/GJ across the airports. The techno‐economic potential consists of a diverse set of production routes. The Northeast and Southeast region of Brazil present the highest potentials with several viable production routes, whereas the remaining regions only have a few promising production routes. The maximum techno‐economic potential of BJF in Brazil could meet almost half of the projected global jet fuel demand toward 2030.     

Climate impact assessment of willow energy from a landscape perspective: a Swedish case study

Locally produced bioenergy can decrease the dependency on imported fossil fuels in a region, while also being valuable for climate change mitigation. Short‐rotation coppice willow is a potentially high‐yielding energy crop that can be grown to supply a local energy facility. This study assessed the energy performance and climate impacts when establishing willow on current fallow land in a Swedish region with the purpose of supplying a bio‐based combined heat and power plant. Time‐dependent life cycle assessment (LCA) was combined with geographic information system (GIS) mapping to include spatial variation in terms of transport distance, initial soil organic carbon content, soil texture and yield. Two climate metrics were used [global warming potential (GWP) and absolute global temperature change potential (AGTP)], and the energy performance was determined by calculating the energy ratio (energy produced per unit of energy used). The results showed that when current fallow land in a Swedish region was used for willow energy, an average energy ratio of 30 MJ MJ^?1 (including heat, power and flue gas condensation) was obtained and on average 84.3 Mg carbon per ha was sequestered in the soil during a 100‐year time frame (compared with the reference land use). The processes contributing most to the energy use during one willow rotation were the production and application of fertilizers (~40%), followed by harvest (~35%) and transport (~20%). The temperature response after 100 years of willow cultivation was ?6·10^?16 K MJ^?1 heat, which is much lower compared with fossil coal and natural gas (70·10^?16 K MJ^?1 heat and 35·10^?16 K MJ^?1 heat, respectively). The combined GIS and time‐dependent LCA approach developed here can be a useful tool in systematic analysis of bioenergy production systems and related land use effects.     

A regional assessment of land‐based carbon mitigation potentials: Bioenergy,BECCS, reforestation,and forest management

Land‐based solutions are indispensable features of most climate mitigation scenarios. Here we conduct a novel cross‐sectoral assessment of regional carbon mitigation potential by running an ecosystem model with an explicit representation of forest structure and climate impacts for Bavaria, Germany, as a case study. We drive the model with four high‐resolution climate projections (EURO‐CORDEX) for the representative concentration pathway RCP4.5 and present‐day land‐cover from three satellite‐derived datasets (CORINE, ESA‐CCI, MODIS) and identify total mitigation potential by not only accounting for carbon storage but also material and energy substitution effects. The model represents the current state in Bavaria adequately, with a simulated forest biomass 12.9 ± 0.4% lower than data from national forest inventories. Future land‐use changes according to two ambitious land‐use harmonization scenarios (SSP1xRCP2.6, SSP4xRCP3.4) achieve a mitigation of 206 and 247 Mt C (2015–2100 period) via reforestation and the cultivation and burning of dedicated bioenergy crops, partly combined with carbon capture and storage. Sensitivity simulations suggest that converting croplands or pastures to bioenergy plantations could deliver a carbon mitigation of 40.9 and 37.7 kg C/m², respectively, by the year 2100 if used to replace carbon‐intensive energy systems and combined with CCS. However, under less optimistic assumptions (including no CCS), only 15.3 and 12.2 kg C/m² are mitigated and reforestation might be the better option (20.0 and 16.8 kg C/m²). Mitigation potential in existing forests is limited (converting coniferous into mixed forests, nitrogen fertilization) or even negative (suspending wood harvest) due to decreased carbon storage in product pools and associated substitution effects. Our simulations provide guidelines to policy makers, farmers, foresters, and private forest owners for sustainable and climate‐benefitting ecosystem management in temperate regions. They also emphasize the importance of the CCS technology which is regarded critically by many people, making its implementation in the short or medium term currently doubtable.     

Hotspots of uncertainty in land‐use and land‐cover change projections: a global‐scale model comparison

Model‐based global projections of future land‐use and land‐cover (LULC) change are frequently used in environmental assessments to study the impact of LULC change on environmental services and to provide decision support for policy. These projections are characterized by a high uncertainty in terms of quantity and allocation of projected changes, which can severely impact the results of environmental assessments. In this study, we identify hotspots of uncertainty, based on 43 simulations from 11 global‐scale LULC change models representing a wide range of assumptions of future biophysical and socioeconomic conditions. We attribute components of uncertainty to input data, model structure, scenario storyline and a residual term, based on a regression analysis and analysis of variance. From this diverse set of models and scenarios, we find that the uncertainty varies, depending on the region and the LULC type under consideration. Hotspots of uncertainty appear mainly at the edges of globally important biomes (e.g., boreal and tropical forests). Our results indicate that an important source of uncertainty in forest and pasture areas originates from different input data applied in the models. Cropland, in contrast, is more consistent among the starting conditions, while variation in the projections gradually increases over time due to diverse scenario assumptions and different modeling approaches. Comparisons at the grid cell level indicate that disagreement is mainly related to LULC type definitions and the individual model allocation schemes. We conclude that improving the quality and consistency of observational data utilized in the modeling process and improving the allocation mechanisms of LULC change models remain important challenges. Current LULC representation in environmental assessments might miss the uncertainty arising from the diversity of LULC change modeling approaches, and many studies ignore the uncertainty in LULC projections in assessments of LULC change impacts on climate, water resources or biodiversity.     

Local‐ and landscape‐level effects of land use change on bird diversity in Abiata‐Shalla Lakes National Park,Ethiopia

Understanding the effects of anthropogenic disturbances on biodiversity is important for conservation prioritization. This study examined the effects of vegetation degradation on bird diversity in Abiata‐Shalla Lakes National Park, Ethiopia. We surveyed birds and vegetation structure between January and March 2015 in disturbed (impacted by settlement and agriculture) and undisturbed (not impacted) transects of two vegetation types (savannah woodland and gallery forest). We compared between disturbed and undisturbed transects at local (within vegetation types) and landscape (across vegetation types) levels: (a) avian species richness of the entire assemblage and feeding guilds and (b) species assemblage composition. We found significantly greater mean and total bird species richness of the entire assemblage and insectivore and granivore feeding guilds in the undisturbed transects, while the nectarivore guild was totally absent in the disturbed transects. We also found significant differences in bird species assemblage composition between the disturbed and undisturbed transects both within and across the vegetation types, and bird species assemblage composition at the landscape level was positively correlated with tree abundance and understorey vegetation height. In conclusion, our results demonstrate and add to the increasing body of evidence concerning the adverse effects of human‐induced vegetation change on bird diversity.     

Modelling the carbon and nitrogen balances of direct land use changes from energy crops in Denmark: a consequential life cycle inventory

This paper addresses the conversion of Danish agricultural land from food/feed crops to energy crops. To this end, a life cycle inventory, which relates the input and output flows from and to the environment of 528 different crop systems, is built and described. This includes seven crops (annuals and perennials), two soil types (sandy loam and sand), two climate types (wet and dry), three initial soil carbon level (high, average, low), two time horizons for soil carbon changes (20 and 100 years), two residues management practices (removal and incorporation into soil) as well as three soil carbon turnover rate reductions in response to the absence of tillage for some perennial crops (0%, 25%, 50%). For all crop systems, nutrient balances, balances between above‐ and below‐ground residues, soil carbon changes, biogenic carbon dioxide flows, emissions of nitrogen compounds and losses of macro‐ and micronutrients are presented. The inventory results highlight Miscanthus as a promising energy crop, indicating it presents the lowest emissions of nitrogen compounds, the highest amount of carbon dioxide sequestrated from the atmosphere, a relatively high carbon turnover efficiency and allows to increase soil organic carbon. Results also show that the magnitude of these benefits depends on the harvest season, soil types and climatic conditions. Inventory results further highlight winter wheat as the only annual crop where straw removal for bioenergy may be sustainable, being the only annual crop not involving losses of soil organic carbon as a result of harvesting the straw. This, however, is conditional to manure application, and is only true on sandy soils.     

Economic assessment and carbon footprint of recycling rare earths from magnets: Evaluation at lab scale paving the way toward industrialization

Project EXTRADE developed an innovative process for recycling rare earths (RE) from permanent magnets used in small applications. To assess the potential of further research from lab scale toward industrialization, this study performs economic and environmental evaluations. Because data are incomplete at current levels of process development, this study propagates uncertainty into the results. Results show that the EXTRADE process, as a complement to the Hard Disk Drive (HDD) waste management system currently in operation in France, could be both economically profitable and beneficial in terms of climate change. However, at this stage of development the price of output products is a key determinant of the economic profitability while still particularly uncertain. Also, the EXTRADE process may offer a climate change benefit due to the substitution of recycled RE oxides for those produced from primary resources (80% chance to be superior to 990 tonnes CO₂‐eq over 5 years). The amount of the waste recycled is another key, uncertain parameter regarding both the environmental and economic benefits provided by the process.     

Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS): Finding the win–wins for energy,negative emissions and ecosystem services—size matters

Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) features heavily in the energy scenarios designed to meet the Paris Agreement targets, but the models used to generate these scenarios do not address environmental and social implications of BECCS at the regional scale. We integrate ecosystem service values into a land‐use optimization tool to determine the favourability of six potential UK locations for a 500 MW BECCS power plant operating on local biomass resources. Annually, each BECCS plant requires 2.33 Mt of biomass and generates 2.99 Mt CO₂ of negative emissions and 3.72 TWh of electricity. We make three important discoveries: (a) the impacts of BECCS on ecosystem services are spatially discrete, with the most favourable locations for UK BECCS identified at Drax and Easington, where net annual welfare values (from the basket of ecosystems services quantified) of £39 and £25 million were generated, respectively, with notably lower annual welfare values at Barrow (?£6 million) and Thames (£2 million); (b) larger BECCS deployment beyond 500 MW reduces net social welfare values, with a 1 GW BECCS plant at Drax generating a net annual welfare value of £19 million (a 50% decline compared with the 500 MW deployment), and a welfare loss at all other sites; (c) BECCS can be deployed to generate net welfare gains, but trade‐offs and co‐benefits between ecosystem services are highly site and context specific, and these landscape‐scale, site‐specific impacts should be central to future BECCS policy developments. For the United Kingdom, meeting the Paris Agreement targets through reliance on BECCS requires over 1 GW at each of the six locations considered here and is likely, therefore, to result in a significant welfare loss. This implies that an increased number of smaller BECCS deployments will be needed to ensure a win–win for energy, negative emissions and ecosystem services.