Indirect carbon dioxide emissions from producing bioenergy from forest harvest residues

Forest harvest residues are important raw materials for bioenergy in regions practicing forestry. Removing these residues from a harvest site reduces the carbon stock of the forest compared with conventional stem‐only harvest because less litter in left on the site. The indirect carbon dioxide (CO₂) emission from producing bioenergy occur when carbon in the logging residues is emitted into the atmosphere at once through combustion, instead of being released little by little as a result of decomposition at the harvest sites. In this study (1) we introduce an approach to calculate this indirect emission from using logging residues for bioenergy production, and (2) estimate this emission at a typical target of harvest residue removal, i.e. boreal Norway spruce forest in Finland. The removal of stumps caused a larger indirect emission per unit of energy produced than the removal of branches because of a lower decomposition rate of the stumps. The indirect emission per unit of energy produced decreased with time since starting to collect the harvest residues as a result of decomposition at older harvest sites. During the 100 years of conducting this practice, the indirect emission from average‐sized branches (diameter 2 cm) decreased from 340 to 70 kg CO₂ eq. MWh^?1 and that from stumps (diameter 26 cm) from 340 to 160 kg CO₂ eq. MWh^?1. These emissions are an order of magnitude larger than the other emissions (collecting, transporting, etc.) from the bioenergy production chain. When the bioenergy production was started, the total emissions were comparable to fossil fuels. The practice had to be carried out for 22 (stumps) or four (branches) years until the total emissions dropped below the emissions of natural gas. Our results emphasize the importance of accounting for land‐use‐related indirect emissions to correctly estimate the efficiency of bioenergy in reducing CO₂ emission into the atmosphere.     

Using dynamic relative climate impact curves to quantify the climate impact of bioenergy production systems over time

The climate impact of bioenergy is commonly quantified in terms of CO₂ equivalents, using a fixed 100‐year global warming potential as an equivalency metric. This method has been criticized for the inability to appropriately address emissions timing and the focus on a single impact metric, which may lead to inaccurate or incomplete quantification of the climate impact of bioenergy production. In this study, we introduce Dynamic Relative Climate Impact (DRCI) curves, a novel approach to visualize and quantify the climate impact of bioenergy systems over time. The DRCI approach offers the flexibility to analyze system performance for different value judgments regarding the impact category (e.g., emissions, radiative forcing, and temperature change), equivalency metric, and analytical time horizon. The DRCI curves constructed for fourteen bioenergy systems illustrate how value judgments affect the merit order of bioenergy systems, because they alter the importance of one‐time (associated with land use change emissions) versus sustained (associated with carbon debt or foregone sequestration) emission fluxes and short‐ versus long‐lived climate forcers. Best practices for bioenergy production (irrespective of value judgments) include high feedstock yields, high conversion efficiencies, and the application of carbon capture and storage. Furthermore, this study provides examples of production contexts in which the risk of land use change emissions, carbon debt, or foregone sequestration can be mitigated. For example, the risk of indirect land use change emissions can be mitigated by accompanying bioenergy production with increasing agricultural yields. Moreover, production contexts in which the counterfactual scenario yields immediate or additional climate impacts can provide significant climate benefits. This paper is accompanied by an Excel‐based calculation tool to reproduce the calculation steps outlined in this paper and construct DRCI curves for bioenergy systems of choice.     

Carbon implications of converting cropland to bioenergy crops or forest for climate mitigation: a global assessment

The potential for climate change mitigation by bioenergy crops and terrestrial carbon sinks has been the object of intensive research in the past decade. There has been much debate about whether energy crops used to offset fossil fuel use, or carbon sequestration in forests, would provide the best climate mitigation benefit. Most current food cropland is unlikely to be used for bioenergy, but in many regions of the world, a proportion of cropland is being abandoned, particularly marginal croplands, and some of this land is now being used for bioenergy. In this study, we assess the consequences of land‐use change on cropland. We first identify areas where cropland is so productive that it may never be converted and assess the potential of the remaining cropland to mitigate climate change by identifying which alternative land use provides the best climate benefit: C₄ grass bioenergy crops, coppiced woody energy crops or allowing forest regrowth to create a carbon sink. We do not present this as a scenario of land‐use change – we simply assess the best option in any given global location should a land‐use change occur. To do this, we use global biomass potential studies based on food crop productivity, forest inventory data and dynamic global vegetation models to provide, for the first time, a global comparison of the climate change implications of either deploying bioenergy crops or allowing forest regeneration on current crop land, over a period of 20 years starting in the nominal year of 2000 ad . Globally, the extent of cropland on which conversion to energy crops or forest would result in a net carbon loss, and therefore likely always to remain as cropland, was estimated to be about 420.1 Mha, or 35.6% of the total cropland in Africa, 40.3% in Asia and Russia Federation, 30.8% in Europe‐25, 48.4% in North America, 13.7% in South America and 58.5% in Oceania. Fast growing C₄ grasses such as Miscanthus and switch‐grass cultivars are the bioenergy feedstock with the highest climate mitigation potential. Fast growing C₄ grasses such as Miscanthus and switch‐grass cultivars provide the best climate mitigation option on ≈485 Mha of cropland worldwide with ~42% of this land characterized by a terrain slope equal or above 20%. If that land‐use change did occur, it would displace ≈58.1 Pg fossil fuel C equivalent (C_eq oil). Woody energy crops such as poplar, willow and Eucalyptus species would be the best option on only 2.4% (≈26.3 Mha) of current cropland, and if this land‐use change occurred, it would displace ≈0.9 Pg C_eq oil. Allowing cropland to revert to forest would be the best climate mitigation option on ≈17% of current cropland (≈184.5 Mha), and if this land‐use change occurred, it would sequester ≈5.8 Pg C in biomass in the 20‐year‐old forest and ≈2.7 Pg C in soil. This study is spatially explicit, so also serves to identify the regional differences in the efficacy of different climate mitigation options, informing policymakers developing regionally or nationally appropriate mitigation actions.     

Net atmospheric impacts of forest bioenergy production and utilization in Finnish boreal conditions

The net CO₂ exchange of forests was investigated to study net atmospheric impact of forest bioenergy production (BP) and utilization in Finnish boreal conditions. Net CO₂ exchange was simulated with a life cycle assessment tool over a 90‐year period and over the whole Finland based on National Forest Inventory data. The difference in the net exchanges between the traditional timber production (TP) and BP regime was considered the net atmospheric impact of forest bioenergy utilization. According to the results, forests became net sources of CO₂ after about 20 years of simulation, and the net exchange was higher in the BP regime than in the TP regime until the middle of the simulation period. From 2040 onwards, the net exchange started to decrease in both regimes and became higher in the TP regime, excluding the last decade of the simulation. The shift of forests to becoming a CO₂ source reflected the decrease in CO₂ sequestration due to the increasing share of recently harvested and seedling stands that are acting as sources of CO₂, and an increase of emissions from degradation of wood products. When expressed in terms of radiative forcing, the net atmospheric impact was on average 19% less for bioenergy compared with that for coal energy over the whole simulation period. The results show the importance of time dependence when considering dynamic forest ecosystems in BP and climate change mitigation. Furthermore, the results emphasize the dualistic role and possibilities of forest management in controlling the build and release of carbon into and from the stocks and in controlling the rate of the build speed, i.e. growth. This information is needed in identifying the capability and possibilities of ecosystems to produce biomass for energy, alongside other products and ecosystem services (e.g. pulp wood and timber), and simultaneously to mitigate climate change.     

Climate cooling benefits of cellulosic bioenergy crops from elevated albedo

Changes in land surface albedo can alter ecosystem energy balance and potentially influence climate. We examined the albedo of six bioenergy cropping systems in southwest Michigan USA: monocultures of energy sorghum (Sorghum bicolor), switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.), and giant miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus), and polycultures of native grasses, early successional vegetation, and restored prairie. Direct field measurements of surface albedo (α_s) from May 2018 through December 2020 at half-hourly intervals in each system quantified the magnitudes and seasonal differences in albedo (∆_α) and albedo-induced radiative forcing (RF_∆α). We used a nearby forest as a historical native cover type to estimate reference albedo and RF_∆α change upon original land use conversion, and a continuous no-till maize (Zea mays L.) system as a contemporary reference to estimate change upon conversion from annual row crops. Annually, α_s differed significantly (p < 0.05) among crops in the order: early successional (0.288 ± 0.012SE) >> miscanthus (0.271 ± 0.009) ≈ energy sorghum (0.270 ± 0.010) ≥ switchgrass (0.265 ± 0.009) ≈ restored prairie (0.264 ± 0.012) > native grasses (0.259 ± 0.010) > maize (0.247 ± 0.010). Reference forest had the lowest annual α_s (0.134 ± 0.003). Albedo differences among crops during the growing season were also statistically significant, with growing season α_s in perennial crops and energy sorghum on average ~20% higher (0.206 ± 0.003) than in no-till maize (0.184 ± 0.002). Average non-growing season (NGS) α_s (0.370 ± 0.020) was much higher than growing season α_s (0.203 ± 0.003) but these NGS differences were not significant. Overall, the original conversion of reference forest and maize landscapes to perennials provided a cooling effect on the local climate (RF_αMAIZE: −3.83 ± 1.00 W m⁻²; RF_αFOREST: −16.75 ± 3.01 W m⁻²). Significant differences among cropping systems suggest an additional management intervention for maximizing the positive climate benefit of bioenergy crops, with cellulosic crops on average ~9.1% more reflective than no-till maize, which itself was about twice as reflective as the reference forest.     

Net climate impacts of forest biomass production and utilization in managed boreal forests

In this work, we studied the potentials offered by managed boreal forests and forestry to mitigate the climate change using forest‐based materials and energy in substituting fossil‐based materials (concrete and plastic) and energy (coal and oil). For this purpose, we calculated the net climate impacts (radiative forcing) of forest biomass production and utilization in the managed Finnish boreal forests (60°–70°N) over a 90‐year period based on integrated use forest ecosystem model simulations (on carbon sequestration and biomass production of forests) and life‐cycle assessment (LCA) tool. When studying the effects of management on the radiative forcing in a system integrating the carbon sink/sources dynamics in both biosystem and technosystem, the current forest management (baseline management) was used a reference management. Our results showed that the use of forest‐based materials and energy in substituting fossil‐based materials and energy would provide an effective option for mitigating climate change. The negative climate impacts could be further decreased by maintaining forest stocking higher over the rotation compared to the baseline management and by harvesting stumps and coarse roots in addition to logging residues in the final felling. However, the climate impacts varied substantially over time depending on the prevailing forest structure and biomass assortment (timber, energy biomass) used in substitution.     

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.     

Sustainability of forest bioenergy in Europe: land-use-related carbon dioxide emissions of forest harvest residues

Increasing bioenergy production from forest harvest residues decreases litter input to the soil and can thus reduce the carbon stock and sink of forests. This effect may negate greenhouse gas savings obtained by using bioenergy. We used a spatially explicit modelling framework to assess the reduction in the forest litter and soil carbon stocks across Europe, assuming that a sustainable potential of bioenergy from forest harvest residues is taken into use. The forest harvest residue removal reduced the carbon stocks of litter and soil on average by 3% over the period from 2016 to 2100. The reduction was small compared to the size of the carbon stocks but significant in comparison to the amount of energy produced from the residues. As a result of these land-use-related emissions, bioenergy production from forest harvest residues would need to be continued for 60–80 years to achieve a 60% carbon dioxide (CO₂) emission reduction in heat and power generation compared to the fossil fuels it replaces in most European countries. The emission reductions achieved and their timings varied among countries because of differences in the litter and soil carbon loss. Our results show that extending the current sustainability requirements for bioliquids and biofuels to solid bioenergy does not guarantee efficient reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in the short-term. In the longer-term, bioenergy from forest harvest residues may pave the way to low-emission energy systems.     

Can we produce carbon and climate neutral forest bioenergy?

Harvesting branches, stumps and unmercantable tops, in addition to stem wood, decreases the carbon input to the soil and consequently reduces the forest carbon stock. We examine the changes in the forest carbon cycle that would compensate for this carbon loss over a rotation period and lead to carbon neutral forest residue bioenergy systems. In addition, we analyse the potential climate impact of these carbon neutral systems. In a boreal forest, the carbon loss was compensated for with a 10% increase in tree growth or a postponing of final felling for 20 years from 90 to 110 years in one forest rotation period. However, these changes in carbon sequestration did not prevent soil carbon loss. To recover soil carbon stock, a 38% increase in tree growth or a 21% decrease in the decomposition rate of the remaining organic matter was needed. All the forest residue bioenergy scenarios studied had a warming impact on climate for at least 62 years. Nevertheless, the increases in the carbon sequestration from forest growth or reduction in the decomposition rate of the remaining organic matter resulted in a 50% smaller warming impact of forest bioenergy use or even a cooling climate impact in the long term. The study shows that carbon neutral forest residue bioenergy systems have warming climate impacts. Minimization of the forest carbon loss improves the climate impact of forest bioenergy.     

Sustainable intensification of crop residue exploitation for bioenergy: Opportunities and challenges

Crop residue exploitation for bioenergy can play an important role in climate change mitigation without jeopardizing food security, but it may be constrained by impacts on soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks, and market, logistic and conversion challenges. We explore opportunities to increase bioenergy potentials from residues while reducing environmental impacts, in line with sustainable intensification. Using the case study of North Rhine‐Westphalia in Germany, we employ a spatiotemporally explicit approach combined with stakeholder interviews. First, the interviews identify agronomic and environmental impacts due to the potential reduction in SOC as the most critical challenge associated with enhanced crop residue exploitation. Market and technological challenges and competition with other residue uses are also identified as significant barriers. Second, with the use of agroecosystem modelling and estimations of bioenergy potentials and greenhouse gas emissions till mid‐century, we evaluate the ability of agricultural management to tackle the identified agronomic and environmental challenges. Integrated site‐specific management based on (a) humus balancing, (b) optimized fertilization and (c) winter soil cover performs better than our reference scenario with respect to all investigated variables. At the regional level, we estimate (a) a 5% increase in technical residue potentials and displaced emissions from substituting fossil fuels by bioethanol, (b) an 8% decrease in SOC losses and associated emissions, (c) an 18% decrease in nitrous oxide emissions, (d) a 37% decrease in mineral fertilizer requirements and emissions from their production and (e) a 16% decrease in nitrate leaching. Results are spatially variable and, despite improvements induced by management, limited amounts of crop residues are exploitable for bioenergy in areas prone to SOC decline. In order to sustainably intensify crop residue exploitation for bioenergy and reconcile climate change mitigation with other sustainability objectives, such as those on soil and water quality, residue management needs to be designed in an integrated and site‐specific manner.     

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.     

Implications of emissions timing on the cost‐effectiveness of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies: application to forest bioenergy systems

Conventional cost‐effectiveness calculations ignore the implications of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions timing and thus may not properly inform decision‐makers in the efficient allocation of resources to mitigate climate change. To begin to address this disconnect with climate change science, we modify the conventional cost‐effectiveness approach to account for emissions timing. GHG emissions flows occurring over time are translated into an ‘Equivalent Present Emission’ based on radiative forcing, enabling a comparison of system costs and emissions on a consistent present time basis. We apply this ‘Present Cost‐Effectiveness’ method to case studies of biomass‐based electricity generation (biomass co‐firing with coal, biomass cogeneration) to evaluate implications of forest carbon trade‐offs on the cost‐effectiveness of emission reductions. Bioenergy production from forest biomass can reduce forest carbon stocks, an immediate emissions source that contributes to atmospheric greenhouse gases. Forest carbon impacts thereby lessen emission reductions in the near‐term relative to the assumption of biomass ‘carbon neutrality’, resulting in higher costs of emission reductions when emissions timing is considered. In contrast, conventional cost‐effectiveness approaches implicitly evaluate strategies over an infinite analytical time horizon, underestimating nearer term emissions reduction costs and failing to identify pathways that can most efficiently contribute to climate change mitigation objectives over shorter time spans (e.g. up to 100 years). While providing only a simple representation of the climate change implications of emissions timing, the Present Cost‐Effectiveness method provides a straightforward approach to assessing the cost‐effectiveness of emission reductions associated with any climate change mitigation strategy where future GHG reductions require significant initial capital investment or increase near‐term emissions. Timing is a critical factor in determining the attractiveness of any investment; accounting for emissions timing can better inform decisions related to the merit of alternative resource uses to meet near‐, mid‐, and long‐term climate change mitigation objectives.     

The outcome is in the assumptions: analyzing the effects on atmospheric CO2 levels of increased use of bioenergy from forest biomass

Recently, several studies have quantified the effects on atmospheric CO₂ concentration of an increased harvest level in forests. Although these studies agreed in their estimates of forest productivity, their conclusions were contradictory. This study tested the effect of four assumptions by which those papers differed. These assumptions regard (1) whether a single or a set of repeated harvests were considered, (2) at what stage in stand growth harvest takes place, (3) how the baseline is constructed, and (4) whether a carbon‐cycle model is applied. A main finding was that current and future increase in the use of bioenergy should be studied considering a series of repeated harvests. Moreover, the time of harvest should be determined based on economical principles, thus taking place before stand growth culminates, which has implications for the design of the baseline scenario. When the most realistic assumptions are used and a carbon‐cycle model is applied, an increased harvest level in forests leads to a permanent increase in atmospheric CO₂ concentration.     

Land‐use change to bioenergy: grassland to short rotation coppice willow has an improved carbon balance

The effect of a transition from grassland to second‐generation (2G) bioenergy on soil carbon and greenhouse gas (GHG) balance is uncertain, with limited empirical data on which to validate landscape‐scale models, sustainability criteria and energy policies. Here, we quantified soil carbon, soil GHG emissions and whole ecosystem carbon balance for short rotation coppice (SRC) bioenergy willow and a paired grassland site, both planted at commercial scale. We quantified the carbon balance for a 2‐year period and captured the effects of a commercial harvest in the SRC willow at the end of the first cycle. Soil fluxes of nitrous oxide (N₂O) and methane (CH₄) did not contribute significantly to the GHG balance of these land uses. Soil respiration was lower in SRC willow (912 ± 42 g C m^?2 yr^?1) than in grassland (1522 ± 39 g C m^?2 yr^?1). Net ecosystem exchange (NEE) reflected this with the grassland a net source of carbon with mean NEE of 119 ± 10 g C m^?2 yr^?1 and SRC willow a net sink, ?620 ± 18 g C m^?2 yr^?1. When carbon removed from the ecosystem in harvested products was considered (Net Biome Productivity), SRC willow remained a net sink (221 ± 66 g C m^?2 yr^?1). Despite the SRC willow site being a net sink for carbon, soil carbon stocks (0–30 cm) were higher under the grassland. There was a larger NEE and increase in ecosystem respiration in the SRC willow after harvest; however, the site still remained a carbon sink. Our results indicate that once established, significant carbon savings are likely in SRC willow compared with the minimally managed grassland at this site. Although these observed impacts may be site and management dependent, they provide evidence that land‐use transition to 2G bioenergy has potential to provide a significant improvement on the ecosystem service of climate regulation relative to grassland systems.     

Evaluating the terrestrial carbon dioxide removal potential of improved forest management and accelerated forest conversion in Norway

As a carbon dioxide removal measure, the Norwegian government is currently considering a policy of large‐scale planting of spruce (Picea abies (L) H. Karst) on lands in various states of natural transition to a forest dominated by deciduous broadleaved tree species. Given the aspiration to bring emissions on balance with removals in the latter half of the 21st century in effort to limit the global mean temperature rise to “well below” 2°C, the effectiveness of such a policy is unclear given relatively low spruce growth rates in the region. Further convoluting the picture is the magnitude and relevance of surface albedo changes linked to such projects, which typically counteract the benefits of an enhanced forest CO₂ sink in high‐latitude regions. Here, we carry out a rigorous empirically based assessment of the terrestrial carbon dioxide removal (tCDR) potential of large‐scale spruce planting in Norway, taking into account transient developments in both terrestrial carbon sinks and surface albedo over the 21st century and beyond. We find that surface albedo changes would likely play a negligible role in counteracting tCDR, yet given low forest growth rates in the region, notable tCDR benefits from such projects would not be realized until the second half of the 21st century, with maximum benefits occurring even later around 2150. We estimate Norway's total accumulated tCDR potential at 2100 and 2150 (including surface albedo changes) to be 447 (±240) and 852 (±295) Mt CO₂‐eq. at mean net present values of US$ 12 (±3) and US$ 13 (±2) per ton CDR, respectively. For perspective, the accumulated tCDR potential at 2100 represents around 8 years of Norway's total current annual production‐based (i.e., territorial) CO₂‐eq. emissions.     

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).     

Land management and climate change determine second‐generation bioenergy potential of the US Northern Great Plains

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) has been proposed as a potential climate mitigation strategy raising concerns over trade‐offs with existing ecosystem services. We evaluate the feasibility of BECCS in the Upper Missouri River Basin (UMRB), a landscape with diverse land use, ownership, and bioenergy potential. We develop land‐use change scenarios and a switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) crop functional type to use in a land‐surface model to simulate second‐generation bioenergy production. By the end of this century, average annual switchgrass production over the UMRB ranges from 60 to 210 Tg dry mass/year and is dependent on the Representative Concentration Pathway for greenhouse gas emissions and on land‐use change assumptions. Under our simple phase‐in assumptions this results in a cumulative total production of 2,000–6,000 Tg C over the study period with the upper estimates only possible in the absence of climate change. Switchgrass yields decreased as average CO₂ concentrations and temperatures increased, suggesting the effect of elevated atmospheric CO₂ was small because of its C4 photosynthetic pathway. By the end of the 21st century, the potential energy stored annually in harvested switchgrass averaged between 1 and 4 EJ/year assuming perfect conversion efficiency, or an annual electrical generation capacity of 7,000–28,000 MW assuming current bioenergy efficiency rates. Trade‐offs between bioenergy and ecosystem services were identified, including cumulative direct losses of 1,000–2,600 Tg C stored in natural ecosystems from land‐use change by 2090. Total cumulative losses of ecosystem carbon stocks were higher than the potential ~300 Tg C in fossil fuel emissions from the single largest power plant in the region over the same time period, and equivalent to potential carbon removal from the atmosphere from using biofuels grown in the same region. Numerous trade‐offs from BECCS expansion in the UMRB must be balanced against the potential benefits of a carbon‐negative energy system.     

Predicting soil carbon changes in switchgrass grown on marginal lands under climate change and adaptation strategies

The United States Great Lakes Region (USGLR) is a critical geographic area for future bioenergy production. Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) is widely considered a carbon (C)‐neutral or C‐negative bioenergy production system, but projected increases in air temperature and precipitation due to climate change might substantially alter soil organic C (SOC) dynamics and storage in soils. This study examined long‐term SOC changes in switchgrass grown on marginal land in the USGLR under current and projected climate, predicted using a process‐based model (Systems Approach to Land‐Use Sustainability) extensively calibrated with a wealth of plant and soil measurements at nine experimental sites. Simulations indicate that these soils are likely a net C sink under switchgrass (average gain 0.87 Mg C ha^?1 year^?1), although substantial variation in the rate of SOC accumulation was predicted (range: 0.2–1.3 Mg C ha^?1 year^?1). Principal component analysis revealed that the predicted intersite variability in SOC sequestration was related in part to differences in climatic characteristics, and to a lesser extent, to heterogeneous soils. Although climate change impacts on switchgrass plant growth were predicted to be small (4%–6% decrease on average), the increased soil respiration was predicted to partially negate SOC accumulations down to 70% below historical rates in the most extreme scenarios. Increasing N fertilizer rate and decreasing harvest intensity both had modest SOC sequestration benefits under projected climate, whereas introducing genotypes better adapted to the longer growing seasons was a much more effective strategy. Best‐performing adaptation scenarios were able to offset >60% of the climate change impacts, leading to SOC sequestration 0.7 Mg C ha^?1 year^?1 under projected climate. On average, this was 0.3 Mg C ha^?1 year^?1 more C sequestered than the no adaptation baseline. These findings provide crucial knowledge needed to guide policy and operational management for maximizing SOC sequestration of future bioenergy production on marginal lands in the USGLR.     

Meeting Europe's climate change commitments: quantitative estimates of the potential for carbon mitigation by agriculture

Under the Kyoto Protocol, the European Union is committed to a reduction in CO₂ emissions to 92% of baseline (1990) levels during the first commitment period (2008–2012). The Kyoto Protocol allows carbon emissions to be offset by demonstrable removal of carbon from the atmosphere. Thus, land‐use/land‐management change and forestry activities that are shown to reduce atmospheric CO₂ levels can be included in the Kyoto targets. These activities include afforestation, reforestation and deforestation (article 3.3 of the Kyoto Protocol) and the improved management of agricultural soils (article 3.4). In this paper, we estimate the carbon mitigation potential of various agricultural land‐management strategies and examine the consequences of European policy options on carbon mitigation potential, by examining combinations of changes in agricultural land‐use/land‐management. We show that no single land‐management change in isolation can mitigate all of the carbon needed to meet Europe's climate change commitments, but integrated combinations of land‐management strategies show considerable potential for carbon mitigation. Three of the combined scenarios, one of which is an optimal realistic scenario, are by themselves able to meet Europe's emission limitation or reduction commitments. Through combined land‐management scenarios, we show that the most important resource for carbon mitigation in agriculture is the surplus arable land. We conclude that in order to fully exploit the potential of arable land for carbon mitigation, policies will need to be implemented to allow surplus arable land to be put into alternative long‐term land‐use. Of all options examined, bioenergy crops show the greatest potential for carbon mitigation. Bioenergy crop production also shows an indefinite mitigation potential compared to other options where the mitigation potential is finite. We suggest that in order to exploit fully the bioenergy option, the infrastructure for bioenergy production needs to be significantly enhanced before the beginning of the first Kyoto commitment period in 2008. It is not expected that Europe will attempt to meet its climate change commitments solely through changes in agricultural land‐use. A reduction in CO₂‐carbon emissions will be key to meeting Europe's Kyoto targets, and forestry activities (Kyoto Article 3.3) will play a major role. In this study, however, we demonstrate the considerable potential of changes in agricultural land‐use and ‐management (Kyoto Article 3.4) for carbon mitigation and highlight the policies needed to promote these agricultural activities. As all sources of carbon mitigation will be important in meeting Europe's climate change commitments, agricultural carbon mitigation options should be taken very seriously.     

The broad impacts of corn stover and wheat straw removal for biofuel production on crop productivity,soil health and greenhouse gas emissions: A review

Biofuel production from crop residues is widely recognized as an essential component of developing a bioeconomy, but the removal of crop residues still raises many questions about the sustainability of the cropping system. Therefore, this study reviews the sustainability effects of crop residues removal for biofuel production in terms of crop production, soil health and greenhouse gas emissions. Most studies found little evidence that residue management had long‐term impacts on grain yield unless the available water is limited. In years when water was not limiting, corn and wheat removal rates ≥90% produced similar or greater grain yield than no removal in most studies. Conversely, when water was limiting, corn grain yield decreased up to 21% with stover removal ≥90% in some studies. Changes in soil organic fractions and nutrients depended largely on the amount of residue returned, soil depth and texture, slope and tillage. Reductions in organic fractions occurred primarily with complete stover removal, in the top 15–30 cm in fine‐textured soils. Soil erosion, water runoff and leaching of nutrients such as total nitrogen (N) and extractable soil potassium decreased when no more than 30% of crop residues were removed. Stover management effects on soil bulk density varied considerably depending on soil layer, and residue and tillage management, with removal rates of less than 50% helping to maintain the soil aggregate stability. Reductions in CO₂ and N₂O fluxes typically occurred following complete residue removal. The use of wheat straw typically increased CH₄ emissions, and above or equal to 8 Mg/ha wheat straw led to the largest CO₂ and N₂O emissions, regardless of N rates. Before using crop residues for biofuel production, it should therefore always be checked whether neutral to positive sustainability effects can be maintained under the site‐specific conditions.