Can bioenergy with carbon capture and storage make an impact?

Venton, Danielle

doi:10.1073/pnas.1617583113

Cited by 19 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the strong environmental tradeoffs under the RFS thus far, biofuels and bioenergy may play a key role in stabilizing atmospheric CO 2 concentrations and holding global warming below 1.5 or 2 °C, particularly with continued advancements like carbon capture and storage ( 2 , 4 , 74 – 76 ) and increased productivity from perennial feedstocks grown on marginal lands ( 77 – 80 ). However, our findings confirm that contemporary corn ethanol production is unlikely to contribute to climate change mitigation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental outcomes of the US Renewable Fuel Standard

Lark

Hendricks

Smith

et al. 2022

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) specifies the use of biofuels in the United States and thereby guides nearly half of all global biofuel production, yet outcomes of this keystone climate and environmental regulation remain unclear. Here we combine econometric analyses, land use observations, and biophysical models to estimate the realized effects of the RFS in aggregate and down to the scale of individual agricultural fields across the United States. We find that the RFS increased corn prices by 30% and the prices of other crops by 20%, which, in turn, expanded US corn cultivation by 2.8 Mha (8.7%) and total cropland by 2.1 Mha (2.4%) in the years following policy enactment (2008 to 2016). These changes increased annual nationwide fertilizer use by 3 to 8%, increased water quality degradants by 3 to 5%, and caused enough domestic land use change emissions such that the carbon intensity of corn ethanol produced under the RFS is no less than gasoline and likely at least 24% higher. These tradeoffs must be weighed alongside the benefits of biofuels as decision-makers consider the future of renewable energy policies and the potential for fuels like corn ethanol to meet climate mitigation goals.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental outcomes of the US Renewable Fuel Standard

Lark

Hendricks

Smith

et al. 2022

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The CO 2 produced as a by-product from the CBECCS systems could be utilized and stored in depleted gas basins, employed for enhanced recovery of oil or coalbed methane, or sequestered in appropriate geological reservoirs (e.g., deep saline sedimentary formations) (11, 32–35). For the CBECCS deployment scenario (e.g., 150 GW in total) to be discussed later, annual CO 2 potentially required for sequestration amounts to 129 megatons (Mt), 164 Mt, 169 Mt, 169 Mt, 94 Mt, and 77 Mt, respectively, for the six regions of China’s mainland, namely North China, Northeast, East China, South Central China, Southwest, and Northwest, which is negligible compared with the available onshore geological repositories in China (i.e., less than 0.036% of total repositories) (34, 36–38).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gasification of coal and biomass as a net carbon-negative power source for environment-friendly electricity generation in China

Cao

Wang

et al. 2019

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Realizing the goal of the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 2 °C by the end of this century will most likely require deployment of carbon-negative technologies. It is particularly important that China, as the world’s top carbon emitter, avoids being locked into carbon-intensive, coal-fired power-generation technologies and undertakes a smooth transition from high- to negative-carbon electricity production. We focus here on deploying a combination of coal and biomass energy to produce electricity in China using an integrated gasification cycle system combined with carbon capture and storage (CBECCS). Such a system will also reduce air pollutant emissions, thus contributing to China’s near-term goal of improving air quality. We evaluate the bus-bar electricity-generation prices for CBECCS with mixing ratios of crop residues varying from 0 to 100%, as well as associated costs for carbon mitigation and cobenefits for air quality. We find that CBECCS systems employing a crop residue ratio of 35% could produce electricity with net-zero life-cycle emissions of greenhouse gases, with a levelized cost of electricity of no more than 9.2 US cents per kilowatt hour. A carbon price of approximately $52.0 per ton would make CBECCS cost-competitive with pulverized coal power plants. Therefore, our results provide critical insights for designing a CBECCS strategy in China to harness near-term air-quality cobenefits while laying the foundation for achieving negative carbon emissions in the long run.

show abstract

“…In these scenarios sequestering CO 2 from the atmosphere via forest management plays a vital role. Despite doubts in the effectiveness of Bioenergy, Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) the appropriate management of forests will have to be used as mitigation strategy against climate change [13,62,63].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies for Climate-Smart Forest Management in Austria

Jandl

Ledermann

Kindermann

et al. 2018

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We simulated Austrian forests under different sustainable management scenarios. A reference scenario was compared to scenarios focusing on the provision of bioenergy, enhancing the delivery of wood products, and reduced harvesting rates. The standing stock of the stem biomass, carbon in stems, and the soil carbon pool were calculated for the period 2010–2100. We used the forest growth model Câldis and the soil carbon model Yasso07. The wood demand of all scenarios could be satisfied within the simulation period. The reference scenario led to a small decrease of the stem biomass. Scenarios aiming at a supply of more timber decreased the standing stock to a greater extent. Emphasizing the production of bioenergy was successful for several decades but ultimately exhausted the available resources for fuel wood. Lower harvesting rates reduced the standing stock of coniferous and increased the standing stock of deciduous forests. The soil carbon pool was marginally changed by different management strategies. We conclude that the production of long-living wood products is the preferred implementation of climate-smart forestry. The accumulation of carbon in the standing biomass is risky in the case of disturbances. The production of bioenergy is suitable as a byproduct of high value forest products.

show abstract

Can bioenergy with carbon capture and storage make an impact?

Cited by 19 publications

References 3 publications

Environmental outcomes of the US Renewable Fuel Standard

Environmental outcomes of the US Renewable Fuel Standard

Gasification of coal and biomass as a net carbon-negative power source for environment-friendly electricity generation in China

Strategies for Climate-Smart Forest Management in Austria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About