Benefits & Impacts Policy 779-page Ebook Download at - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

FAPESP-SCOPE-BIOEN-BIOTA-CLIMATE CHANGE (2012/23765-0) Reporting a global assessment of Bioenergy & Sustainability 137 experts from 24 countries Land use Feedstocks Technologies Benefits & Impacts Policy 779-page Ebook Download at http://bioenfapesp.org

Bioenergy

Integrated policy for bioenergy expansion Maximizing bioenergy benefits and positive synergies Meeting demand: biomass supply at the scales needed High costs and technological Bioenergy complexities of developing trade sustainable biorefinery systems expansion Certification Financing the Bioenergy and social bioenergy governance aspects effort Souza et al., Technical Summary, Chapter 1

Liquid biofuels - over 100 Billion L – 4.2 EJ - less than 1% of our primary energy use; Biopower – 1 EJ Soy, oil palm, Waste Oil Biopower from Sugarcane Maize Ethanol rape Biodiesel Renewable solid biomass Ethanol Diesel (HVO) Up to 3,900 L/ha Up to 5,700 L/ha pines, firs , spruce, Up to 7,200 L/ha 16.8 to 53.8 eucalyptus, 52.6 gCO 2 /MJ gCO 2 /MJ poplar, willow 21.3 gCO 2 /MJ 10-18 ton/ha 26 to 48 gCO2e/ kWh GHG emissions GHG emissions GHG emissions GHG emissions GHG emissions 40% lower than 45-70% lower 93% lower than 76% lower than 42% lower than diesel than diesel coal gasoline gasoline Macedo, Nassar et al.Chapter 17 Green House gas emissions, Woods et al. Chapter 9 Land Use, Long and Karp et al. Chapter 10 Feedstocks

Conventional Ethanol At a global level, land is not a constraint but 83 Billion L availability is concentrated in two main regions, Latin 3.1 EJ America and Sub-Saharan Africa. 6.8 Million Ha of land Biodiesel This land is being used predominantly for low intensity animal grazing. 23 Million tonne 1.1 EJ 6.3 Million Ha of land HVO 6 Million tonne 0.1 EJ <0.1 Million Ha of land 0.4 to 1.5% of global land or 5 to 20% of rainfed land (no irrigation) Woods et al. Chapter 9, Land Use

Existing pastureland could support almost four times the numbers of animals. Bringing the poorest-performing pastures up to 50% of their maximum attainable density would more than double the global stock of grazing animals. Productivity, efficiency, reduction of waste, agriculture modernization. Osseweijer et al. Chapter 4, Food Security

Integrated new biorefinery systems are on the way: no carbon waste! Chapter 12 – Convertion Technologies and Engines. Chum, Nigro et al.

Conservation of biodiversity is paramount Joly et al.Chapter 16 Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

TRADITIONAL BIOENERGY Most of the renewable energy we use today comes from inefficient burning of biomass to produce heat 2.8 billion people use it for Respiratory illnesses 30% of the biomass used is cooking and heating. 1.6 million deaths per year, of native vegetation Wood hauling is done mostly mainly women and children by women and children MODERN BIOENERGY In rural areas, bioenergy can bring access to energy and contribute to poverty reduction Improving health and education In Kenya, 1.4 million improved Generating jobs and improving livelihoods cooking stoves saved Biogas in 5 million homes in India and 15 75 thousand Ha million homes in China of forest Diaz-Chavez et al. Chapter 21, Energy Acess

Bioenergy Production Now Feedstocks Land Use Conversion Technologies Conventional Ethanol Ethanol and Flexible Fuel Vehicle Engines Biodiesel Biodiesel Vehicle Engines Lignocellulosic Ethanol Aviation Biofuels Renewable Diesel Bioelectricity Biogas Biogas Vehicles Heat Bioenergy Expansion Land Availability Biomass Production Potential Bioenergy Costs Biomass Supply in the Face of Climate Change Impacts of Bioenergy Expansion on Biodiversity and Ecosystems Indirect Effects Financing Trade Bioenergy Added Benefits to Social and Environmental Development Biomass Carbon Capture and Sequestration Improvement of Soil Quality Increasing Soil Carbon Pollution Reduction Social Benefits

Our low carbon future has started

Supply chain and environmental security Water - Vicky Ballester, USP GHG Emissions, Isaias Macedo, UNICAMP Environmental Climate Security - Paulo Artaxo, USP Sustainable development and innovation Case Studies - Regis Leal, CTBE Food Security - Luis Cortez, UNICAMP Conversion Technologies and Engines - Francisco Nigro, USP

Vicky Ballester, CENA, USP

Opportunities to implement or improve bioenergy production to address long-term sustainable use of water and soil resources Bioenergy systems can have positive impacts on these resources when feedstocks and conversion technologies are matched to local conditions and planning includes holistic landscape-level assessment

Positive ( ) and negative impacts ( ) of bioenergy production on: Water cycle Carbon cycle Other nutrient cycles New technologies for Soil carbon Water cycle changes Less use of fertilizers landscape analysis sequestration Evapotranspiration 1 Ton of sugar-cane for increase Comparing to ethanol: ~ 1000 L of traditional crops Down stream runoff Less GHGs vinasse Average ET (mm.y -1 ) and discharge Improve Soil decrease Pasture: 635 80 to 200 m 3 .ha -1 properties adding nutrients Annual Crops:651 Dry (sub and) organic matter Sugar-cane: 760 tropical regions + 8 to 20 mm Savannah: 880 “irrigation” water Groundwater Perennial Crops: 950 recharge reduction Biodigestion: biogas Forest: 1150 Soils salinization and bioelectricity Bentes, Young, Ballester, Cantarella, Cowie, Martinelli and Neary. Soils and Water. Chap. 18 : 619-658.

Wide range of positive and negative impacts Result from Local/Regional Characteristics Environmental, Social, Economic, Cultural, Policies, Regulation, Governance Therefore Use of a single metric such as • Nutrient Use • Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE) • Soil Organic Matter/Organic Carbon • Water Footprint • Water Use • Water Use Efficiency (WUE) Meanful and and lead Arrows represent impacts, boxes and numbers (1 to 5) to miss interpretations impacts levels. Green: positive; Red: negative

Recommendation: Landscape level assessment and management using systems base on recommended actions and several metrics Interdisciplinary, Example: Best Management Practices applied to crop life integrated cycle: enables feedstock production for bioenergy approach programs as a sustainable part of land management and renewable energy production, and can represent new opportunities Continuous Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Review Bioenergy Crop Life Landscape Cycle level Recommended actions instead of isolated Best Management Practices: system of metrics recommended actions

Isaias Macedo, Unicamp

Evaluating GHG emissions and mitigation from bioenergy production and use The transportation sector is the most challenging for GHG mitigation in the next decades; and, worldwide, power generation with fossil fuels is a large (and growing) source of GHG emissions. In the last years advances in technologies and in methodologies / data for better evaluation of GHG emissions have shown the importance of bioenergy in the context of climate change. • Commercial liquid biofuels produced in suitable conditions (AEZ, sustainable agricultural practices , modern conversion technologies and full use of co-products) already provide high levels of GHG mitigation • Commercial solid biomass fuels are increasingly substituting for coal in co-firing power generation • Advanced biofuels (in development) indicate even better GHG mitigation potential, besides increasing bioenergy availability • The LUC studies for better biofuels show the great improvement potential for the whole agriculture / forest system.

GHG emissions / mitigation for commercial biofuels There are different regional regulations for GHG emissions evaluation: EU-RED, UK-RTFO, California-LCFS, US-EPA/RFS, etc. Results bellow use the same procedures, for comparison. � Average� � GHG� mitigation,� GHG� emissions� * � %� (fossil� fuel) � Commercial� Liquid� Biofuels � � � � � � � � Sugar� Cane� Ethanol,� Brazil� 21,3� � gCO2e/MJ� 76� � � � � � Corn� Ethanol,� USA� 52,6� � gCO2e/MJ� 42� � � � � � Rapeseed� biodiesel,� EU� 53,8� � gCO2e/MJ� 40� � � � Solid� Biomass� (power� >� 10MWe) � � � � � � � Wood� waste,� residues,� SR� crops� � � � � � 26� – � 48� � � gCO2e/kWh� � � � � � � � � � � >� 93� � *� No� LUC;� includes� co-products� credits�

Bioenergy can make a substantial (and much needed) contribution to reduce GHG emissions, even beyond the results achieved until now Advanced biofuels (cellulosic ethanol, BtL processes) , full use of co-products and continuous improvements lead the way LUC (and iLUC) emissions are found to be much smaller than previously estimated, when appropriate measures are taken (AEZ, reducing deforestation and native land conversion, higher productivities, pasture integration and intensification) Land use changes, in agriculture, forestry and pastures, may produce benefits towards reducing GHG emissions Gaps in knowledge include data gathering for soil conditions , SOM stock changes and N 2 O emissions; and impacts of albedo, aerosols and emissions timing on climate.

Paulo Artaxo, IF, USP