The land cover and carbon cycle consequences of large-scale utilizations of biomass as an energy source

The use of modern biomass for energy generation has been considered in many studies as a possible measure for reducing or stabilizing global carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions. In this paper we assess the impacts of large-scale global utilization of biomass on regional and grid scale land cover, greenhouse gas emissions, and carbon cycle. We have implemented in the global environmental change model IMAGE the LESS biomass intensive scenario, which was developed for the Second Assessment Report of IPCC. This scenario illustrates the potential for reducing energy related emission by different sets of fuel mixes and a higher energy efficiency. Our analysis especially covers different consequences involved with such modern biomass scenarios. We emphasize influences of CO₂ concentrations and climate change on biomass crop yield, land use, competition between food and biomass crops, and the different interregional trade patterns for modern biomass based energy. Our simulations show that the original LESS scenario is rather optimistic on the land requirements for large-scale biomass plantations. Our simulations show that 797 Mha is required while the original LESS scenario is based on 550 Mha. Such expansion of agricultural land will influence deforestation patterns and have significant consequenses for environmental issues, such as biodiversity. Altering modern biomass requirements and the locations where they are grown in the scenario shows that the outcome is sensitive for regional emissions and feedbacks in the C cycle and that competition between food and modern biomass can be significant. We conclude that the cultivation of large quantities of modern biomass is feasible, but that its effectiveness to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases has to be evaluated in combination with many other environmental land use and socio-economic factors.     

Evaluating cost-effective strategies for meeting regional CO2 targets

Various climate protocol proposals oblige different industrialized countries to reduce CO₂ and other greenhouse gas emissions. In principle, the total costs of these obligations could be substantially reduced if emission reductions are implemented in regions with low marginal costs for CO₂ reduction. This has been difficult to quantify because of lack of models with suitable regional and sectoral detail. In this paper we perform these calculations by taking advantage of the capability of the IMAGE 2 model to compute regional emissions and costs. Two main options are examined for allocating emission reductions required of industrialized regions in a cost effective manner: (1) allocating them among industrialized regions (2) allocating them among all world regions. The cost savings for each of these options are presented. The main conclusions are that (a) it is of great importance for the cost comparisons of protocols to use a well defined baseline scenario and clearly formulated targets, and (b) large economic benefits, in the order of 35–65%, can accrue from joint-implementation agreements which allocate investments on the basis of net marginal costs of CO₂ emission reduction.     

Baseline scenarios of global environmental change

This paper presents three baseline scenarios of no policy action computed by the IMAGE 2 model. These scenarios cover a wide range of coupled global change Indicators, including: energy demand and consumption; food demand, consumption, and production; changes in land cover including changes in extent of agricultural land and forest; emissions of greenhouse gases and ozone precursors; and climate change and its impacts on sea level rise, crop productivity and natural vegetation. Scenario information is available for the entire world with regional and grid scale detail, and covers from 1970 to 2100. The scenarios indicate that the coming decades could be a period of relatively rapid global environmental change as compared to the period before and after. The natural vegetation in industrialized regions could be threatened by climate change, but abandonment of agricultural lands could also make new lands available for reforestation and revegetation. The opposite is true for most of Asia and Africa. Here the impacts of climate change on vegetation may not be as significant as in temperate climates, but the demand for food will lead to a significant expansion of agricultural lands at the expense of remaining forests and other natural areas.