...
首页> 外文期刊>Global change biology bioenergy >Natural climate solutions versus bioenergy: Can carbon benefits of natural succession compete with bioenergy from short rotation coppice?
【24h】

Natural climate solutions versus bioenergy: Can carbon benefits of natural succession compete with bioenergy from short rotation coppice?

机译:自然气候解决方案与生物能源:自然继承的碳益处与来自短旋转Coppice的生物能量竞争?

获取原文

摘要

Short rotation plantations are often considered as holding vast potentials for future global bioenergy supply. In contrast to raising biomass harvests in forests, purpose‐grown biomass does not interfere with forest carbon (C) stocks. Provided that agricultural land can be diverted from food and feed production without impairing food security, energy plantations on current agricultural land appear as a beneficial option in terms of renewable, climate‐friendly energy supply. However, instead of supporting energy plantations, land could also be devoted to natural succession. It then acts as a long‐term C sink which also results in C benefits. We here compare the sink strength of natural succession on arable land with the C saving effects of bioenergy from plantations. Using geographically explicit data on global cropland distribution among climate and ecological zones, regionally specific C accumulation rates are calculated with IPCC default methods and values. C savings from bioenergy are given for a range of displacement factors (DFs), acknowledging the varying efficiency of bioenergy routes and technologies in fossil fuel displacement. A uniform spatial pattern is assumed for succession and bioenergy plantations, and the considered timeframes range from 20 to 100?years. For many parameter settings—in particular, longer timeframes and high DFs—bioenergy yields higher cumulative C savings than natural succession. Still, if woody biomass displaces liquid transport fuels or natural gas‐based electricity generation, natural succession is competitive or even superior for timeframes of 20–50?years. This finding has strong implications with climate and environmental policies: Freeing land for natural succession is a worthwhile low‐cost natural climate solution that has many co‐benefits for biodiversity and other ecosystem services. A considerable risk, however, is C stock losses (i.e., emissions) due to disturbances or land conversion at a later time.
机译:短旋转种植园通常被认为是未来全球生物能源供应的巨大潜力。与森林中的生物质收获提高生物量相反,目的生成的生物质不会干扰森林碳(C)股。如果农业土地可以从食品和饲料生产中转移,而不损害粮食安全,目前农业用地的能源种植园就可再生,气候友好能源供应而言。然而,而不是支持能源种植园,土地也可以致力于自然的继承。然后它充当长期C水槽,也导致C的益处。我们在这里比较耕地上的自然继承的水槽强度与生物能源从种植园的C.在气候和生态区域之间使用地理上明确的全球裁剪数据,通过IPCC默认方法和值计算区域特定的C累积率。 C从生物能量中节省了一系列位移因子(DFS),承认生物能源路线和化石燃料流离失所的不同效率。假设连续和生物能源种植园均匀的空间模式,并且考虑的时间帧范围为20至100?年。对于许多参数设置 - 特别是,较长的时间帧和高DFS-BioEnergy生产比自然连续更高的累积C节省。尽管如此,如果伍迪生物量取代液体运输燃料或天然气的发电,自然继承是竞争甚至优越的时间范围为20-50?年。这一发现具有强烈的气候和环境政策意义:自然继承的释放土地是一个有价值的低成本天然气解决方案,对生物多样性和其他生态系统服务有很多合作效益。然而,由于稍后时间的骚乱或土地转换,C股票损失(即排放量)是相当大的风险。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号