[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01972038.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Global energy sector emission reductions and bioenergy use: overview of the bioenergy demand phase of the EMF-33 model comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Nico Bauer
  • Steven K. Rose
  • Shinichiro Fujimori
  • Detlef P. van Vuuren
  • John Weyant
  • Marshall Wise
  • Yiyun Cui
  • Vassilis Daioglou
  • Matthew J. Gidden
  • Etsushi Kato
  • Alban Kitous
  • Florian Leblanc
  • Ronald D. Sands
  • Fuminori Sano
  • Jessica Strefler
  • Junichi Tsutsui
  • Ruben Bibas
  • Oliver Fricko
  • Tomoko Hasegawa
  • Atsushi Kurosawa
  • Silvana Mima

    (GAEL - Laboratoire d'Economie Appliquée de Grenoble - Grenoble INP - Institut polytechnique de Grenoble - Grenoble Institute of Technology - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UGA [2016-2019] - Université Grenoble Alpes [2016-2019])

  • Matteo Muratori
Abstract
We present an overview of results from 11 integrated assessment models (IAMs) that participated in the 33rd study of the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum (EMF-33) on the viability of large-scale deployment of bioenergy for achieving long-run climate goals. The study explores future bioenergy use across models under harmonized scenarios for future climate policies, availability of bioenergy technologies, and constraints on biomass supply. This paper provides a more transparent description of IAMs that span a broad range of assumptions regarding model structures, energy sectors, and bioenergy conversion chains. Without emission constraints, we find vastly different CO2 emission and bioenergy deployment patterns across models due to differences in competition with fossil fuels, the possibility to produce large-scale bio-liquids, and the flexibility of energy systems. Imposing increasingly stringent carbon budgets mostly increases bioenergy use. A diverse set of available bioenergy technology portfolios provides flexibility to allocate bioenergy to supply different final energy as well as remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by combining bioenergy with carbon capture and sequestration (BECCS). Sector and regional bioenergy allocation varies dramatically across models mainly due to bioenergy technology availability and costs, final energy patterns, and availability of alternative decarbonization options. Although much bioenergy is used in combination with CCS, BECCS is not necessarily the driver of bioenergy use. We find that the flexibility to use biomass feedstocks in different energy sub-sectors makes large-scale bioenergy deployment a robust strategy in mitigation scenarios that is surprisingly insensitive with respect to reduced technology availability. However, the achievability of stringent carbon budgets and associated carbon prices is sensitive. Constraints on biomass feedstock supply increase the carbon price less significantly than excluding BECCS because carbon removals are still realized and valued. Incremental sensitivity tests find that delayed readiness of bioenergy technologies until 2050 is more important than potentially higher investment costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Nico Bauer & Steven K. Rose & Shinichiro Fujimori & Detlef P. van Vuuren & John Weyant & Marshall Wise & Yiyun Cui & Vassilis Daioglou & Matthew J. Gidden & Etsushi Kato & Alban Kitous & Florian Lebla, 2018. "Global energy sector emission reductions and bioenergy use: overview of the bioenergy demand phase of the EMF-33 model comparison," Post-Print hal-01972038, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01972038
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-018-2226-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Duncan Brack & Richard King, 2021. "Managing Land‐based CDR: BECCS, Forests and Carbon Sequestration," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S1), pages 45-56, April.
    2. Giannousakis, Anastasis & Hilaire, Jérôme & Nemet, Gregory F. & Luderer, Gunnar & Pietzcker, Robert C. & Rodrigues, Renato & Baumstark, Lavinia & Kriegler, Elmar, 2021. "How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    3. Alexandre C. Köberle & Vassilis Daioglou & Pedro Rochedo & André F. P. Lucena & Alexandre Szklo & Shinichiro Fujimori & Thierry Brunelle & Etsushi Kato & Alban Kitous & Detlef P. Vuuren & Roberto Scha, 2022. "Can global models provide insights into regional mitigation strategies? A diagnostic model comparison study of bioenergy in Brazil," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 170(1), pages 1-31, January.
    4. Dumortier, Jerome & Elobeid, Amani & Carriquiry, Miguel, 2022. "Light-duty vehicle fleet electrification in the United States and its effects on global agricultural markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    5. Vassilis Daioglou & Matteo Muratori & Patrick Lamers & Shinichiro Fujimori & Alban Kitous & Alexandre C. Köberle & Nico Bauer & Martin Junginger & Etsushi Kato & Florian Leblanc & Silvana Mima & Marsh, 2020. "Implications of climate change mitigation strategies on international bioenergy trade," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1639-1658, December.
    6. Steef V. Hanssen & Vassilis Daioglou & Zoran J. N. Steinmann & Stefan Frank & Alexander Popp & Thierry Brunelle & Pekka Lauri & Tomoko Hasegawa & Mark A. J. Huijbregts & Detlef P. Vuuren, 2020. "Biomass residues as twenty-first century bioenergy feedstock—a comparison of eight integrated assessment models," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1569-1586, December.
    7. Birka Wicke & Ingeborg Kluts & Jan Peter Lesschen, 2020. "Bioenergy Potential and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Intensifying European Temporary Grasslands," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-18, November.
    8. Gunnar Luderer & Michaja Pehl & Anders Arvesen & Thomas Gibon & Benjamin L Bodirsky & Harmen Sytze de Boer & Oliver Fricko & Mohamad Hejazi & Florian Humpenöder & Gokul Iyer & Silvana Mima & Ioanna Mo, 2019. "Environmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of alternative power sector decarbonization strategies," Post-Print hal-02380468, HAL.
    9. Florian Leblanc & Ruben Bibas & Silvana Mima & Matteo Muratori & Shogo Sakamoto & Fuminori Sano & Nico Bauer & Vassilis Daioglou & Shinichiro Fujimori & Matthew J. Gidden & Estsushi Kato & Steven K. R, 2022. "The contribution of bioenergy to the decarbonization of transport: a multi-model assessment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 170(3), pages 1-21, February.
    10. Hof, A.F. & Esmeijer, K. & de Boer, H.S. & Daioglou, V. & Doelman, J.C. & Elzen, M.G.J. den & Gernaat, D.E.H.J. & van Vuuren, D.P., 2022. "Regional energy diversity and sovereignty in different 2 °C and 1.5 °C pathways," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PB).
    11. Ajay Gambhir & Isabela Butnar & Pei-Hao Li & Pete Smith & Neil Strachan, 2019. "A Review of Criticisms of Integrated Assessment Models and Proposed Approaches to Address These, through the Lens of BECCS," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-21, May.
    12. Nikas, A. & Gambhir, A. & Trutnevyte, E. & Koasidis, K. & Lund, H. & Thellufsen, J.Z. & Mayer, D. & Zachmann, G. & Miguel, L.J. & Ferreras-Alonso, N. & Sognnaes, I. & Peters, G.P. & Colombo, E. & Howe, 2021. "Perspective of comprehensive and comprehensible multi-model energy and climate science in Europe," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(PA).
    13. Mantulet, Gabin & Bidaud, Adrien & Mima, Silvana, 2020. "The role of biomass gasification and methanisation in the decarbonisation strategies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    14. Camilla C. N. Oliveira & Gerd Angelkorte & Pedro R. R. Rochedo & Alexandre Szklo, 2021. "The role of biomaterials for the energy transition from the lens of a national integrated assessment model," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-22, August.
    15. Matteo Muratori & Nico Bauer & Steven K. Rose & Marshall Wise & Vassilis Daioglou & Yiyun Cui & Etsushi Kato & Matthew Gidden & Jessica Strefler & Shinichiro Fujimori & Ronald D. Sands & Detlef P. Vuu, 2020. "EMF-33 insights on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1621-1637, December.
    16. Lehtveer, Mariliis & Fridahl, Mathias, 2020. "Managing variable renewables with biomass in the European electricity system: Emission targets and investment preferences," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    17. Junichi Tsutsui & Hiromi Yamamoto & Shogo Sakamoto & Masahiro Sugiyama, 2020. "The role of advanced end-use technologies in long-term climate change mitigation: the interlinkage between primary bioenergy and energy end-use," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1659-1673, December.
    18. Mandley, S.J. & Daioglou, V. & Junginger, H.M. & van Vuuren, D.P. & Wicke, B., 2020. "EU bioenergy development to 2050," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    19. Jérôme Hilaire & Jan C. Minx & Max W. Callaghan & Jae Edmonds & Gunnar Luderer & Gregory F. Nemet & Joeri Rogelj & Maria Mar Zamora, 2019. "Negative emissions and international climate goals—learning from and about mitigation scenarios," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 157(2), pages 189-219, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01972038. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.