Serious mismatches continue between science and policy in forest bioenergy

  • Michael Norton
    EASAC Secretariat German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina Halle Germany
  • Andras Baldi
    Centre for Ecological Research Institute of Ecology and Botany Vácrátót Hungary
  • Vicas Buda
    Nature Research Centre Vilnius Lithuania
  • Bruno Carli
    Institute of Applied Physics CNR Florence Italy
  • Pavel Cudlin
    Global Change Research Institute Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Ceské Budejovice Czech Republic
  • Mike B. Jones
    Trinity College Dublin University of Dublin Dublin Ireland
  • Atte Korhola
    Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland
  • Rajmund Michalski
    Institute of Environmental Engineering Polish Academy of Sciences Zabrze Poland
  • Francisco Novo
    The Spanish Royal Academy of Sciences Madrid Spain
  • Július Oszlányi
    Institute of Landscape Ecology of the Slovak Academy of Sciences Bratislava Slovakia
  • Filpe Duarte Santos
    Department of Physics, Geophysics and Environment University of Lisbon Lisbon Portugal
  • Bernhard Schink
    Faculty of Biology University of Konstanz Constance Germany
  • John Shepherd
    National Oceanography Centre School of Ocean & Earth Science University of Southampton Southampton UK
  • Louise Vet
    Netherlands Institute of Ecology Wageningen The Netherlands
  • Lars Walloe
    Division of Physiology Institute of Basic Medical Sciences University of Oslo Oslo Norway
  • Anders Wijkman
    The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Stockholm Sweden

抄録

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>In recent years, the production of pellets derived from forestry biomass to replace coal for electricity generation has been increasing, with over 10 million tonnes traded internationally—primarily between United States and Europe but with an increasing trend to Asia. Critical to this trade is the classification of woody biomass as ‘renewable energy’ and thus eligible for public subsidies. However, much scientific study on the net effect of this trend suggests that it is having the opposite effect to that expected of renewable energy, by increasing atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide for substantial periods of time. This review, based on recent work by Europe's Academies of Science, finds that current policies are failing to recognize that removing forest carbon stocks for bioenergy leads to an initial increase in emissions. Moreover, the periods during which atmospheric CO<jats:sub>2</jats:sub> levels are raised before forest regrowth can reabsorb the excess emissions are incompatible with the urgency of reducing emissions to comply with the objectives enshrined in the Paris Agreement. We consider how current policy might be reformed to reduce negative impacts on climate and argue for a more realistic science‐based assessment of the potential of forest bioenergy in substituting for fossil fuels. The length of time atmospheric concentrations of CO<jats:sub>2</jats:sub> increase is highly dependent on the feedstocks and we argue for regulations to explicitly require these to be sources with short payback periods. Furthermore, we describe the current United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change accounting rules which allow imported biomass to be treated as zero emissions at the point of combustion and urge their revision to remove the risk of these providing incentives to import biomass with negative climate impacts. Reforms such as these would allow the industry to evolve to methods and scales which are more compatible with the basic purpose for which it was designed.</jats:p>

収録刊行物

  • GCB Bioenergy

    GCB Bioenergy 11 (11), 1256-1263, 2019-09-09

    Wiley

被引用文献 (1)*注記

もっと見る

問題の指摘

ページトップへ