Search

Limiting global warming to close to 1.5°C by 2100 requires deep and rapid greenhouse gas emission reductions and carbon dioxide removals (CDR) on a massive scale, presenting a remarkable scaling challenge. This paper focuses on the financing of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) in Sweden. BECCS is one of the most prominent CDR methods in 1.5°C-compatible global emission scenarios and has been assigned a specific role in Swedish policy for net-zero. A Swedish state support system for BECCS based on results-based payments is planned. Furthermore, demand for CDR-based carbon credits is on the rise on the voluntary carbon markets (VCM) for use towards voluntary mitigation targets. Risks involved with the current Swedish policies are analysed, specifically for the co-financing of BECCS by the planned state support and revenues from the VCM. We find that with the current policies, state support systems will subsidise carbon credit prices on the VCM. We argue that such subsidisation can lower decarbonisation efforts by lowering the internal carbon price set by actors, thus undermining environmental integrity. It is concluded that proportional attribution should be applied, i.e., attributing mitigation outcomes to the state support and VCM revenue in proportion to their financial contribution to the CDR achieved. The attribution analysis should be accompanied by adjustments in national greenhouse gas accounting so that mitigation outcomes that are issued as carbon credits and used for offsetting are not double claimed (i.e., not used by both a nation and a non-state actor on the VCM towards their respective mitigation targets). If proportional attribution and adjustments in national GHG accounting are not implemented, the credibility and environmental integrity of offsetting claims made by carbon credit users are eroded. We recommend that action is taken to operationalise and implement proportional attribution to allow for co-financing of BECCS projects while maintaining environmental integrity. Wider implications for our recommendations beyond the case of Swedish BECCS are also analysed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK sixth carbon budget has recommended domestic biomass supply should increase to meet growing demand, planting a minimum of 30,000 hectares of perennial energy crops a year by 2035, with a view to establishing 700,000 hectares by 2050 to meet the requirements of the balanced net zero pathway. Miscanthus is a key biomass crop to scale up domestic biomass production in the United Kingdom. A cohesive land management strategy, based on robust evidence, will be required to ensure upscaling of miscanthus cultivation maximizes the environmental and economic benefits and minimizes undesirable consequences. This review examines research into available land areas, environmental impacts, barriers to uptake, and the challenges, benefits, and trade‐offs required to upscale miscanthus production on arable land and grassland in the United Kingdom. Expansion of perennial biomass crops has been considered best restricted to marginal land, less suited to food production. The review identifies a trade‐off between avoiding competition with food production and a risk of encroaching on areas containing high‐biodiversity or high‐carbon stocks, such as semi‐natural grasslands. If areas of land suitable for food production are needed to produce the biomass required for emission reduction, the review indicates there are multiple strategies for miscanthus to complement long‐term food security rather than compete with it. On arable land, a miscanthus rotation with a cycle length of 10–20 years can be employed as fallow period for fields experiencing yield decline, soil fatigue, or persistent weed problems. On improved grassland areas, miscanthus presents an option for diversification, flood mitigation, and water quality improvement. Strategies need to be developed to integrate miscanthus into farming systems in a way that is profitable, sensitive to local demand, climate, and geography, and complements rather than competes with food production by increasing overall farm profitability and resilience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our model for optimizing stand-level wood production and carbon sinks includes individual-tree models for forest growth, an advanced model for soil carbon, detailed wood production economy, and an intertemporal objective for the value of wood production and carbon sinks/emissions. Carbon stocks include aboveground biomass and carbon in forest soil and in wood products. Optimization of the management regime, rotations and thinning timing, and type and intensity are carried out by reinforcement learning. Including the social price of carbon causes a regime switch from continuous cover forestry to clear-cuts, postponed lighter thinning, and a longer rotation, and with a high carbon price, to solutions with pure clear-cuts or solutions utilizing stands as pure carbon stocks. Carbon price has profound effects on stand values, and the bare land value may well exceed the value before a clear-cut. The total average carbon stock is maximized with harvest and a long rotation instead of "no harvesting". Bioenergy, carbon capture, and storage (BECCS) always increases the value of wood production but not necessarily the value of carbon sinks. With BECCS, increasing carbon stocks in trees and forest soil remains optimal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bio-energy systems with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) will be essential if countries are to meet the gas emission reduction targets established in the 2015 Paris Agreement. This study seeks to carry out a thermodynamic optimization and analysis of a BECCS technology for a typical Brazilian cogeneration plant. To maximize generated net electrical energy (MWe) and carbon dioxide CO2 capture (Mt/year), this study evaluated six cogeneration systems integrated with a chemical absorption process using MEA. A key performance indicator (gCO2/kWh) was also evaluated. The set of optimal solutions shows that the single regenerator configuration (REG1) resulted in more CO2 capture (51.9% of all CO2 emissions generated by the plant), penalized by 14.9% in the electrical plant's efficiency. On the other hand, the reheated configuration with three regenerators (Reheat3) was less power-penalized (7.41%) but had a lower CO2 capture rate (36.3%). Results showed that if the CO2 capture rates would be higher than 51.9%, the cogeneration system would reach a higher specific emission (gCO2/kWh) than the cogeneration base plant without a carbon capture system, which implies that low capture rates (<51%) in the CCS system guarantee an overall net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in sugarcane plants for power and ethanol production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compared to conventional monoethanolamine (MEA), alternative solvents are expected to substantially contribute to reduce the energy demand of postcombustion CO2 capture from flue gases. This study presents a comprehensive techno-economic analysis of a 27wt% 2-amino-2-methyl-1- propanol (AMP) + 13wt% piperazine (PZ) aqueous solution for CO2 capture, compared to a 30 wt% MEA solution. The study addresses the retrofit of a carbon capture unit to a biomass-fired combined heat and power (CHP) plant, effectively making it a bioenergy with a carbon capture and storage (BECCS) system. The treated flue gas has a flow rate of 23 tons/hour (t/h) with 11.54 vol% CO2 and a 90% capture rate is aimed for. Aspen Plus V14 was employed for process simulations. Initially, binary interaction parameters for AMP/PZ, AMP/H2O, and PZ/H2O are regressed using vapor-liquid equilibrium (VLE) data, which were retrieved from literature along with reaction kinetics. Validation of parameters from available experimental literature yields an average absolute relative deviation (AARD) of only 5.9%. Afterwards, a process simulation model is developed and validated against experimental data from a reference pilot plant, using a similar AMP/PZ blend, resulting in 5% AARD. Next, a sensitivity analysis optimizes operating conditions, including solvent rate, absorber/stripper packing heights, and stripper pressure, based on regeneration energy impact. Optimized results, compared to MEA, reveal that AMP/PZ reduces the energy consumption from 3.61 to 2.86 GJ/tCO2. The retrofitting of the capture unit onto the selected CHP plant is examined through the development of a dedicated model. Two control strategies are compared to address energy unavailability for supplying the capture unit. The analysis spans 4 months, selected to account for seasonal variations. At nominal capacity, CO2 emissions, rendered negative by biomass combustion and CO2 capture, reach a maximum of -3.4 tCO2/h compared to 0.36 tCO2/h before retrofitting. Depending on the control strategy and CHP plant operating point, the Specific Primary Energy Consumption for CO2 Avoided (SPECCA) ranges from 4.91 MJ/kgCO2 to 1.76 MJ/kgCO2. Finally, an economic comparison based on systematic methodology reveals a 7.87% reduction in capture cost favoring the AMP/PZ blend. Together, these findings highlight AMP/PZ as a highly favorable alternative solvent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: To achieve net-zero targets, it is essential to evaluate and model the costs and scalability of emerging carbon dioxide removal technologies like direct air capture with CO2 storage (DACCS) and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Yet such efforts are often impeded by varying assessments of the climate impact and potential contributions of these technologies. This study explores the future costs and scalability of DACCS and BECCS to advance net-zero goals. Methods: We analyze expert opinions on these technologies’ potential costs and deployment scales for 2030, 2040, and 2050. Data was collected from 34 experts, comprising 21 DACCS and 13 BECCS specialists. They provided 90% confidence interval estimates and ‘best estimates’ for future costs and deployment under two International Energy Agency (IEA) policy scenarios— Stated Policies (STEPS) and Net Zero Emissions by 2050 (NZE). Results: We find that BECCS costs start at a lower level but decrease more slowly, whereas DACCS costs decline more steeply from a higher initial cost. However, DACCS estimates varied significantly among experts, showing no convergence over time. Regarding potential scalability, both technologies are associated with substantially higher deployment under the NZE scenario. Yet the combined estimated capacity of DACCS and BECCS by 2050 is only about a quarter of the CO2 removals projected by the IEA for its NZE scenario (1.9 GtCO2). Discussion: This study provides valuable insights into the future of DACCS and BECCS technologies in Europe, especially since our experts expect that DACCS and BECCS costs will be even higher (and deployment scales lower) than those predicted by recent IEA tracking, opening future research directions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) plays a vital role in most climate change mitigation scenarios, where a solution for sustainable near‐term bioenergy expansion is to grow energy crops such as perennial grasses on recently abandoned cropland. There is a need to combine model‐based insights into theoretical potential and future biomass supply with more fine‐grained sociotechnical analysis to move toward realistic policies and innovation strategies. We combine natural science insights anchored in quantitative bioenergy modeling with qualitative social science anchored in the multi‐level perspective. Using these mixed methods enables a global‐to‐local‐to‐global level assessment of near‐term bioenergy recultivation opportunities for abandoned cropland. Norway is the local case. There are three main findings. First, the ongoing recultivation trends for food/feed production risks making gains in aboveground carbon stocks from natural regrowth on the mapped abandoned cropland over a 30‐year evaluation period almost negligible. Second, delaying a BECCS recultivation of abandoned cropland will make it impossible to reach high‐end mitigation potentials, and an accelerated BECCS recultivation guided by a policy push is needed to ensure stronger mitigation. Third, we unravel several real‐world challenges associated with bioenergy resource and supply modeling. Remote‐sensing techniques alone cannot capture actual land availability for land‐based climate change mitigation strategies. Local‐level sociotechnical conditions are generally found insufficiently supportive to align with the rapid near‐term bioenergy crop expansion found in 2°C scenarios from integrated assessment. The integration of mixed quantitative and qualitative methods is key to better understand the role of BECCS in climate change mitigation. Plain Language Summary: Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is a key option for mitigating climate change. The idea is to capture the carbon emitted when biomass is converted into fuels or burned for energy production and store it underground. One proposed solution to ramp‐up biomass supply involves growing energy crops, like perennial grasses, on recently abandoned farmland. To make realistic policies and strategies for the future, we need to connect the theoretical potential of BECCS with local context, considering social and technical factors. We combine two approaches: using numbers to model bioenergy and using social science to understand the human and political side. By using a mix of methods, we can assess the potential for a near‐term recultivation of abandoned cropland for bioenergy and BECCS. There were three main findings. First, the combined use of both natural science and social science methods can help us better understand the role of BECCS in climate change mitigation. Second, re‐using abandoned farmland for growing food or animal feed reduces the effectiveness of letting the land naturally recover for fighting climate change. Third a rapid BECCS recultivation of abandoned cropland increases achieved climate change mitigation relative to a delayed BECCS recultivation. Key Points: Mixed quantitative and qualitative methods are key to unravel the role of bioenergy and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) in climate change mitigationOngoing recultivation of abandoned cropland for food production limits aboveground carbon accumulation from natural regrowthPolicies to redirect recultivation toward BECCS are needed to maximize climate change mitigation [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the last 20 years, IPPC reports have made it clear that the world must move beyond simply reducing the amount of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere to actively removing it from the skies. (Solar and wind can reduce carbon emissions, but they do not remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere). New BioEnergy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) technologies have been emerging that can remove carbon dioxide emissions from the atmosphere and sequester them permanently underground. Indeed, many long-term scenarios for transitioning from today's fossil fuel-dependent society to a future net zero society hinge on BECCS. But a key question is what bioenergy feedstock to use. In some cases, powering these facilities by burning biomass that comes from plantations in the US South is an option. Consequently, the study of the origins, production, and use of the fuel consumed by the world's largest biomass-fired power plant in Drax, England, provides a useful case study of the potential advantages and disadvantages of the burning of biomass – wood pellets made from trees, bark, roots, stumps, millwaste, sawdust, and other woody vegetation – in place of fossil fuel to generate power for processes such as BECCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Limiting global warming to 2 °C requires urgent action on land-based mitigation. This study evaluates the biogeochemical and biogeophysical implications of two alternative land-based mitigation scenarios that aim to achieve the same radiative forcing. One scenario is primarily driven by bioenergy expansion (SSP226Lu-BIOCROP), while the other involves re/afforestation (SSP126Lu-REFOREST). We find that overall, SSP126Lu-REFOREST is a more efficient strategy for removing CO2 from the atmosphere by 2100, resulting in a net carbon sink of 242 ~ 483 PgC with smaller uncertainties compared to SSP226Lu-BIOCROP, which exhibits a wider range of -78 ~ 621 PgC. However, SSP126Lu-REFOREST leads to a relatively warmer planetary climate than SSP226Lu-BIOCROP, and this relative warming can be intensified in certain re/afforested regions where local climates are not favorable for tree growth. Despite the cooling effect on a global scale, SSP226Lu-BIOCROP reshuffles regional warming hotspots, amplifying summer temperatures in vulnerable tropical regions such as Central Africa and Southeast Asia. Our findings highlight the need for strategic land use planning to identify suitable regions for re/afforestation and bioenergy expansion, thereby improving the likelihood of achieving the intended climate mitigation outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a rapidly evolving technology, carbon capture and storage (CCS) can potentially lower the levels of greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas industry. This paper provides a comprehensive review of different aspects of CCS technology, including its key components, the methods and stages of carbon storage, implied environmental effects, and its pros and cons. This paper also investigates the utilization of CCS as an alternative method to water injection into oil reservoirs. It also probes the technical and operational challenges of implementing CCS technology in the oil and gas industry. Additionally, this paper examines the regulatory and policy issues associated with CCS, including incentives and frameworks for promoting the deployment of CCS technology. Finally, in this paper the potential benefits of CCS are discussed, including reducing the carbon footprint of the oil and gas industry, enhancing energy security, and supporting the transition to a low-carbon economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The transition to a carbon-neutral economy requires innovative solutions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and promote sustainable energy production. Additionally, carbon dioxide removal technologies are urgently needed. The production of biomethane or biohydrogen with carbon dioxide capture and storage are two promising BECCS approaches to achieve these goals. In this study, we compare the advantages and disadvantages of these two approaches regarding their technical, economic, and environmental performance. Our analysis shows that while both approaches have the potential to reduce GHG emissions and increase energy security, the hydrogen-production approach has several advantages, including up to five times higher carbon dioxide removal potential. However, the hydrogen bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (HyBECCS) approach also faces some challenges, such as higher capital costs, the need for additional infrastructure, and lower energy efficiency. Our results give valuable insights into the trade-offs between these two approaches. They can inform decision-makers regarding the most suitable method for reducing GHG emissions and provide renewable energy in different settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Bioenergy with carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is increasingly proposed as an efficient way to mitigate climate change. This study examined the circumstances and methodological choices in which two CDR bioenergy systems were preferable to a reference bioenergy system from a climate change mitigation perspective. The CDR systems were also compared. Methods: Three systems were modelled: two CDR systems (Biochar, bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)), with a combined heat and power (CHP) system as reference. A parameterised life cycle inventory (LCI) model was developed and computed for all systems and four different functional units (FUs), resulting in different distributions of climate impacts. Contribution analysis was performed, followed by pair-wise comparison of all scenarios to establish their ranking. First-order Sobol indices were computed to assess the contribution of each parameter to total variance. When ranking of scenarios was strongly dependent on parameter values, decision tree analysis was applied. Results and discussion: The CDR systems had a lower climate impact than CHP in most computations, across all FUs. On comparing the two CDR systems, the preferable system changed with FU. With heat or carbon sequestration as FU the Biochar system was preferable in general, while with electricity or biomass use as FU, the BECCS system had the lowest climate impact in most computations. For most system configurations, energy substitutions had a large influence and contributed most to the variance in results. The system ranking also depended on the reference activities in the background energy system. Conclusions: The Biochar and BECCS systems were generally preferable to the reference CHP system from a climate mitigation perspective, particularly when the reference energy systems had a relatively low climate impact. However, FU and parameters affected the system ranking. For comparing BECCS and biochar, case-specific climate impacts will be decisive, but not always conclusive, as the choice of FU has such large impact on the results. Recommendations: When conducting LCA of multi-functional systems, the use of several FUs, parameterised LCI, and contribution analysis allows for deeper investigation than conventional sensitivity analyses. When analysing the climate impact of bioenergy with or without carbon removal, it is especially important to perform sensitivity analysis on the energy background system, since it strongly affects the results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The decarbonization of energy matrices is crucial to limit global warming below 2 °C this century. An alternative capable of enabling zero or even negative CO2 emissions is bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). In this sense, the Brazilian sugar–energy sector draws attention, as it would be possible to combine the production of fuel and electricity from renewable biomass. This paper is the final part of a study that aimed to research carbon capture and storage (CCS) in energy systems based on sugarcane. The case studied is CCS in thermal power plants considering two different technologies: the steam cycle based on the condensing–extraction steam turbine (CEST) and the combined cycle integrated to biomass gasification (BIG-CC). The results for the thermal power plant indicate that the CO2 capture costs may be lower than those in cogeneration systems, which were previously studied. The main reasons are the potential scale effects and the minimization of energy penalties associated with integrating the CCS system into the mills. In the best cases, capture costs can be reduced to EUR 54–65 per ton of CO2 for the CEST technology and EUR 57–68 per ton of CO2 for the BIG-CC technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) technologies are fundamental to reach negative CO2 emissions by removing it from the atmosphere and storing it underground. A promising solution to implement BECCS is pressurized Chemical Looping Combustion (CLC), which involves coupling a pressurized CLC reactor system to a turboexpander. The typical configuration chosen is to have an air reactor and a fuel reactor based on coupled circulating fluidized beds. The fluidization regime in both reactors is preferred to be fast fluidization to enhance gas particle contact and solids circulation among reactors. To design the two reactors, Aspen Plus software was used, given that the new version has a module for fluidized bed modeling. At first, the oxygen carrier was designed ex novo, but given that it is a composite compound mainly made by nickel oxide freeze-granulated on alumina (Ni40Al-FG), the molecular structure has been inserted in Aspen Plus. Then, based on the power of the gas turbine, the power output per kg of evolving fluid (in this case, depleted air) is calculated using Aspen Plus. Once the nitrogen content in the depleted air is known, the total air at the inlet of the air reactor is calculated. The fuel reactor is modeled by inserting the reduction reactions for nickel-based oxygen carriers. The paper presents a useful methodology for developing pressurized Chemical Looping Combustors to be coupled to gas turbines for power generation. The provided data will be cross-validated with 0D-models and experimental results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Demand for sustainably produced biomass is expected to increase with the need to provide renewable commodities, improve resource security and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with COP26 commitments. Studies have demonstrated additional environmental benefits of using perennial biomass crops (PBCs), when produced appropriately, as a feedstock for the growing bioeconomy, including utilisation for bioenergy (with or without carbon capture and storage). PBCs can potentially contribute to Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) (2023–27) objectives provided they are carefully integrated into farming systems and landscapes. Despite significant research and development (R&D) investment over decades in herbaceous and coppiced woody PBCs, deployment has largely stagnated due to social, economic and policy uncertainties. This paper identifies the challenges in creating policies that are acceptable to all actors. Development will need to be informed by measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of greenhouse gas emissions reductions and other environmental, economic and social metrics. It discusses interlinked issues that must be considered in the expansion of PBC production: (i) available land; (ii) yield potential; (iii) integration into farming systems; (iv) R&D requirements; (v) utilisation options; and (vi) market systems and the socio‐economic environment. It makes policy recommendations that would enable greater PBC deployment: (1) incentivise farmers and land managers through specific policy measures, including carbon pricing, to allocate their less productive and less profitable land for uses which deliver demonstrable greenhouse gas reductions; (2) enable greenhouse gas mitigation markets to develop and offer secure contracts for commercial developers of verifiable low‐carbon bioenergy and bioproducts; (3) support innovation in biomass utilisation value chains; and (4) continue long‐term, strategic R&D and education for positive environmental, economic and social sustainability impacts. Perennial biomass crops (PBCs) can potentially contribute to Common Agricultural Policy (2023–27) objectives provided they are carefully integrated into farming systems and landscapes. Despite significant research and development (R&D) investment over decades in herbaceous and coppiced woody PBCs, deployment has largely stagnated due to social, economic and policy uncertainties. This paper identifies the challenges in creating policies that are acceptable to all actors and discusses the interlinked issues: (i) available land; (ii) yield potential; (iii) integration into farming systems; (iv) R&D requirements; (v) utilisation options; and (vi) market systems and the socio‐economic environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BECCS (bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) is an important technology to achieve international and Brazilian climatic goals, notably because it provides negative emissions. In addition, Brazil presents favorable conditions for the development of BECCS, given the country's mature biofuel industry. Therefore, this research aims to provide a systematic literature review of the effective potential of and barriers to implementing bioenergy with carbon capture and storage in Brazil. The platforms chosen for this study are Science Direct and Integrated Search Portal, which is a search portal administered by the University of São Paulo. The search initially identified 667 articles, of which 24 were analyzed after selection and screening. The results show that technical factors are not a current barrier to the implementation of BECCS in Brazil, especially in ethanol production. However, the economic results vary among articles, but no BECCS plant has been shown to be economically feasible without enhanced oil recovery. In addition, the concentrations of most ethanol distilleries in the southeast region of Brazil point to them as long-hanging fruit for the country. Nevertheless, due to limitations in CO2 transportation, the costs of implementing BECCS increase significantly as CO2 capture is expanded away from the southeast region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy could play a major role in decarbonizing energy systems in the context of the Paris Agreement. Large‐scale bioenergy deployment could be related to sustainability issues and requires major infrastructure investments. It, therefore, needs to be studied carefully. The Bioenergy and Land Optimization Spatially Explicit Model (BLOEM) presented here allows for assessing different bioenergy pathways while encompassing various dimensions that influence their optimal deployment. In this study, BLOEM was applied to the Brazilian context by coupling it with the Brazilian Land Use and Energy Systems (BLUES) model. This allowed investigating the most cost‐effective ways of attending future bioenergy supply projections and studying the role of recovered degraded pasture lands in improving land availability in a sustainable and competitive manner. The results show optimizing for limiting deforestation and minimizing logistics costs results in different outcomes. It also indicates that recovering degraded pasture lands is attractive from both logistics and climate perspectives. The systemic approach of BLOEM provides spatial results, highlighting the trade‐offs between crop allocation, land use and the logistics dynamics between production, conversion, and demand, providing valuable insights for regional and national climate policy design. This makes it a useful tool for mapping sustainable bioenergy value chain pathways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The pulp and paper industry (PPI) has several opportunities to contribute to meeting prevailing climate targets. It can cut its own CO2 emissions, which currently account for 2% of global industrial fossil CO2 emissions, and it has an opportunity to produce renewable energy, fuels, and materials for other sectors. The purpose of this study is to improve understanding of the decarbonization prospects of the PPI. The study provides insights on the magnitude of needed annual renewal rates for several possible net-zero target years of industrial fossil CO2 emissions in the PPI and discusses decarbonization opportunities, namely, energy and material efficiency improvement, fuel switching, electrification, renewable energy production, carbon capture, and new products. The effects of climate policies on the decarbonization opportunities are critically evaluated to provide an overview of the current and future business environment of the European PPI. The focus is on Europe, but other regions are analyzed briefly to widen the view. The analysis shows that there are no major technical barriers to the fossil-free operation of the PPI, but the sector renovates slowly, and many new opportunities are not implemented on a large scale due to immature technology, poor economic feasibility, or unclear political environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The roles digital media-technologies play in raising public issues relating to emerging technologies and their potential for engaging publics with science and policy assessments is a lively field of inquiry in Science and Technology Studies (STS). This paper presents an analysis of controversies over proposals for the large-scale removal of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CDR). The study combines a digital method (web-querying) with document analysis to map debates about two CDR approaches: bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and afforestation. In the first step, we locate actors using the web to engage with BECCS and afforestation and map their alignments in relation to competing framings of CDR. In a second step, we examine the devices deployed by UK-based actors to evidence and contest the feasibility of BECCS and afforestation. Our analysis shows that policy distinctions between "natural" and "engineered" CDR are used flexibly in practice and do not map neatly onto actor engagement with BECCS and afforestation. We highlight the predominance of cross-cutting techno-economic expertise and argue that framings of CDR as a solution to governing climate change may contribute to public disengagement from climate policy processes. The paper reflects on methods for studying controversies, publics, and issues emerging around processes of technoscientific assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Negative emissions technologies (NETs) approaches are an essential part of virtually any scenario in which global warming is limited to 1.5 °C in accordance with the Paris Agreement. Discussions often focus on two technologies due to their substantial carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration potential: bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS). However, the large-scale deployment of both technologies—especially BECCS—may lead to significant human rights infringements. This paper aims to analyze the impact of both technologies on human rights from the methodological perspective of a legal interpretation of international law. It shows that a large-scale BECCS strategy, which inevitably requires enormous land-use changes, will most likely infringe upon the right to food, the right to water, and the right to a healthy environment. In contrast, large-scale DACCS approaches will likely have a smaller human rights impact, but the energy-intensive process could also infringe upon the right to energy. Balancing these human rights with other freedom rights, e.g., of consumers and enterprises, the paper will further demonstrate that from the perspective of human rights, rapid emission reductions and the minimization of livestock farming—and also less risky nature-based options such as peatland and forest management—should prevail before any large-scale industrial NET strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To achieve net zero greenhouse gas emission by 2050 as set out by the 2019 amendment to the 2008 UK Climate Change Act, a major shift towards renewable energy is needed. This includes the development of new methods along with improving and upscaling existing technologies. One example of new methods in bioenergy is developing new Miscanthus cultivars for electricity generation via thermal power station furnaces. Miscanthus is still relatively new compared with other agriculture practices, so market assessments and improvements are needed to reduce the barriers to entry for prospective growers. This publication provides a profile of UK Miscanthus growers and their businesses, their experiences of benefits and drawbacks of the crop, and what they see as potential barriers to entry for prospective farmers. A survey of current Miscanthus growers in England and Wales was conducted and indicated that most farmers were content with the crop and that its environmental and economic benefits were noted. However, it was evident that with a geographically limited UK market, growers wanted to see a better distribution of biomass processing stations to reduce the ongoing costs of transport. With growing demand for renewables, including bio-energy sources, it was determined important to provide information and support for stable farming operations and to incentivise the adoption of Miscanthus. Such incentives include ongoing development of new cultivars, focussing on traits such as production potential and stressor resilience, and growers indicated preference for an annual planting grant. These developments are predicted to further improve the crop's profit margin, making it a more cost-effective crop for farmers. Sensitively managed Miscanthus also has the potential to contribute to carbon sequestration, soil health, and aspects of farmland biodiversity. Incentivising such management in government land--based environmental schemes would offer additional income streams and help to promote environmental positive crop planting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality, hydrogen generated from renewable sources will play an important role. Additionally, as underlined in the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), new technologies to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere are required on a large scale. A novel concept for hydrogen production with net negative emissions referred to as HyBECCS (Hydrogen Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage) combines these two purposes in one technological approach. The HyBECCS concept combines biohydrogen production from biomass with the capture and storage of biogenic carbon dioxide. Various technology combinations of HyBECCS processes are possible, whose ecological effects and economic viability need to be analyzed in order to provide a basis for comparison and decision‐making. This paper presents fundamentals for the techno‐economic and environmental evaluation of HyBECCS approaches. Transferable frameworks on system boundaries as well as emission, cost, and revenue streams are defined and specifics for the application of existing assessment methods are elaborated. In addition, peculiarities concerning the HyBECCS approach with respect to political regulatory measures and interrelationships between economics and ecology are outlined. Based on these considerations, two key performance indicators (KPIs) are established, referred to as levelized cost of carbon‐negative hydrogen (LCCNH) and of negative emissions (LCNE). Both KPIs allow deciding whether a specific HyBECCS project is economically viable and allows its comparison with different hydrogen, energy provision, or negative emission technologies (NETs). Carbon‐negative hydrogen production referred to as HyBECCS (Hydrogen Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage) combines hydrogen production from biomass with the capture and storage of biogenic carbon dioxide. Various technology combinations of HyBECCS processes are possible, whose ecological effects and economic viability need to be analysed. This paper presents fundamentals for the techno‐economic and environmental evaluation of HyBECCS approaches. Transferable frameworks on system boundaries as well as emission, cost and revenue streams are defined and specifics for the application of existing assessment methods are elaborated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) based on purpose‐grown lignocellulosic crops can provide negative CO2 emissions to mitigate climate change, but its land requirements present a threat to biodiversity. Here, we analyse the implications of crop‐based BECCS for global terrestrial vertebrate species richness, considering both the land‐use change (LUC) required for BECCS and the climate change prevented by BECCS. LUC impacts are determined using global‐equivalent, species–area relationship‐based loss factors. We find that sequestering 0.5–5 Gtonne of CO2 per year with lignocellulosic crop‐based BECCS would require hundreds of Mha of land, and commit tens of terrestrial vertebrate species to extinction. Species loss per unit of negative emissions decreases with: (i) longer lifetimes of BECCS systems, (ii) less overall deployment of crop‐based BECCS and (iii) optimal land allocation, that is prioritizing locations with the lowest species loss per negative emission potential, rather than minimizing overall land use or prioritizing locations with the lowest biodiversity. The consequences of prevented climate change for biodiversity are based on existing climate response relationships. Our tentative comparison shows that for crop‐based BECCS considered over 30 years, LUC impacts on vertebrate species richness may outweigh the positive effects of prevented climate change. Conversely, for BECCS considered over 80 years, the positive effects of climate change mitigation on biodiversity may outweigh the negative effects of LUC. However, both effects and their interaction are highly uncertain and require further understanding, along with the analysis of additional species groups and biodiversity metrics. We conclude that factoring in biodiversity means lignocellulosic crop‐based BECCS should be used early to achieve the required mitigation over longer time periods, on optimal biomass cultivation locations, and most importantly, as little as possible where conversion of natural land is involved, looking instead to sustainably grown or residual biomass‐based feedstocks and alternative strategies for carbon dioxide removal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy is considered an important component within the European Union (EU) energy transition to meet mid‐century climate targets. Model assessments that have highlighted the role of bioenergy in decarbonising EU energy systems fail to account for the fact that mitigation strategies and bioenergy supply take place within a global decarbonisation effort. Thus, they do not account for inter‐regional competition for the resource base that Europe may face. This study shows how bioenergy can contribute to EU climate targets, highlighting its possible role within the energy system and developments required to facilitate its scale‐up. We use the global integrated assessment model IMAGE 3.2 to project bioenergy demand, sectoral deployment, feedstock, and inter‐regional import for Europe to 2050. Employing a global model allows for projections of EU decarbonisation strategies consistent with global climate targets and captures the effects of biomass production and consumption in other world regions. Bioenergy is projected to account for up to 27% of total primary energy demand, increasing from the current 5EJ to 18EJ/yr. To match this demand, the model projects imports of biomass to increase from 4% of its current supply to 60%. Bioenergy could provide up to 1GtCO2 or 40% of the overall mitigation needed by the EU in 2050. This is based on large‐scale use for power production, with the transport, industry and buildings sectors getting smaller shares. By 2050 it is projected that 55% of total EU bioenergy use is coupled with Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Bioenergy supply comes primarily for agricultural and forestry residues, as these sources have low upstream greenhouse gas emissions. However, as demand increases, energy crops are increasingly used, especially in the provision of advanced liquid fuels. The results show that one route for achieving an EU energy transition is based on rapid deployment of BECCS and the mobilisation of sustainable imports of second‐generation feedstocks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

District heating (DH) systems can improve energy efficiency, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and be a cost‐effective residential space heating alternative over conventional decentralized heating. This study uses radiative forcing (RF), a time‐sensitive life cycle assessment metric, to evaluate space heating alternatives. We compare forest residue and willow biomass resources and natural gas as fuel sources against decentralized heating using heating oil. The comparison is performed for selected locations in the Northeastern United States over a 30‐year production timeline and 100 observation years. The natural gas and willow scenarios are compared with scenarios where available forest residue is unused and adds a penalty of GHG emissions due to microbial decay. When forest residues are available, their use is recommended before considering willow production. Investment in bioenergy‐based DH with carbon capture and storage and natural‐gas‐based DH with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology is considered to assess their influence on RF. Its implementation further improves the net carbon mitigation potential of DH despite the carbon and energy cost of CCS infrastructure. Soil carbon sequestration from willow production reduces RF overall, specifically when grown on land converted from cropland to pasture, hay, and grassland. The study places initial GHG emissions spikes from infrastructure and land‐use change into a temporal framework and shows a payback within the first 5 years of operation for DH with forest residues and willow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given the prospects of low short‐term emissions reduction, carbon removals (CDRs) are expected to play an important role in achieving ambitious mitigation targets in future scenarios of integrated assessment models (IAMs), particularly Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). In this paper, we explore the IAMC 1.5℃ database to depict the characteristics of the two main CDR options present in mitigation scenarios: BECCS and afforestation/reforestation. We apply a linear mixed‐effect model to capture the specific regional and cross‐IAM effects. Results reveal that the distribution of BECCS and afforestation deployment differs across IAMs and regions and, to a second extent, time. BECCS is preferred in the scenarios not for its ability to expand energy use but actually because it appears as an alternative to afforestation, which is associated with a decrease in energy use. However, the regional distribution of CDR deployment does not show a common pattern across scenarios and IAMs. Therefore, a more comprehensive investigation is needed before it can support policy proposals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Negative emissions technologies (NETs) are an essential part of most scenarios for achieving the Paris Agreement goal of limiting warming to below 2°C and for all scenarios that limit warming to 1.5 °C. The deployment of these technologies requires carbon accounting methods for a range of different purposes, such as determining the effectiveness of specific technologies or incentivising NETs. Although the need for carbon accounting methods is discussed within the literature on NETs, there does not appear to be a clear understanding of the range of different accounting challenges. Based on a systematic literature review this study identifies five distinct accounting issues related to NETs: 1. estimating total system-wide change in emissions/removals; 2. non-permanence; 3. non-equivalence of 'no overshoot' and 'overshoot and removal'; 4. accounting for incentives for NETs; and 5. the temporal distribution of emissions/removals. Solutions to these accounting challenges are proposed, or alternatively, areas for further research and the development of solutions are highlighted. One key recommendation is that carbon accounting methods should follow a 'reality principle' to report emissions and removals when and where they actually occur, and an important overall conclusion is that it is essential to use the correct accounting method for its appropriate purpose. For example, consequential methods that take account of total system-wide changes in emissions/removals should be used if the purpose is to inform decisions on the deployment or incentivisation of NETs. Attributional methods, however, should be used if the purpose is to construct static descriptions of possible net zero worlds. Key policy insights Negative emissions technologies (NETs) raise a number of distinct carbon accounting challenges, the importance of which varies across different NETs. Attributional life cycle assessment is not an appropriate method for estimating the system-wide changes caused by the deployment of NETs. Consequential greenhouse gas accounting methods should be used to estimate system-wide changes, and should be used as much as possible for guiding incentives for NETs. Greenhouse gas accounting methods should follow a 'reality principle' to report emissions and removals when and where they actually occur. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a result and while acknowledging diverse land use and biodiversity impacts from different bioenergy feedstock (Ale et al., 2019), a bioenergy-reliant mitigation strategy above certain thresholds, through the loss of natural habitats of probably unprecedented dimensions, would be much more detrimental to global biodiversity than in a counterfactual higher climate change scenario (Hof et al., 2018). Keywords: BECCS; biodiversity; climate change mitigation; IPCC; livelihood; sustainable EN BECCS biodiversity climate change mitigation IPCC livelihood sustainable 510 515 6 03/11/21 20210401 NES 210401 The majority of scenarios that meet the goals of the Paris agreements exceed sustainability and precautionary thresholds in land, biodiversity and BECCS potentials. The timescales underlying the BECCS potentials across the IPCC models render BECCS a highly risky technology and mismatch with the urgency of fast GHG reduction underlying the Paris Agreement (Norton et al., 2019). [Extracted from the article]

This paper explores the role of negative emissions technologies (NETs) in energy systems, bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and direct air capture (DAC) with geological carbon storage (DACCS) in particular, using a bottom-up energy system model TIMES-Japan that participated in the 35th study of the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum (EMF 35 JMIP) focusing on the energy transitions for the long-run climate goals. Modeling results show that large-scale deployment of NETs is essential to achieve the net-zero vision of Japan's long-term strategy, however, these NETs might not be enough in the case of the highest energy service demands. Within the feasible solution space, earlier deployment of BECCS with domestic biomass can contribute effectively to achieve the target with the support of the DACCS at the later period if both technologies are available. It shows feasible results without DACCS only in the lowest energy service demands, implying the importance of urgent research, development, and deployment of DACCS. Furthermore, this study shows that earlier deployment of DAC system with CO2 utilization in fuel production is a cost-effective way to lead the large-scale deployment of the DAC as NETs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The combination of bioethanol production and carbon capture and storage technologies (BECCS) is considered an indispensable method for the achievement of the targets set by the Paris agreement. In Croatia, a first‐of‐its‐kind biorefinery project is currently underway that aims to integrate a second‐generation ethanol plant into an existing fossil refinery. The goal is to replace the fossil fuel production by second‐generation ethanol production using miscanthus. In the ethanol fermentation, CO2 is emitted in highly concentrated form and this can be directly compressed, injected and stored in exploited oil reservoirs. This study presents an assessment of the greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction potential of miscanthus ethanol produced in combination with CCS technology, based on data from the planning process of this biorefinery project. The GHG reduction potential is evaluated as part of a full environmental life cycle assessment. This is of particular relevance as a lignocellulosic ethanol industry is currently emerging in the European Union (EU) and LCAs of BECCS systems have, so far, often omitted environmental impacts other than GHG emissions. Overall, the ethanol to be produced in this planned biorefinery project would clearly achieve the EU's global warming potential (GWP) reduction target for biofuels. Depending on the accounting approach applied for the biological carbon storage, reduction potentials between 104% and 138% relative to the fossil comparator are likely. In addition, ethanol can reduce risks to resource availability. As such, the results generated from data based on the intended biorefinery project support the two major rationales for biofuel use. However, these reductions could come at the expense of human health and ecosystem quality impacts associated with the combustion of lignin and biogas. In order to prevent potential environmental trade‐offs, it will be imperative to monitor and manage these emissions from residue combustion, as they represent significant drivers of the overall environmental impacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biomass feedstocks can be used to substitute fossil fuels and effectively remove carbon from the atmosphere to offset residual CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and other sectors. Both features make biomass valuable for climate change mitigation; therefore, CO2 emission mitigation leads to complex and dynamic interactions between the energy and the land-use sector via emission pricing policies and bioenergy markets. Projected bioenergy deployment depends on climate target stringency as well as assumptions about context variables such as technology development, energy and land markets as well as policies. This study investigates the intra- and intersectorial effects on physical quantities and prices by coupling models of the energy (REMIND) and land-use sector (MAgPIE) using an iterative soft-link approach. The model framework is used to investigate variations of a broad set of context variables, including the harmonized variations on bioenergy technologies of the 33rd model comparison study of the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum (EMF-33) on climate change mitigation and large scale bioenergy deployment. Results indicate that CO2 emission mitigation triggers strong decline of fossil fuel use and rapid growth of bioenergy deployment around midcentury (~ 150 EJ/year) reaching saturation towards end-of-century. Varying context variables leads to diverse changes on mid-century bioenergy markets and carbon pricing. For example, reducing the ability to exploit the carbon value of bioenergy increases bioenergy use to substitute fossil fuels, whereas limitations on bioenergy supply shift bioenergy use to conversion alternatives featuring higher carbon capture rates. Radical variations, like fully excluding all technologies that combine bioenergy use with carbon removal, lead to substantial intersectorial effects by increasing bioenergy demand and increased economic pressure on both sectors. More gradual variations like selective exclusion of advanced bioliquid technologies in the energy sector or changes in diets mostly lead to substantial intrasectorial reallocation effects. The results deepen our understanding of the land-energy nexus, and we discuss the importance of carefully choosing variations in sensitivity analyses to provide a balanced assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the potential role of bioenergy coupled to carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (BECCS) in long-term global scenarios. We first validate past insights regarding the potential use of BECCS in achieving climate goals based on results from 11 integrated assessment models (IAMs) that participated in the 33rd study of the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum (EMF-33). As found in previous studies, our results consistently project large-scale cost-effective BECCS deployment. However, we also find a strong synergistic nexus between CCS and biomass, with bioenergy the preferred fuel for CCS as the climate constraint increases. Specifically, the share of bioenergy that is coupled to CCS technologies increases since CCS effectively enhances the emissions mitigation capacity of bioenergy. For the models that include BECCS technologies across multiple sectors, there is significant deployment in conjunction with liquid fuel or hydrogen production to decarbonize the transportation sector. Using a wide set of scenarios, we find carbon removal to be crucial to achieving goals consistent with 1.5 °C warming. However, we find earlier BECCS deployment but not necessarily greater use in the long-term since ultimately deployment is limited by economic competition with other carbon-free technologies, especially in the electricity sector, by land-use competition (especially with food) affecting biomass feedstock availability and price, and by carbon storage limitations. The extent of BECCS deployment varies based on model assumptions, with BECCS deployment competitive in some models below carbon prices of 100 US$/tCO2. Without carbon removal, 2 °C is infeasible in some models, while those that solve find similar levels of bioenergy use but substantially greater mitigation costs. Overall, the paper provides needed transparency regarding BECCS' role, and results highlight a strong nexus between bioenergy and CCS, and a large reliance on not-yet-commercial BECCS technologies for achieving climate goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most mitigation scenarios compatible with a likely change of holding global warming well below 2 °C rely on negative emissions technologies (NETs). According to the integrated assessment models (IAMs) used to produce mitigation scenarios for the IPCC reports, the NET with the greatest potential to achieve negative emissions is bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Crucial questions arise about where the enormous quantities of biomass needed according to the IAM scenarios could feasibly be produced in a sustainable manner. Africa is attractive in the context of BECCS because of large areas that could contribute biomass energy and indications of substantial underground CO2 storage capacities. However, estimates of large biomass availability in Africa are usually based on highly aggregated datasets, and only a few studies explore future challenges or barriers for BECCS in any detail. Based on previous research and literature, this paper analyses the pre-conditions for BECCS in Tanzania by studying what we argue are the applications of BECCS, or the components of the BECCS chain, that are most feasible in the country, namely (1) as applied to domestic sugarcane-based energy production (bioethanol), and (2) with Tanzania in a producer and re-growth role in an international BECCS chain, supplying biomass or biofuels for export to developed countries. The review reveals that a prerequisite for both options is either the existence of a functional market for emissions trading and selling, making negative emissions a viable commercial investment, or sustained investment through aid programmes. Also, historically, an important barrier to the development of production capacity of liquid biofuels for export purposes has been given by ethical dilemmas following in the wake of demand for land to facilitate production of biomass, such as sugarcane and jatropha. In these cases, conflicts over access to land and mismanagement have been more of a rule than an exception. Increased production volumes of solid biomass for export to operations that demand bioenergy, be it with or without a CCS component, is likely to give rise to similar conflicts. While BECCS may well play an important role in reducing emissions in countries with high capacity to act combined with existing large point sources of biogenic CO2 emissions, it seems prudent to proceed with utmost caution when implicating BECCS deployment in least developed countries, like Tanzania.The paper argues that negative BECCS-related emissions from Tanzania should not be assumed in global climate mitigation scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biofuel and bioenergy systems are integral to most climate stabilization scenarios for displacement of transport sector fossil fuel use and for producing negative emissions via carbon capture and storage (CCS). However, the net greenhouse gas mitigation benefit of such pathways is controversial due to concerns around ecosystem carbon losses from land use change and foregone sequestration benefits from alternative land uses. Here, we couple bottom-up ecosystem simulation with models of cellulosic biofuel production and CCS in order to track ecosystem and supply chain carbon flows for current and future biofuel systems, with comparison to competing land-based biological mitigation schemes. Analyzing three contrasting US case study sites, we show that on land transitioning out of crops or pasture, switchgrass cultivation for cellulosic ethanol production has per-hectare mitigation potential comparable to reforestation and severalfold greater than grassland restoration. In contrast, harvesting and converting existing secondary forest at those sites incurs large initial carbon debt requiring long payback periods. We also highlight how plausible future improvements in energy crop yields and biorefining technology together with CCS would achieve mitigation potential 4 and 15 times greater than forest and grassland restoration, respectively. Finally, we show that recent estimates of induced land use change are small relative to the opportunities for improving system performance that we quantify here. While climate and other ecosystem service benefits cannot be taken for granted from cellulosic biofuel deployment, our scenarios illustrate how conventional and carbon-negative biofuel systems could make a nearterm, robust, and distinctive contribution to the climate challenge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) features heavily in the energy scenarios designed to meet the Paris Agreement targets, but the models used to generate these scenarios do not address environmental and social implications of BECCS at the regional scale. We integrate ecosystem service values into a land-use optimization tool to determine the favourability of six potential UK locations for a 500 MW BECCS power plant operating on local biomass resources. Annually, each BECCS plant requires 2.33 Mt of biomass and generates 2.99 Mt CO2 of negative emissions and 3.72 TWh of electricity. We make three important discoveries: (a) the impacts of BECCS on ecosystem services are spatially discrete, with the most favourable locations for UK BECCS identified at Drax and Easington, where net annual welfare values (from the basket of ecosystems services quantified) of £39 and £25 million were generated, respectively, with notably lower annual welfare values at Barrow (-£6 million) and Thames (£2 million); (b) larger BECCS deployment beyond 500 MW reduces net social welfare values, with a 1 GW BECCS plant at Drax generating a net annual welfare value of £19 million (a 50% decline compared with the 500 MW deployment), and a welfare loss at all other sites; (c) BECCS can be deployed to generate net welfare gains, but trade-offs and co-benefits between ecosystem services are highly site and context specific, and these landscape-scale, sitespecific impacts should be central to future BECCS policy developments. For the United Kingdom, meeting the Paris Agreement targets through reliance on BECCS requires over 1 GW at each of the six locations considered here and is likely, therefore, to result in a significant welfare loss. This implies that an increased number of smaller BECCS deployments will be needed to ensure a win-win for energy, negative emissions and ecosystem services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Land‐based solutions are indispensable features of most climate mitigation scenarios. Here we conduct a novel cross‐sectoral assessment of regional carbon mitigation potential by running an ecosystem model with an explicit representation of forest structure and climate impacts for Bavaria, Germany, as a case study. We drive the model with four high‐resolution climate projections (EURO‐CORDEX) for the representative concentration pathway RCP4.5 and present‐day land‐cover from three satellite‐derived datasets (CORINE, ESA‐CCI, MODIS) and identify total mitigation potential by not only accounting for carbon storage but also material and energy substitution effects. The model represents the current state in Bavaria adequately, with a simulated forest biomass 12.9 ± 0.4% lower than data from national forest inventories. Future land‐use changes according to two ambitious land‐use harmonization scenarios (SSP1xRCP2.6, SSP4xRCP3.4) achieve a mitigation of 206 and 247 Mt C (2015–2100 period) via reforestation and the cultivation and burning of dedicated bioenergy crops, partly combined with carbon capture and storage. Sensitivity simulations suggest that converting croplands or pastures to bioenergy plantations could deliver a carbon mitigation of 40.9 and 37.7 kg C/m2, respectively, by the year 2100 if used to replace carbon‐intensive energy systems and combined with CCS. However, under less optimistic assumptions (including no CCS), only 15.3 and 12.2 kg C/m2 are mitigated and reforestation might be the better option (20.0 and 16.8 kg C/m2). Mitigation potential in existing forests is limited (converting coniferous into mixed forests, nitrogen fertilization) or even negative (suspending wood harvest) due to decreased carbon storage in product pools and associated substitution effects. Our simulations provide guidelines to policy makers, farmers, foresters, and private forest owners for sustainable and climate‐benefitting ecosystem management in temperate regions. They also emphasize the importance of the CCS technology which is regarded critically by many people, making its implementation in the short or medium term currently doubtable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The combination of concentrated solar power–chemical looping air separation (CSP-CLAS) with an oxy-fuel combustion process for carbon dioxide (CO2) capture is a novel system to generate electricity from solar power and biomass while being able to store solar power efficiently. In this study, the computer program Advanced System for Process Engineering Plus (ASPEN Plus) was used to develop models to assess the process performance of such a process with manganese (Mn)-based oxygen carriers on alumina (Al2O3) support for a location in the region of Seville in Spain, using real solar beam irradiance and electricity demand data. It was shown that the utilisation of olive tree prunings (Olea europaea) as the fuel—an agricultural residue produced locally—results in negative CO2 emissions (a net removal of CO2 from the atmosphere). Furthermore, it was found that the process with an annual average electricity output of 18 MW would utilise 2.43% of Andalusia's olive tree prunings, thereby capturing 260.5 k-tonnes of CO2, annually. Drawbacks of the system are its relatively high complexity, a significant energy penalty in the CLAS process associated with the steam requirements for the loop-seal fluidisation, and the gas storage requirements. Nevertheless, the utilisation of agricultural residues is highly promising, and given the large quantities produced globally (~ 4 billion tonnes/year), it is suggested that other novel processes tailored to these fuels should be investigated, under consideration of a future price on CO2 emissions, integration potential with a likely electricity grid system, and based on the local conditions and real data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The urgency with which the world economy needs to be decarbonized could lead to the emergence of regions with the capacity to produce renewable feedstock such as biomass. The competitiveness of these regions could result from their ability to produce high value‐added chemicals at the lowest cost. The biomass embodied in a chemical product could reduce carbon emissions, leading to net CO2 removal. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that bio‐ethylene could make the Brazilian chemical industry more competitive. This would be achieved by applying the revenues from carbon credits associated with using ethanol and sugarcane bagasse as feedstocks for bio‐ethylene production. Three production routes were compared according to their estimated cost of production in Brazil under a simplified life‐cycle analysis: sugar‐cane‐derived ethanol to ethylene (with and without CO2 capture and storage – BECCS); bio‐methanol to olefin; and conventional steam cracking of naphtha. When associated with the production of long‐lasting materials, the ethanol‐to‐ethylene with BECCS route achieved the lower CO2 break‐even price (US$75/t CO2), followed by ethanol to ethylene without BECCS (US$82/t CO2) and bio‐methanol to ethylene (US$106/t CO2). Our findings highlight the advantage for the Brazilian chemical industry of implementing a national or, even better, a global carbon‐pricing instrument. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy is expected to have a prominent role in limiting global greenhouse emissions to meet the climate change target of the Paris Agreement. Many studies identify negative emissions from bioenergy generation with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) as its key contribution, but assume that no other CO2 removal technologies are available. We use a global integrated assessment model, TIAM‐UCL, to investigate the role of bioenergy within the global energy system when direct air capture and afforestation are available as cost‐competitive alternatives to BECCS. We find that the presence of other CO2 removal technologies does not reduce the pressure on biomass resources but changes the use of bioenergy for climate mitigation. While we confirm that when available BECCS offers cheaper decarbonization pathways, we also find that its use delays the phase‐out of unabated fossil fuels in industry and transport. Furthermore, it displaces renewable electricity generation, potentially increasing the likelihood of missing the Paris Agreement target. We found that the most cost‐effective solution is to invest in a basket of CO2 removal technologies. However, if these technologies rely on CCS, then urgent action is required to ramp up the necessary infrastructure. We conclude that a sustainable biomass supply is critical for decarbonizing the global energy system. Since only a few world regions carry the burden of producing the biomass resource and store CO2 in geological storage, adequate international collaboration, policies and standards will be needed to realize this resource while avoiding undesired land‐use change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several technical methods are currently discussed to meet the objectives of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 21st Conference of the Parties, Paris, France (Paris Agreement) in terms of carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration in the Earth's atmosphere. In addition to efficiency improvements, reduction of energy consumption, and the utilization of renewable energy sources, the application of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies seems to be unavoidable. Whereas all these measures aim on the reduction of CO2 that is being newly released, there is the approach to remove CO2 from the atmosphere that has already been emitted. This can be achieved by the utilization of bioenergy in CCS processes. Within this paper, the utilization of alternative fuels in two second-generation CCS processes is assessed. In this regard, chemical looping combustion (CLC) and calcium looping (CaL) are two promising technologies. Both processes have proven their feasibility already in semi-industrial scale. The assessment includes three different types of fuel namely coal, biomass, and solid recovered fuel (SRF). The analysis is twofold: first, a heat and mass balance calculation reveals the specific CO2 emissions of each power system; second, a cost analysis points out the feasibility from an economic point of view. The highest CO2 removal can be achieved by a biomass-fired CLC unit (− 696 gCO2/kWhe). Furthermore, it was found that the co-combustion of SRF even at moderate co-firing rates allows for noteworthy improved economics of the CCS system. Therefore, the utilization of waste-derived fuels in the context of CCS processes should be put more into focus in future research activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Negative emission technologies (NETs) are a set of technologies that could retrieve greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. NETs could dramatically contribute to maintaining the temperature increase to within the limit of 2 °C or even 1.5 °C. Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is one of the most studied NETs. BECCS captures carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions coming from a bioenergy plant—e.g., electricity, biofuels, and hydrogen—and stores those emissions in a geologic reservoir, typically a saline aquifer. The purpose of this article is to investigate whether a research community exists on BECCS, and whether it is aligned with research priorities. To do so, a bibliometric analysis is conducted based on author collaborations on BECCS in academic journals between 2001 and 2017. The co-authorship network shows that BECCS research is largely based on the integrated assessment model (IAM) research community. These models analyze how power and transportation systems evolve under a climate constraint in the long run, e.g., until 2100. Such a focus has advantages and drawbacks. On the one hand, it helps to build a common vision of the technology and possible roadmaps. On the other hand, I highlight that the implementation features of BECCS in the near future are insufficiently assessed, e.g., techno-economic analyses, business models, local-scale assessments, and comparison with other NETs. These issues are marginal in the network, whereas long-term analyses are at its core. Future research programmes should better include them to avoid a considerable disappointment about the real potential of BECCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper covers the public debate on BECCS (bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) between 2008 and 2018. Through a qualitative analysis of around 800 feature articles, editorials, and opinion pieces published in English, German, Swedish, Danish, and Norwegian in news media and debates sections of scientific media, we highlight conspicuous aspects of the debate and relate them to the theoretical concept of post-normal science. We find that the debate is characterized by an emphasis on values, scientific uncertainty and the integrity of science, premised on a pervading sense of urgency. To a significant extent, the debate can be understood as a "normal" view of science questioning what it perceives to be unscientific model-based climate scenarios, and the scenarios, in turn, can be seen as a response to post-normal circumstances. The urgency permeating the debate provides conditions for open debate about ethical and epistemological uncertainty. The debate goes through a period of polarization – corroborating findings from previous studies on the climate science debate after COP21 – between an intense critique of BECCS inclusion in climate scenarios and reluctant acceptance thereof. Towards the end of the studied period, emphasis shifts towards reluctant acceptance, indicating that post-normal debate may only occur as a temporary state always tending towards new consensus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In their constant attempt to avoid responsibility, polluters promote technological innovation as the 'true' solution to global warming. This article, through the case of BECCS, illustrates all that is faulty with such reasoning, and how indulging such diversion from addressing the environmental crisis with science-backed solutions violates human rights and the SDGs, and evidently, deepens the crisis and postpones the responsibility of making inconvenient changes to future generations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Land-management options for greenhouse gas removal (GGR) include afforestation or reforestation (AR), wetland restoration, soil carbon sequestration (SCS), biochar, terrestrial enhanced weathering (TEW), and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). We assess the opportunities and risks associated with these options through the lens of their potential impacts on ecosystem services (Nature's Contributions to People; NCPs) and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We find that all land-based GGR options contribute positively to at least some NCPs and SDGs. Wetland restoration and SCS almost exclusively deliver positive impacts. A few GGR options, such as afforestation, BECCS, and biochar potentially impact negatively some NCPs and SDGs, particularly when implemented at scale, largely through competition for land. For those that present risks or are least understood, more research is required, and demonstration projects need to proceed with caution. For options that present low risks and provide cobenefits, implementation can proceed more rapidly following no-regrets principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores policies for Negative Emissions Technologies (NETs), in an attempt to move beyond the supply-side focus of the majority of NETs research, as well as the current dominance of carbon pricing as the main NETs policy proposal. The paper identifies a number of existing policies from four key areas – energy/transport, agriculture, sub-soil, and oceans – which will have an impact on three NETs: Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS), Direct Air Capture (DAC), and terrestrial Enhanced Rock Weathering (ERW). We propose that non-climate co-benefits may be valuable in terms of the policy 'demand pull' for NETs; in particular, we find that ERW may provide multiple co-benefits which can be mandated through existing policy structures. However, interaction with numerous policy areas may also create barriers, particularly where there is tension between the priorities of different government departments. On the basis of existing and analogous policies from a range of geographical contexts and scales, this paper proposes four options for NETs policy that could be reasonably implemented in the near-term. We also argue that ERW demonstrates the importance of scale and framing, because the policy environment depends on whether it is framed as a soil amendment at local scales or as a climate stabilization technique at international scale. Key policy insights Co-benefits may assist the 'demand pull' for novel technologies by providing multiple policy angles for incentivisation rather than relying on a 'fix-all' policy such as a high carbon price. DAC with storage might be overly reliant on a high carbon price, because it only provides one core benefit – that of atmospheric carbon reduction. ERW may provide multiple co-benefits which can be mandated through existing policy structures, but should focus on using waste rock rather than mining virgin material. We propose four near-term options for NETs policy: funding for small-scale BECCS demonstration and an international biomass certification mechanism; small-scale loans for ERW on farms and promotion of locally-sourced rock residues; amendment of fertilizer subsidy schemes to include silicate rock; and a clearer framework for licensing sub-soil access for CO2 storage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

New contingency policy plans are expected to be published by the United Kingdom government to set out urgent actions, such as carbon capture and storage, greenhouse gas removal and the use of sustainable bioenergy to meet the greenhouse gas reduction targets of the 4th and 5th Carbon Budgets. In this study, we identify two plausible bioenergy production pathways for bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) based on centralized and distributed energy systems to show what BECCS could look like if deployed by 2050 in Great Britain. The extent of agricultural land available to sustainably produce biomass feedstock in the centralized and distributed energy systems is about 0.39 and 0.5 Mha, providing approximately 5.7 and 7.3 MtDM/year of biomass respectively. If this land‐use change occurred, bioenergy crops would contribute to reduced agricultural soil GHG emission by 9 and 11 MtCO2eq/year in the centralized and distributed energy systems respectively. In addition, bioenergy crops can contribute to reduce agricultural soil ammonia emissions and water pollution from soil nitrate leaching, and to increase soil organic carbon stocks. The technical mitigation potentials from BECCS lead to projected CO2 reductions of approximately 18 and 23 MtCO2/year from the centralized and distributed energy systems respectively. This suggests that the domestic supply of sustainable biomass would not allow the emission reduction target of 50 MtCO2/year from BECCS to be met. To meet that target, it would be necessary to produce solid biomass from forest systems on 0.59 or 0.49 Mha, or alternatively to import 8 or 6.6 MtDM/year of biomass for the centralized and distributed energy system respectively. The spatially explicit results of this study can serve to identify the regional differences in the potential capture of CO2 from BECCS, providing the basis for the development of onshore CO2 transport infrastructures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy with carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (BECCS) technologies represent an interesting option to reach negative carbon emissions, which implies the removal of CO2 already emitted to the atmosphere. Chemical looping combustion (CLC) with biomass can be considered as a promising BECCS technology since CLC has low cost and energy penalty. In CLC, the oxygen needed for combustion is supplied by a solid oxygen carrier circulating between the fuel and air reactors. In the fuel reactor, the fuel is oxidized producing a CO2-concentrated stream while the oxygen carrier is reduced. In the air reactor, the oxygen carrier is regenerated with air. Chemical looping with oxygen uncoupling (CLOU) is a CLC technology that allows the combustion of solid fuels as in common combustion with air by means of an oxygen carrier that release gaseous oxygen in the fuel reactor. In the last years, several Cu-based, Mn-based, and mixed oxide oxygen (O2) carriers have been tested showing good CLOU properties. Among them, copper (Cu)-based and Cu-Manganese (Mn) mixed oxides showed high reactivity, O2 release rate, and high O2 equilibrium concentration. The aim of this work is to study the viability of biomass combustion by CLOU process. The combustion of three types of biomass (pine sawdust, olive stone, and almond shell) were studied in a continuous 1.5 kWth CLC unit. Two O2 carriers were tested: a Cu-based oxygen carrier with Magnesium, Aluminum, Oxgen (MgAl2O4) as an inert prepared by spray drying (Cu60MgAl) and a mixed Cu-Mn oxide prepared by spray granulation (Cu34Mn66). These materials are capable of releasing gaseous oxygen when they are reduced in a different range of temperatures. CO2 capture and combustion efficiency were evaluated. Two fuel reactor operation temperatures were used: 775–850 °C for Cu34Mn66 and 900–935 °C for Cu60MgAl. High CO2 capture efficiencies and 100% combustion efficiency were reached with both oxygen carriers and with all the biomasses tested. Therefore, the CLOU technology with the Cu- and Cu-Mn-based oxygen carriers allowed avoiding CO2 emissions maintaining high combustion efficiencies. Results obtained demonstrate that this innovative biomass combustion technology combined with carbon storage lets an efficient BECCS process implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This experimental study aims to mitigate harmful emissions from a CI engine using bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) approach. The engine used for this experimental work is a single cylinder CI engine with a rated power of 5.2 kW at a constant speed of 1500 rpm. The BECCS approach is a combination of plant-based biofuels and carbon capture and storage (CCS) system. The whole investigation was done in four phases: (1) Substituting diesel with Karanja oil methyl ester (KOME) (2) Equal volume blending of Orange oil (ORG) with KOME (3) 20% blending of n-butanol (B) with KOME-ORG blend (4) CCS system with zeolite based non-selective catalytic reduction (NSCR) and mono ethanolamine (MEA) based selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) system with KOME-ORG + B20 blend. The experimental results show that substitution of diesel with KOME reduces smoke emission, but increases NO and CO2 emission. KOME-ORG blend reduces CO2 and smoke emissions with high NO emission due to combustion improvement. In comparison with the sole combustion of KOME at full load condition, the combination of KOME-ORG + B20 as bio-fuel with zeolite based post-combustion treatment system resulted in a maximum reduction of NO, smoke and CO2 emission by 41%, 19% and 15% respectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is recognized as a potential negative emission technology, needed to keep global warming within safe limits. With current technologies, large‐scale implementation of BECCS would compromise food production. Bioenergy derived from phototrophic microorganisms, with direct capture of CO2 from air, could overcome this challenge and become a sustainable way to realize BECCS. Here we present an alkaline capture and conversion system that combines high atmospheric CO2 transfer rates with high and robust phototrophic biomass productivity (15.2 ± 1.0 g/m 2/d). The system is based on a cyanobacterial consortium, that grows at high alkalinity (0.5 mol/L) and a pH swing between 10.4 and 11.2 during growth and harvest cycles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the Paris Agreement, there are targets set up for 2100 to be well below 2 °C. A more ambitious target of 1.5 °C also appears in the agreement. In order to address whether this target is achievable or not, studies about the 1.5 °C target's emission pathway are essential. Recently a few studies have presented modelling results of the global emission pathway for the 1.5 °C target. This paper presents an analysis for China under the global 1.5 °C pathway and budget, by looking at key options to go beyond the 2 °C target pathway. Similar to the global emission pathway, China's CO2 emissions have to be reduced quickly and reach zero emission between 2050 and 2060. China's energy system needs to make a rapid transition to much greater reduction in fossil fuel use from now on. End-use sectors need to increase electricity use significantly. Power generation will achieve negative emission before 2050. CCS will be widely used, and biomass energy with CCS (BECCS) must be adopted on a large scale by 2040. This is doable in China, but very near-term changes in policy are needed to make such a pathway happen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]