Combining Eddy Covariance Towers, Field Measurements, and the MEMS 2 Ecosystem Model Improves Confidence in the Climate Impacts of Bioenergy With Carbon Capture and Storage
Grant Falvo, Yao Zhang, Michael Abraha, Samantha Mosier, Yahn-Jauh Su, Cheyenne Lei, Jiquan Chen, M. Francesca Cotrufo, G. Philip Robertson
{"title":"Combining Eddy Covariance Towers, Field Measurements, and the MEMS 2 Ecosystem Model Improves Confidence in the Climate Impacts of Bioenergy With Carbon Capture and Storage","authors":"Grant Falvo, Yao Zhang, Michael Abraha, Samantha Mosier, Yahn-Jauh Su, Cheyenne Lei, Jiquan Chen, M. Francesca Cotrufo, G. Philip Robertson","doi":"10.1111/gcbb.70023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Carbon dioxide removal technologies such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) are required if the effects of climate change are to be reversed over the next century. However, BECCS demands extensive land use change that may create positive or negative radiative forcing impacts upstream of the BECCS facility through changes to in situ greenhouse gas fluxes and land surface albedo. When quantifying these upstream climate impacts, even at a single site, different methods can give different estimates. Here we show how three common methods for estimating the net ecosystem carbon balance of bioenergy crops established on former grassland or former cropland can differ in their central estimates and uncertainty. We place these net ecosystem carbon balance forcings in the context of associated radiative forcings from changes to soil N<sub>2</sub>O and CH<sub>4</sub> fluxes, land surface albedo, embedded fossil fuel use, and geologically stored carbon. Results from long term eddy covariance measurements, a soil and plant carbon inventory, and the MEMS 2 process-based ecosystem model all agree that establishing perennials such as switchgrass or mixed prairie on former cropland resulted in net negative radiative forcing (i.e., global cooling) of −26.5 to −39.6 fW m<sup>−2</sup> over 100 years. Establishing these perennials on former grassland sites had similar climate mitigation impacts of −19.3 to −42.5 fW m<sup>−2</sup>. However, the largest climate mitigation came from establishing corn for BECCS on former cropland or grassland, with radiative forcings from −38.4 to −50.5 fW m<sup>−2</sup>, due to its higher plant productivity and therefore more geologically stored carbon. Our results highlight the strengths and limitations of each method for quantifying the field scale climate impacts of BECCS and show that utilizing multiple methods can increase confidence in the final radiative forcing estimates.</p>","PeriodicalId":55126,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","volume":"17 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gcbb.70023","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.70023","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Carbon dioxide removal technologies such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) are required if the effects of climate change are to be reversed over the next century. However, BECCS demands extensive land use change that may create positive or negative radiative forcing impacts upstream of the BECCS facility through changes to in situ greenhouse gas fluxes and land surface albedo. When quantifying these upstream climate impacts, even at a single site, different methods can give different estimates. Here we show how three common methods for estimating the net ecosystem carbon balance of bioenergy crops established on former grassland or former cropland can differ in their central estimates and uncertainty. We place these net ecosystem carbon balance forcings in the context of associated radiative forcings from changes to soil N2O and CH4 fluxes, land surface albedo, embedded fossil fuel use, and geologically stored carbon. Results from long term eddy covariance measurements, a soil and plant carbon inventory, and the MEMS 2 process-based ecosystem model all agree that establishing perennials such as switchgrass or mixed prairie on former cropland resulted in net negative radiative forcing (i.e., global cooling) of −26.5 to −39.6 fW m−2 over 100 years. Establishing these perennials on former grassland sites had similar climate mitigation impacts of −19.3 to −42.5 fW m−2. However, the largest climate mitigation came from establishing corn for BECCS on former cropland or grassland, with radiative forcings from −38.4 to −50.5 fW m−2, due to its higher plant productivity and therefore more geologically stored carbon. Our results highlight the strengths and limitations of each method for quantifying the field scale climate impacts of BECCS and show that utilizing multiple methods can increase confidence in the final radiative forcing estimates.
期刊介绍:
GCB Bioenergy is an international journal publishing original research papers, review articles and commentaries that promote understanding of the interface between biological and environmental sciences and the production of fuels directly from plants, algae and waste. The scope of the journal extends to areas outside of biology to policy forum, socioeconomic analyses, technoeconomic analyses and systems analysis. Papers do not need a global change component for consideration for publication, it is viewed as implicit that most bioenergy will be beneficial in avoiding at least a part of the fossil fuel energy that would otherwise be used.
Key areas covered by the journal:
Bioenergy feedstock and bio-oil production: energy crops and algae their management,, genomics, genetic improvements, planting, harvesting, storage, transportation, integrated logistics, production modeling, composition and its modification, pests, diseases and weeds of feedstocks. Manuscripts concerning alternative energy based on biological mimicry are also encouraged (e.g. artificial photosynthesis).
Biological Residues/Co-products: from agricultural production, forestry and plantations (stover, sugar, bio-plastics, etc.), algae processing industries, and municipal sources (MSW).
Bioenergy and the Environment: ecosystem services, carbon mitigation, land use change, life cycle assessment, energy and greenhouse gas balances, water use, water quality, assessment of sustainability, and biodiversity issues.
Bioenergy Socioeconomics: examining the economic viability or social acceptability of crops, crops systems and their processing, including genetically modified organisms [GMOs], health impacts of bioenergy systems.
Bioenergy Policy: legislative developments affecting biofuels and bioenergy.
Bioenergy Systems Analysis: examining biological developments in a whole systems context.