IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v163y2020i3d10.1007_s10584-020-02799-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bioenergy technologies in long-run climate change mitigation: results from the EMF-33 study

Author

Listed:
  • Vassilis Daioglou

    (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
    Utrecht University)

  • Steven K. Rose

    (Electric Power Research Institute)

  • Nico Bauer

    (Leibniz Association)

  • Alban Kitous

    (Joint Research Centre of the European Commission)

  • Matteo Muratori

    (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

  • Fuminori Sano

    (Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth)

  • Shinichiro Fujimori

    (National Institute for Environmental Studies
    Kyoto University)

  • Matthew J. Gidden

    (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
    Climate Analytics)

  • Etsushi Kato

    (The Institute of Applied Energy)

  • Kimon Keramidas

    (Joint Research Centre of the European Commission)

  • David Klein

    (Leibniz Association)

  • Florian Leblanc

    (International Research Center on the Environment and Development (CIRED))

  • Junichi Tsutsui

    (Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry)

  • Marshal Wise

    (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and the University of Maryland)

  • Detlef P. Vuuren

    (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
    Utrecht University)

Abstract

Bioenergy is expected to play an important role in long-run climate change mitigation strategies as highlighted by many integrated assessment model (IAM) scenarios. These scenarios, however, also show a very wide range of results, with uncertainty about bioenergy conversion technology deployment and biomass feedstock supply. To date, the underlying differences in model assumptions and parameters for the range of results have not been conveyed. Here we explore the models and results of the 33rd study of the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum to elucidate and explore bioenergy technology specifications and constraints that underlie projected bioenergy outcomes. We first develop and report consistent bioenergy technology characterizations and modeling details. We evaluate the bioenergy technology specifications through a series of analyses—comparison with the literature, model intercomparison, and an assessment of bioenergy technology projected deployments. We find that bioenergy technology coverage and characterization varies substantially across models, spanning different conversion routes, carbon capture and storage opportunities, and technology deployment constraints. Still, the range of technology specification assumptions is largely in line with bottom-up engineering estimates. We then find that variation in bioenergy deployment across models cannot be understood from technology costs alone. Important additional determinants include biomass feedstock costs, the availability and costs of alternative mitigation options in and across end-uses, the availability of carbon dioxide removal possibilities, the speed with which large scale changes in the makeup of energy conversion facilities and integration can take place, and the relative demand for different energy services.

Suggested Citation

  • Vassilis Daioglou & Steven K. Rose & Nico Bauer & Alban Kitous & Matteo Muratori & Fuminori Sano & Shinichiro Fujimori & Matthew J. Gidden & Etsushi Kato & Kimon Keramidas & David Klein & Florian Lebl, 2020. "Bioenergy technologies in long-run climate change mitigation: results from the EMF-33 study," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1603-1620, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:163:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-020-02799-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-020-02799-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-020-02799-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-020-02799-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Klein & Gunnar Luderer & Elmar Kriegler & Jessica Strefler & Nico Bauer & Marian Leimbach & Alexander Popp & Jan Dietrich & Florian Humpenöder & Hermann Lotze-Campen & Ottmar Edenhofer, 2014. "The value of bioenergy in low stabilization scenarios: an assessment using REMIND-MAgPIE," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 705-718, April.
    2. Matteo Muratori & Nico Bauer & Steven K. Rose & Marshall Wise & Vassilis Daioglou & Yiyun Cui & Etsushi Kato & Matthew Gidden & Jessica Strefler & Shinichiro Fujimori & Ronald D. Sands & Detlef P. Vuu, 2020. "EMF-33 insights on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1621-1637, December.
    3. Vassilis Daioglou & Matteo Muratori & Patrick Lamers & Shinichiro Fujimori & Alban Kitous & Alexandre C. Köberle & Nico Bauer & Martin Junginger & Etsushi Kato & Florian Leblanc & Silvana Mima & Marsh, 2020. "Implications of climate change mitigation strategies on international bioenergy trade," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1639-1658, December.
    4. Detlef P. van Vuuren, Elie Bellevrat, Alban Kitous and Morna Isaac, 2010. "Bio-Energy Use and Low Stabilization Scenarios," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I).
    5. Gerssen-Gondelach, S.J. & Saygin, D. & Wicke, B. & Patel, M.K. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2014. "Competing uses of biomass: Assessment and comparison of the performance of bio-based heat, power, fuels and materials," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 964-998.
    6. Bosetti, Valentina & Marangoni, Giacomo & Borgonovo, Emanuele & Diaz Anadon, Laura & Barron, Robert & McJeon, Haewon C. & Politis, Savvas & Friley, Paul, 2015. "Sensitivity to energy technology costs: A multi-model comparison analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 244-263.
    7. Holly Jean Buck, 2016. "Rapid scale-up of negative emissions technologies: social barriers and social implications," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 155-167, November.
    8. Guy Lomax & Timothy M. Lenton & Adepeju Adeosun & Mark Workman, 2015. "Investing in negative emissions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(6), pages 498-500, June.
    9. Elmar Kriegler & John Weyant & Geoffrey Blanford & Volker Krey & Leon Clarke & Jae Edmonds & Allen Fawcett & Gunnar Luderer & Keywan Riahi & Richard Richels & Steven Rose & Massimo Tavoni & Detlef Vuu, 2014. "The role of technology for achieving climate policy objectives: overview of the EMF 27 study on global technology and climate policy strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 353-367, April.
    10. Steven Rose & Elmar Kriegler & Ruben Bibas & Katherine Calvin & Alexander Popp & Detlef Vuuren & John Weyant, 2014. "Bioenergy in energy transformation and climate management," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 477-493, April.
    11. Baker, Erin & Bosetti, Valentina & Anadon, Laura Diaz & Henrion, Max & Aleluia Reis, Lara, 2015. "Future costs of key low-carbon energy technologies: Harmonization and aggregation of energy technology expert elicitation data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 219-232.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Larissa Nogueira & Francesco Dalla Longa & Lara Aleluia Reis & Laurent Drouet & Zoi Vrontisi & Kostas Fragkiadakis & Evangelos Panos & Bob Zwaan, 2023. "A multi-model framework to assess the role of R&D towards a decarbonized energy system," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(7), pages 1-22, July.
    2. Mark M. Dekker & Vassilis Daioglou & Robert Pietzcker & Renato Rodrigues & Harmen-Sytze Boer & Francesco Dalla Longa & Laurent Drouet & Johannes Emmerling & Amir Fattahi & Theofano Fotiou & Panagiotis, 2023. "Identifying energy model fingerprints in mitigation scenarios," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 8(12), pages 1395-1404, December.
    3. Vassilis Daioglou & Matteo Muratori & Patrick Lamers & Shinichiro Fujimori & Alban Kitous & Alexandre C. Köberle & Nico Bauer & Martin Junginger & Etsushi Kato & Florian Leblanc & Silvana Mima & Marsh, 2020. "Implications of climate change mitigation strategies on international bioenergy trade," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1639-1658, December.
    4. Daioglou, Vassilis & Mikropoulos, Efstratios & Gernaat, David & van Vuuren, Detlef P., 2022. "Efficiency improvement and technology choice for energy and emission reductions of the residential sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    5. Steven K Rose & Nico Bauer & Alexander Popp & John Weyant & Shinichiro Fujimori & Petr Havlik & Marshall Wise & Detlef P Vuuren, 2020. "An overview of the Energy Modeling Forum 33rd study: assessing large-scale global bioenergy deployment for managing climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1539-1551, December.
    6. Oshiro, Ken & Fujimori, Shinichiro, 2022. "Role of hydrogen-based energy carriers as an alternative option to reduce residual emissions associated with mid-century decarbonization goals," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. P. A. Turner & C. B. Field & D. B. Lobell & D. L. Sanchez & K. J. Mach, 2018. "Unprecedented rates of land-use transformation in modelled climate change mitigation pathways," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(5), pages 240-245, May.
    2. Nico Bauer & Steven K. Rose & Shinichiro Fujimori & Detlef P. Vuuren & John Weyant & Marshall Wise & Yiyun Cui & Vassilis Daioglou & Matthew J. Gidden & Etsushi Kato & Alban Kitous & Florian Leblanc &, 2020. "Global energy sector emission reductions and bioenergy use: overview of the bioenergy demand phase of the EMF-33 model comparison," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1553-1568, December.
    3. Giannousakis, Anastasis & Hilaire, Jérôme & Nemet, Gregory F. & Luderer, Gunnar & Pietzcker, Robert C. & Rodrigues, Renato & Baumstark, Lavinia & Kriegler, Elmar, 2021. "How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    4. Audoly, Richard & Vogt-Schilb, Adrien & Guivarch, Céline & Pfeiffer, Alexander, 2018. "Pathways toward zero-carbon electricity required for climate stabilization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 884-901.
    5. Carl-Friedrich Schleussner & Joeri Rogelj & Michiel Schaeffer & Tabea Lissner & Rachel Licker & Erich M. Fischer & Reto Knutti & Anders Levermann & Katja Frieler & William Hare, 2016. "Science and policy characteristics of the Paris Agreement temperature goal," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(9), pages 827-835, September.
    6. Laura Diaz Anadon & Erin Baker & Valentina Bosetti & Lara Aleluia Reis, 2016. "Expert views - and disagreements - about the potential of energy technology R&D," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 677-691, June.
    7. Guivarch, Céline & Monjon, Stéphanie, 2017. "Identifying the main uncertainty drivers of energy security in a low-carbon world: The case of Europe," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 530-541.
    8. Ajay Gambhir & Laurent Drouet & David McCollum & Tamaryn Napp & Dan Bernie & Adam Hawkes & Oliver Fricko & Petr Havlik & Keywan Riahi & Valentina Bosetti & Jason Lowe, 2017. "Assessing the Feasibility of Global Long-Term Mitigation Scenarios," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-31, January.
    9. Giacomo Marangoni & Gauthier De Maere & Valentina Bosetti, 2017. "Optimal Clean Energy R&D Investments Under Uncertainty," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 256056, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    10. Pianta, Silvia & Rinscheid, Adrian & Weber, Elke U., 2021. "Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States: Perceptions, preferences, and lessons for policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    11. Cotterman, Turner & Small, Mitchell J. & Wilson, Stephen & Abdulla, Ahmed & Wong-Parodi, Gabrielle, 2021. "Applying risk tolerance and socio-technical dynamics for more realistic energy transition pathways," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    12. Cohen, Francois & Pfeiffer, Alexander, 2018. "The Impact of Negative Emissions Technologies and Natural Climate Solutions on Power-Sector Asset Stranding," INET Oxford Working Papers 2018-02, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    13. Wim Carton & Adeniyi Asiyanbi & Silke Beck & Holly J. Buck & Jens F. Lund, 2020. "Negative emissions and the long history of carbon removal," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    14. Matteo Muratori & Nico Bauer & Steven K. Rose & Marshall Wise & Vassilis Daioglou & Yiyun Cui & Etsushi Kato & Matthew Gidden & Jessica Strefler & Shinichiro Fujimori & Ronald D. Sands & Detlef P. Vuu, 2020. "EMF-33 insights on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1621-1637, December.
    15. Guivarch, Celine & Monjon, Stéphanie, 2016. "Energy security in a low-carbon world: Identifying the main uncertain drivers of energy security in Europe," Conference papers 332807, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    16. Olaleye, Olaitan & Baker, Erin, 2015. "Large scale scenario analysis of future low carbon energy options," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 203-216.
    17. Oshiro, Ken & Fujimori, Shinichiro, 2022. "Role of hydrogen-based energy carriers as an alternative option to reduce residual emissions associated with mid-century decarbonization goals," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    18. Florian Leblanc & Ruben Bibas & Silvana Mima & Matteo Muratori & Shogo Sakamoto & Fuminori Sano & Nico Bauer & Vassilis Daioglou & Shinichiro Fujimori & Matthew J Gidden & Estsushi Kato & Steven K Ros, 2022. "The contribution of bioenergy to the decarbonization of transport: a multi-model assessment," Post-Print hal-03558507, HAL.
    19. Steven K Rose & Nico Bauer & Alexander Popp & John Weyant & Shinichiro Fujimori & Petr Havlik & Marshall Wise & Detlef P Vuuren, 2020. "An overview of the Energy Modeling Forum 33rd study: assessing large-scale global bioenergy deployment for managing climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1539-1551, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:163:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-020-02799-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

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

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

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