IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i6p1534-d514473.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Considering the Environmental Impacts of Bioenergy Technologies to Support German Energy Transition

Author

Listed:
  • Amarachi Kalu

    (Department of Geography, Ludwig Maximillian’s University, Luisenstraße 37, 80333 Munich, Germany)

  • Janja Vrzel

    (Department of Geography, Ludwig Maximillian’s University, Luisenstraße 37, 80333 Munich, Germany)

  • Sebastian Kolb

    (Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Chair of Energy Process Engineering, Fürther Straße 244f, 90429 Nuremberg, Germany)

  • Juergen Karl

    (Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Chair of Energy Process Engineering, Fürther Straße 244f, 90429 Nuremberg, Germany)

  • Philip Marzahn

    (Department of Geography, Ludwig Maximillian’s University, Luisenstraße 37, 80333 Munich, Germany)

  • Fabian Pfaffenberger

    (Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Chair of Communication Science, Findelgasse 7/9, 90402 Nuremberg, Germany)

  • Ralf Ludwig

    (Department of Geography, Ludwig Maximillian’s University, Luisenstraße 37, 80333 Munich, Germany)

Abstract

Clean energy for all, as listed in the United Nation’s SDG7, is a key component for sustainable environmental development. Therefore, it is imperative to uncover the environmental implications of alternative energy technologies. SustainableGAS project simulates different process chains for the substitution of natural gas with renewable energies in the German gas market. The project follows an interdisciplinary approach, taking into account techno-social and environmental variabilities. However, this research highlights the project results from the environmental perspective. So far, a detailed assessment of the environmental costs of alternative gas technologies with a focus on the process of energy transition has remained rare. Although such data constitute key inputs for decision-making, this study helps to bridge a substantial knowledge gap. Competing land-use systems are examined to secure central ecosystem services. To fulfill this obligation, an Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Trade-offs (InVEST) serves as the modelling tool. InVEST assesses ecosystem services (ES) that are or may be affected by alternative bioenergy technologies. Spatially explicit model results include the water provisioning from the Water Yield Model (WYM), soil erosion and sedimentation described by the Sediment Delivery Ratio (SDR), and nutrient fluxes (N) in response to changing land use are obtained through the Nutrient Delivery Ratio (NDR). The detailed model results are finally extrapolated, which provides a comprehensive image of the environmental impacts associated with bioenergy expansion in Germany from our combination of unique Renewable Gas Plants (RGPs). The final result shows that nutrient load will reduce in southern Germany by the year 2050 compared to the reference state, and biomass use reduced by 46% crops.

Suggested Citation

  • Amarachi Kalu & Janja Vrzel & Sebastian Kolb & Juergen Karl & Philip Marzahn & Fabian Pfaffenberger & Ralf Ludwig, 2021. "Considering the Environmental Impacts of Bioenergy Technologies to Support German Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:6:p:1534-:d:514473
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/6/1534/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/6/1534/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Strzalka, Rafal & Schneider, Dietrich & Eicker, Ursula, 2017. "Current status of bioenergy technologies in Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 801-820.
    2. Walston, Leroy J. & Li, Yudi & Hartmann, Heidi M. & Macknick, Jordan & Hanson, Aaron & Nootenboom, Chris & Lonsdorf, Eric & Hellmann, Jessica, 2021. "Modeling the ecosystem services of native vegetation management practices at solar energy facilities in the Midwestern United States," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    3. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Semmens, Darius J. & Waage, Sissel & Winthrop, Robert, 2013. "A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 27-39.
    4. Kolb, Sebastian & Plankenbühler, Thomas & Frank, Jonas & Dettelbacher, Johannes & Ludwig, Ralf & Karl, Jürgen & Dillig, Marius, 2021. "Scenarios for the integration of renewable gases into the German natural gas market – A simulation-based optimisation approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    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. Vera, Ivan & Wicke, Birka & Lamers, Patrick & Cowie, Annette & Repo, Anna & Heukels, Bas & Zumpf, Colleen & Styles, David & Parish, Esther & Cherubini, Francesco & Berndes, Göran & Jager, Henriette & , 2022. "Land use for bioenergy: Synergies and trade-offs between sustainable development goals," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 161(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. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    2. M'Arimi, M.M. & Mecha, C.A. & Kiprop, A.K. & Ramkat, R., 2020. "Recent trends in applications of advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) in bioenergy production: Review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    3. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    4. Warziniack, Travis & Sims, Charles & Haas, Jessica, 2019. "Fire and the joint production of ecosystem services: A spatial-dynamic optimization approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Rasmussen, Laura Vang & Mertz, Ole & Christensen, Andreas E. & Danielsen, Finn & Dawson, Neil & Xaydongvanh, Pheang, 2016. "A combination of methods needed to assess the actual use of provisioning ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 75-86.
    6. Cátia da Silva & Ana Paula Barbosa‐Póvoa & Ana Carvalho, 2022. "Towards sustainable development: Green supply chain design and planning using monetization methods," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1369-1394, May.
    7. You Zuo & Lin Zhang, 2023. "Research on Local Ecosystem Cultural Services in the Jiangnan Water Network Rural Areas: A Case Study of the Ecological Green Integration Demonstration Zone in the Yangtze River Delta, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Klimanova, O.A. & Bukvareva, E.N. & Yu, Kolbowsky E. & Illarionova, O.A., 2023. "Assessing ecosystem services in Russia: Case studies from four municipal districts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    9. Cabral, Pedro & Feger, Clément & Levrel, Harold & Chambolle, Mélodie & Basque, Damien, 2016. "Assessing the impact of land-cover changes on ecosystem services: A first step toward integrative planning in Bordeaux, France," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 318-327.
    10. Kolo, Horst & Kindu, Mengistie & Knoke, Thomas, 2020. "Optimizing forest management for timber production, carbon sequestration and groundwater recharge," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    11. Gaglio, M. & Aschonitis, V. & Pieretti, L. & Santos, L. & Gissi, E. & Castaldelli, G. & Fano, E.A., 2019. "Modelling past, present and future Ecosystem Services supply in a protected floodplain under land use and climate changes," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 403(C), pages 23-34.
    12. Alicja Krzemień & Juan José Álvarez Fernández & Pedro Riesgo Fernández & Gregorio Fidalgo Valverde & Silverio Garcia-Cortes, 2022. "Valuation of Ecosystem Services Based on EU Carbon Allowances—Optimal Recovery for a Coal Mining Area," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-21, December.
    13. Hend Dakhel Alhassany & Safaa Malik Abbas & Marcos Tostado-Véliz & David Vera & Salah Kamel & Francisco Jurado, 2022. "Review of Bioenergy Potential from the Agriculture Sector in Iraq," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, April.
    14. McInnes, R.J. & Everard, M., 2017. "Rapid Assessment of Wetland Ecosystem Services (RAWES): An example from Colombo, Sri Lanka," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 89-105.
    15. Jacobs, Sander & Martín-López, Berta & Barton, David N. & Dunford, Robert & Harrison, Paula A. & Kelemen, Eszter & Saarikoski, Heli & Termansen, Mette & García-Llorente, Marina & Gómez-Baggethun, , 2018. "The means determine the end – Pursuing integrated valuation in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 515-528.
    16. Sy, Mariam Maki & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Simier, Monique & Pasqualini, Vanina & Figuières, Charles & De Wit, Rutger, 2018. "Identifying Consensus on Coastal Lagoons Ecosystem Services and Conservation Priorities for an Effective Decision Making: A Q Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 1-13.
    17. Fabian Delpy & Maibritt Pedersen Zari & Bethanna Jackson & Rubianca Benavidez & Thomas Westend, 2021. "Ecosystem Services Assessment Tools for Regenerative Urban Design in Oceania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-22, March.
    18. Davide Geneletti, 2015. "A Conceptual Approach to Promote the Integration of Ecosystem Services in Strategic Environmental Assessment," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1-27, December.
    19. Sagir, Emrah & Alipour, Siamak, 2021. "Photofermentative hydrogen production by immobilized photosynthetic bacteria: Current perspectives and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    20. Eric Nost, 2015. "Performing nature's value: software and the making of Oregon's ecosystem services markets," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(12), pages 2573-2590, 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:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:6:p:1534-:d:514473. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.