Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of bioenergy crops in a carbon dioxide constrained world: an application of the MiniCAM energy-agriculture and land use model

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the coming century, modern bioenergy crops have the potential to play a crucial role in the global energy mix, especially under policies to reduce carbon dioxide emissions as proposed by many in the international community. Previous studies have not fully addressed many of the dynamic interactions and effects of a policy-induced expansion of bioenergy crop production, particularly on crop yields and human food demand. This study combines an updated agriculture and land use (AgLU) model with a well-developed energy-economic model to provide an analysis of the effects of bioenergy crops on energy, agricultural and land use systems. The results indicate that carbon dioxide mitigation policies can stimulate a large production of bioenergy crops, dependent on the level of the policy. This production of bioenergy crops can lead to several impacts on the agriculture and land use system: decreases in forestland and unmanaged land, decreases in the average yield of food crops, increases in the prices of food crops, and decreases in the level of human demand of calories.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The production and transportation of bioenergy crops can produce CO2 and nitrous oxide emissions. There might also be additional nitrous oxide emissions due to bioenergy crop fertilization. This study does not address these emissions.

  2. The market for forward forest products is the market for forest products 45 years from the current period.

  3. Hydrogen for fuel cells is only produced in scenarios that assume hydrogen fuel cell development as an energy end-use option.

  4. Bioenergy crops may still be economical and used in more marginal lands, with correspondingly lower yields. An interesting extension of this research would be to examine policies to promote bioenergy crops only in wastelands or other more marginal lands so they do not compete directly with food crops.

  5. The average food crop yield data on China is very likely biased upwards due to a systematic under-reporting of food cropland by China’s State Land Administration. This is likely due to incentives created by agricultural policies in China. See Seto et al. (2000), Frolking et al. (1999), and Heilig (1999) for further details.

  6. Percent difference is calculated as follows: (policy land use-base land use)/(base land use).

References

  • Azar C, Larson E (2000) Bioenergy and land-use competition in Northeast Brazil. Energy Sustainable Develop 4(3):51–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Berndes G, Azar C, Tomas K et al (2001) The feasibility of large-scale lignocellulose-based bioenergy production. Biomass Bioenergy 20:371–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berndes G, Hoogwijk M, van den Broek R (2003) The contribution of biomass in the future global energy supply: a review of 17 studies. Biomass Bioenergy 25:1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenkert A, Smith S, Pitcher H et al (2007) MiniCAM Documentation. available upon request

  • Carpentieri C, Larson E, Woods J (1993) Future biomass-based electricity supply in Northeast Brazil. Biomass Bioenergy 4(3):149–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds J, Reilly J (1985) Global energy: assessing the future. New York, Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds J, Wise M, Sands R et al (1996) Agriculture, land use, and commercial biomass energy, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Report SA-27726, Richland, WA

  • Edmonds J, Wise M, Pitcher H et al (1997) An integrated assessment of climate change and the accelerated introduction of advanced energy technologies: an application of MiniCAM 1.0. Mitig Adapt Strategies Glob Chang 1:311–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer G, Schrattenholzer L (2001) Global bioenergy potentials through 2050. Biomass Bioenergy 20(3):151–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: 2001, FAOSTAT data base, http://apps.fao.org

  • Frolking S, Xiao X, Zhuang Y et al (1999) Agricultural land-use in China: a comparison of area estimates from ground-based census and satellite-borne remote sensing. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 8(5):407–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham R (1994) An analysis of the potential land base for energy crops in the conterminous United States. Biomass Bioenergy 6:175–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham R, Allison L, Becker D (1996) ORECCL-Oak Ridge Energy Crop County Level Database. Proceedings of BIOENERGY ’96—The Seventh National Bioenergy Conference: Partnerships to Develop and Apply Biomass Technologies, Nashville, TN

  • Hall D, Scrase J (1998) Will biomass energy be the environmentally friendly fuel of the future? Biomass Bioenergy 15(4–5):357–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall D, Rosillo-Calle F, Williams R et al (1993) Biomass for energy: Supply prospects. In: Johansson TBJ, Kelly H, Reddy AKN, Williams R (Eds) Renewable energy: sources for fuel and electricity, Washington, DC, Island Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanegraff M, Biewinga E, Van der Bijl G (1998) Assessing the ecological and economic sustainability of energy crops. Biomass Bioenergy 15(4–5):345–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen E (1991) Poplar woody biomass yields: a look into the future. Biomass Bioenergy 1:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heilig G (1999) ChinaFood. Can China feed itself?, CD-ROM Vers. 1.1. Laxenburg, Austria, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

  • Kaya Y (1989) Impact of Carbon Dioxide Emissions on GNP growth: Interpretation of Proposed Scenarios, Geneva, Switzerland, IPCC/Response Strategies Working Group, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

  • Kheshgi H, Prince R, Marland G (2000) The potential of biomass fuels in the context of global climate change: Focus on transportation fuels. Ann Rev Energy Environ 25:199–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundborg A (1998) A sustainable forest fuel system in Sweden. Biomass Bioenergy 15(4–5):399–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakicenovic N, Swart R (eds.) (2000) Special report on emissions scenarios. Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press

  • Pinstrup-Anderson P, Pandhya-Lorch R, Rosengrant M (1999) World food prospects: critical issues for the early 21st Century. Washington, DC, International Food Policy Research Institute

    Google Scholar 

  • Raneses A, Hanson K, Shapouri H (1998) Economic impacts from shifting cropland use from food to fuel. Biomass Bioenergy 15(6):417–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao P, Shastry G (1986) Changes in diet and nutrition profile in ten states in India, Hyderabad, India, Nutrition News, National Institute of Nutrition, 7(2)

  • Rogner H (1997) An assessment of world hydrocarbon resources. Ann Rev Energy Environ 22:217–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sands R, Edmonds J (2005) Climate change impacts for the conterminous USA: an integrated assessment, paper 7: economic analysis of field crops and land use with climate change. Clim Change 69(1):127–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sands R, Leimbach M (2003) Modeling agriculture and land use in an integrated assessment framework. Clim Change 56(1):185–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seto K, Kaufmann R, Woodcock C (2000) Landsat reveals China’s farmland reserves, but they’re vanishing fast. Nature 406(6792):121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith S, Pitcher H, Wigley T (2005) Future sulfur dioxide emissions. Clim Change 73(3):267–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigley T, Richels R, Edmonds J (1996) Economic and environmental choices in the stabilization of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Nature 379(6562):240–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto H, Yamaji K, Fujino J (1999) Evaluation of bioenergy resources with a global land use and energy model formulated with SD technique. Biomass Bioenergy 63(2):101–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto H, Yamaji K, Fujino J (2000) Scenario analysis of bioenergy resources and CO2 emissions with a global land use and energy model. Biomass Bioenergy 66(4):325–337

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto H, Yamaji K, Fujino J (2001) Evaluation of bioenergy potential with a multi-regional global-land-use-and-energy-model. Biomass Bioenergy 21(3):185–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to acknowledge Karen Fisher-Vanden of Dartmouth College and Hugh Pitcher of the Joint Global Change Research Institute (JGCRI) for helpful ideas at the germination stage of this paper. We would also like to thank Allison Thomson of JGCRI for reviewing this paper and providing additional comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Joint Global Change Research Institute, 8400 Baltimore Ave, Suite 201, College Park, MD, 20740-2496, USA

    Kenneth T. Gillingham, Steven J. Smith & Ronald D. Sands

  2. Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Terman Engineering Center, 3rd floor, 380 Panama Way, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA

    Kenneth T. Gillingham

Authors
  1. Kenneth T. Gillingham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven J. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ronald D. Sands
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven J. Smith.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gillingham, K.T., Smith, S.J. & Sands, R.D. Impact of bioenergy crops in a carbon dioxide constrained world: an application of the MiniCAM energy-agriculture and land use model. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 13, 675–701 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-007-9122-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-007-9122-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation