Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Global Supply of Biomass for Energy and Carbon Sequestration from Afforestation/Reforestation Activities

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

Abstract

In this paper we provide an analytical framework to estimate the joint production of biomass and carbon sequestration from afforestation and reforestation activities. The analysis is based on geographical explicit information on a half-degree resolution. For each grid-cell the model estimates forest growth using a global vegetation model and chooses forest management rules. Land prices, cost of forest production and harvesting are determined as a function of grid specific site productivity, population density and estimates of economic wealth. The sensitivity of the results due to scenario storylines is assessed using different population and economic growth assumptions, which are consistent with B1 and A2 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Emission Scenarios (IPCC-SRES) marker scenarios. Considerable differences in the economic supply schedules are found. However, technical potentials seem to converge given constancy in other underlying assumptions of the model.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexandrov, G.A., Yamagata, Y. and Oikawa, T.: 1999, ‘Towards a model for projecting net ecosystem production of the world forests’, Ecological Modeling 123, 183–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexandrov, G.A., Oikawa, T. and Yamagata, Y.: 2002, ‘The scheme for globalization of a process-based model explaining gradations in terrestrial NPP and its application’, Ecological Modeling 148, 293–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benítez, P.C. and Obersteiner, M.: 2003, ‘Site identification for carbon sequestration in Latin America: A grid-based economic approach’, in: Conference Proceedings of the First Latin American and Caribbean Congress of Environmental and Resource Economics, 9–11 July 2003, Cartagena de Indias, Columbia. Available at: http://www.alear.org.

  • Benítez, P.C., Olschewski, R., Koning, F.D. and López, M.: 2001, Análisis costo-beneficio de usos del suelo y fijación de carbono en sistemas forestales de Ecuador Noroccidental (Cost Benefit Analysis of Land Use and Carbon Sequestration in Forestry Systems of Northwest Ecuador). TÖB TWF-30s., Tropical Ecology Support Program (TÖB), German Technical Cooperation (GTZ), Eschborn, Germany (in Spanish).

  • Benítez, P.C., McCallum, I., Obersteiner, M. and Yamagata, Y.: 2004, Global Supply for Carbon Sequestration: Identifying Least-Cost Afforestation Sites Under Country Risk Consideration. Interim Report IR-04-022. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.

  • Berndes, G., Hoogwijk, M.M. and van den Broek, R.: 2003, ‘The contribution of biomass in the future global energy system: A review of 17 studies’, Biomass & Bioenergy 25(1), 1–28. (NWS-E-2003-40).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrere, R. and Fonseca, H. (eds.): 2003, Plantations are not Forests. World Rainforest Movement, ISBN: 9974-7782-1-2, Montevideo.

  • CIESIN: 2000, Gridded Population of the World (GPW), Version 2. Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Columbia University; International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); and World Resources Institute (WRI). CIESIN, Columbia University, Palisades, NY, USA. Available at: http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/plue/gpw.

  • De Cara, St. and Jayet, P. A.: 2000, ‘Emissions of greenhouse gases from agriculture: The heterogeneity of abatement costs in France’, European Review of Agricultural Economics 27(3), 281–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Jong, B.H., Tipper, R. and Montoya-Gómez, G.: 2000, ‘An economic analysis of the potential for carbon sequestration by forests: Evidence from Southern Mexico’, Ecological Economics 33, 313–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dieter, M. and Elsasser, P.: 2004, Economic Efficiency and Competitiveness for Forest GHG Sequestration Projects in Germany, Arbeitsbericht des Instituts für Ökonomie 2004/11, Bundesversuchsanstalt für Forst und Holzwirtschaft Hamburg, Germany.

  • Ecosecurities: 2002, Baseline Determination for Plantar: Evaluation of the Emissions Reduction Potential of the Plantar Project, Prototype Carbon Fund, The World Bank, Washington DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • ESRI: 1998, World Countries, 1998, Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), Redlands, California, USA. Available at: http://www.esri.com.

  • FAO: 1999, ‘Background Paper 2. Bioenergy’, Paper prepared for FAO/Netherlands Conference on ‘The Multifunctional Character of Agriculture and Land’, 12–17 September 1999, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

  • FAO: 2002, FAOSTAT Database, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy. Available at: http://apps.fao.org.

  • Fearnside, P.M.: 1995, ‘Global warming response in Brazil's forest sector: Comparison of project-level costs and benefits’, Biomass and Bioenergy 8(5), 309–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruebler, A., Chirkov, V., Goujon, A., Kolp, P., Lutz, W., Nakicenoivic, N., O'Neill, B., Prommer, I., Riahi, K. and Scherbov, S.: 2005, Regional, National, and Spatially Explicit Projections of Economic and Demographic Change Based on SRES. IIASA Interim Report IR-05-001, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Austria (forthcoming).

  • GTOPO30: 1996, Global Digital Elevation Model (DEM) with a Horizontal Grid Spacing of 30 Arc Seconds, US Geological Survey's EROS Data Center (EDC). Available at: http://edcdaac.usgs.gov/gtopo30/gtopo30.html.

  • Haque, A.K.E., Read, P. and Ali, M.E.: 1999, The Bangladesh MSP Pilot Project Proposal for GEF Funding of Capacity Building for Country Driven Projects, Working Paper, Institute of Development, Environment, and Strategic Studies (IDESS), North-South University, Dhaka, Bangladesh, 15 pp.

  • Hoogwijk, M.M.: 2004, On the Global and Regional Potential of Renewable Energy Sources, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Utrecht, Netherlands.

  • IPCC: 2001a, Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC: 2001b, Special Report on Emission Scenarios, A Special Report of Working Group III of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

  • Kartha, S. and Larson, E.D.: 2000, Bioenergy Primer: Modernized Biomass Energy for Sustainable Development, United Nations Development Program, New York, NY, 133 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levandrowski, J., Peters, M., Jones, C., House, R., Sperow, M., Eve, M. and Paustian, K.: 2004, Economic of Sequestering Carbon in US Agricultural Sector, USDA Technical Bulletin Number 1909, Washington DC, April.

  • Lundmark, R.: 2003, The Supply of Forest-Based Biomass for the Energy Sector: The Case of Sweden, Interim Report IR-03-059, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.

  • Obersteiner, M.: 1998, The Pan Siberian Forest Industry Model (PSFIM): A Theoretical Concept for Forest Industry Analysis, Interim Report IR-98-033, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.

  • Obersteiner, M.: 1999a, Carbon Budget of the Forest Industry of the Russian Federation: 19282012, Interim Report IR-99-033, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.

  • Obersteiner, M.: 1999b, Efficiency Gaps and Economies of Scale in the Siberian Forest Industry. Interim Report IR-99-060, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.

  • Obersteiner, M., Jonas, M. and Nilsson, S.: 2002, ‘Quantifying a fully verifiable Kyoto’, The World Resources Review (forthcoming).

  • Obersteiner, M., Rametsteiner, E. and Nilsson, S.: 2001, Cap Management of LULUCF Options. Interim Report IR-01-011. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.

  • Obersteiner, M. and Benitez, P.C.: 2003, Supply of Carbon Sinks Through Afforestation on the Territory of the Former Soviet Union. Mimeo. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

  • Ramankutty, N., Foley, J.A., Norman, J. and McSweeney, K.: 2001, ‘The global distribution of cultivable lands: Current patterns and sensitivity to possible climate change’. Manuscript in revision, Global Ecology and Biogeography. Available at: http://www.sage.wisc.edu/atlas/.

  • Richards, K.R. and Stokes, C.: 2004, ‘A review of forest carbon sequestration cost studies: A dozen years of research’, Climatic Change 68, 1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosillo-Calle, F.: 2000, ‘The role of biomass energy in rural development’, In: Proceedings of the Third Encontro de Energia no Meio Rural, 12–15 September, Campinas, SP, Brazil. Available at: http://www.proceedings.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=MSC0000000022000000200011&1ng=en&nrm=van.

  • Schlamadinger, B., Obersteiner, M., Michaelowa, A., Grubb, M., Azar, C., Yamagata, Y., Goldberg, D., Read, P., Kirschbaum, M.U.F., Fearnside, P.M., Sugiyama, T., Rametsteiner, E. and Böswald, K.: 2001a, ‘Capping the cost of compliance with the kyoto protocol and recycling revenues into Land-use projects’, The Scientific World 1, 271–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlamadinger, B., Grubb, M., Azar, C., Bauen, A. and Berndes, G.: 2001b, Carbon Sinks and Biomass Energy Production: A Study of Linkages, Options and Implications, Climate Strategies, International Network for Climate Policy Analysis. London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, U.A. and McCarl, B.A.: 2003, ‘Economic potential of biomass based fuels for greenhouse gas emission mitigation’, Environmental and Resource Economics 24(4), 291–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sohngen, B. and Sedjo, R.: 2000, ‘Potential carbon flux from timber harvests and management on the context of a global timber market’, Climatic Change 44, 151–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trexler, M.C. and Haugen, C.: 1995, Keeping it Green: Evaluating Tropical Forestry Strategies to Mitigate Global Warming, World Resource Institute, Washington DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • USGS: 2003, Global Land Cover Characteristics (GLCC) Data Base, Version 2.0. United States Geological Survey (USGS). Available at: http://edcdaac.usgs.gov/glcc/glcc.html.

  • World Bank: 2003, World Development Indicators. Table 5.7. The World Bank, Washington DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Obersteiner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Obersteiner, M., Alexandrov, G., Benítez, P.C. et al. Global Supply of Biomass for Energy and Carbon Sequestration from Afforestation/Reforestation Activities. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 11, 1003–1021 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-006-9031-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-006-9031-z

Keywords

Navigation