Paper details

Title:

Alternative Greenhouse Gas Accounting Systems for Bioenergy: Descriptions and Evaluations

Author(s):

Bird, N., Pena, N., Zanchi, G., Frieden, D.

Document(s):

Abstract:

Pressure is rising to alter the accounting system used to calculate emissions due to bioenergy under the Kyoto Protocol and the EU Emissions Trading Scheme because it does not capture the full extent of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from bioenergy use. Both the European Union (EU) and United States (U.S.) are engaged in consultation processes targeted on how to treat emissions connected with use of biomass for energy within regulatory systems hence this discussion of accounting options is timely. The paper first classifies alternative accounting systems into the following three basic approaches: 1) CO2 emissions produced when biomass is burnt for energy are not counted at the point of combustion but are accounted for in the land use sector as carbon stock losses (a combustion factor = 0 approach);. 2) CO2 emissions produced when biomass is burnt for energy are accounted for in the energy sector; uptake of CO2 from the atmosphere by plants and soils may, or may not, be accounted for (a combustion factor = 1 approach); 3) End users are responsible for all or a specified subset of emissions that occur along the bioenergy value chain regardless of where these emissions occur (a value chain approach). The paper then evaluates these approaches against general criteria, and assesses their impacts on a selected set of stakeholder goals. The general criteria are: (a) comprehensiveness; (b) simplicity; and (c) scale independence. Stakeholder goals to be examined are: (a) stimulation of rural economies (b) food security, (c) GHG reductions, and (d) preservation of forests. Given that it is unlikely that all countries will accept greenhouse gas emission targets in the future, we find that: 0-combustion factor accounting systems rank low on comprehensiveness but are relatively simple and scale­independent. Systems with a 1-combustion factor tend to be more comprehensive, and can be both simple and scale­independent. End-user systems vary in comprehensiveness, tend to be complicated and are scale-dependent. While stimulating rural economies, the current system (0-combustion factor) does not foster food security, reduce GHG emissions or preserve forests. 1-combustion factor approaches can support rural economies and food security but tend not to preserve forest. In value-chain approaches, mandates to use biofuels determine impacts on rural economies and food security. These systems can be effective in forest preservation and achieving GHG reductions.

Keywords:

agriculture, decision making, emissions, greenhouse gases (GHG), biofuels

Topic:

Biomass Policies, Markets and Sustainability

Subtopic:

Methods for life cycle analysis and examples

Event:

19th European Biomass Conference and Exhibition

Session:

OC9.3

Pages:

2398 - 2407

ISBN-13:

978-88-89407-55-4

ISBN-10:

88-89407-55-7

Paper DOI:

10.5071/19thEUBCE2011-OC9.3

Price:

FREE