scholarly journals Accounting for indirect land-use change in the life cycle assessment of biofuel supply chains

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (71) ◽  
pp. 1105-1119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Tarka Sanchez ◽  
Jeremy Woods ◽  
Mark Akhurst ◽  
Matthew Brander ◽  
Michael O'Hare ◽  
...  

The expansion of land used for crop production causes variable direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions, and other economic, social and environmental effects. We analyse the use of life cycle analysis (LCA) for estimating the carbon intensity of biofuel production from indirect land-use change (ILUC). Two approaches are critiqued: direct, attributional life cycle analysis and consequential life cycle analysis (CLCA). A proposed hybrid ‘combined model’ of the two approaches for ILUC analysis relies on first defining the system boundary of the resulting full LCA. Choices are then made as to the modelling methodology (economic equilibrium or cause–effect), data inputs, land area analysis, carbon stock accounting and uncertainty analysis to be included. We conclude that CLCA is applicable for estimating the historic emissions from ILUC, although improvements to the hybrid approach proposed, coupled with regular updating, are required, and uncertainly values must be adequately represented; however, the scope and the depth of the expansion of the system boundaries required for CLCA remain controversial. In addition, robust prediction, monitoring and accounting frameworks for the dynamic and highly uncertain nature of future crop yields and the effectiveness of policies to reduce deforestation and encourage afforestation remain elusive. Finally, establishing compatible and comparable accounting frameworks for ILUC between the USA, the European Union, South East Asia, Africa, Brazil and other major biofuel trading blocs is urgently needed if substantial distortions between these markets, which would reduce its application in policy outcomes, are to be avoided.

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 2855-2867 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Cai ◽  
J. Wang ◽  
Y. Feng ◽  
M. Wang ◽  
Z. Qin ◽  
...  

Land use change (LUC)-induced surface albedo effects for expansive biofuel production need to be quantified for improved understanding of biofuel climate impacts.


2012 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 1250015 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALLA A. GOLUB ◽  
THOMAS W. HERTEL

This paper reviews an analysis of land use change impacts of expanded biofuel production with GTAP-BIO computable general equilibrium (CGE) model. It describes the treatment of energy substitution, the role of biofuel by-products, specification of bilateral trade, the determination of land cover changes in response to increased biofuel feedstock production, and changes in crop yields – both at the intensive and extensive margins. The paper responds to some of the criticisms of GTAP-BIO and provides insights into the sensitivity of land use change and GHG emissions to changes in key parameters and assumptions. In particular, it considers an alternative specification of acreage response that takes into account the degree of land heterogeneity within agro-ecological zone (AEZ) for different AEZs and countries. The paper concludes with the discussion of alternative specifications of land mobility across uses employed in CGE models and the agenda for further research to narrow parametric and structural uncertainty to improve the model's performance.


Author(s):  
Amani Elobeid ◽  
Marcelo M.R. Moreira ◽  
Cicero Zanetti de Lima ◽  
Miguel Carriquiry ◽  
Leila Harfuch

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 118002
Author(s):  
Melissa J Scully ◽  
Gregory A Norris ◽  
Tania M Alarcon Falconi ◽  
David L MacIntosh

Abstract Spawn-Lee et al published a comment on our recent paper, ‘Carbon intensity of corn ethanol in the United States: state of the science.’ Their commentary is critical of our methodology and conclusions regarding greenhouse gas (GHG) life cycle analyses (LCAs) for corn starch ethanol and gives particular attention to the estimation of emissions from land use change (LUC). Several of the concerns stated by Spawn-Lee et al were raised in prior publications and are addressed in the recently published literature, thus, we respond to those points in brief and refer readers to those papers for more information. In response to their remaining concerns, we present detailed information in support of our approach for assessing LCAs of corn starch ethanol and our findings. Our original paper and the corroborating information provided here demonstrate that our methods are robust and our results are credible. Further, we hope this response contributes to constructive discussion and research on estimation of GHG emissions and LUC linked to corn starch ethanol.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document