To have a >50% chance of limiting warming below 2 °C, most recent scenarios from integrated assessment models (IAMs) require large-scale deployment of negative emissions technologies (NETs). These are technologies that result in the net removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. We quantify potential global impacts of the different NETs on various factors (such as land, greenhouse gas emissions, water, albedo, nutrients and energy) to determine the biophysical limits to, and economic costs of, their widespread application. Resource implications vary between technologies and need to be satisfactorily addressed if NETs are to have a significant role in achieving climate goals.

/pdf/biophysical-and-economic-limits-to-negative-co2-emissions-4rvt7yn0md.pdf

Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions

To address the challenges of biodiversity conservation and commodity production, a framework has been proposed that distinguishes between the integration (“land sharing”) and separation (“land sparing”) of conservation and production. Controversy has arisen around this framework partly because many scholars have focused specifically on food production rather than more encompassing notions such as land scarcity or food security. Controversy further surrounds the practical value of partial trade‐off analyses, the ways in which biodiversity should be quantified, and a series of scale effects that are not readily accounted for. We see key priorities for the future in (1) addressing these issues when using the existing framework, and (2) developing alternative, holistic ways to conceptualise challenges related to food, biodiversity, and land scarcity.

Land sparing versus land sharing: Moving forward

Mining poses significant and potentially underestimated risks to tropical forests worldwide. In Brazil’s Amazon, mining drives deforestation far beyond operational lease boundaries, yet the full extent of these impacts is unknown and thus neglected in environmental licensing. Here we quantify mining-induced deforestation and investigate the aspects of mining operations, which most likely contribute. We find mining significantly increased Amazon forest loss up to 70 km beyond mining lease boundaries, causing 11,670 km2 of deforestation between 2005 and 2015. This extent represents 9% of all Amazon forest loss during this time and 12 times more deforestation than occurred within mining leases alone. Pathways leading to such impacts include mining infrastructure establishment, urban expansion to support a growing workforce, and development of mineral commodity supply chains. Mining-induced deforestation is not unique to Brazil; to mitigate adverse impacts of mining and conserve tropical forests globally, environmental assessments and licensing must considered both on- and off-lease sources of deforestation.

https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1092&context=rsfac

Mining drives extensive deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon

Social impact assessment in the mining sector: Review and comparison of indicators frameworks

This paper first reviews the potential causality from biomass energy to CO2 emissions and economic development within relevant literature. Later, the paper examines statistically the impacts of biomass energy consumption on CO2 emissions and GDP in the US. To this end, paper observes environmental and economic implications of biomass fuel usage throughout energy literature and launches asymmetric causality test to confirm/disconfirm the literature output. The findings of the tests indicate that biomass energy consumption per capita mitigates CO2 emissions per capita and increases GDP per capita. Eventually, upon its output, this research asserts that biomass energy consumption can be an efficient policy tool for environmentally sustainable development in the US, and, that, hence, biomass production technologies and biomass consumption need to be promoted in other countries as well as in the US. On the other hand, analyses underline the fact that policy makers should consider as well some potential constraints of biomass energy usage such as land use constraints and carbon leakage from biomass production. Therefore, although this paper explores the remedial impact of biomass on environment and growth, one may suggest also that further possible works consider the effects of biomass sources in detail to minimize the some worsening influence of biomass usage on climate change.

Can biomass energy be an efficient policy tool for sustainable development

Land use conflicts are becoming increasingly apparent from local to global scales. Surface gold mining is an extreme source of such a conflict, but mining impacts on local livelihoods often remain unclear. Our goal here was to assess land cover change due to gold surface mining in Western Ghana, one of the world’s leading gold mining regions, and to study how these changes affected land use systems. We used Landsat satellite images from 1986–2002 to map land cover change and field interviews with farmers to understand the livelihood implications of mining-related land cover change. Our results showed that surface mining resulted in deforestation (58%), a substantial loss of farmland (45%) within mining concessions, and widespread spill-over effects as relocated farmers expand farmland into forests. This points to rapidly eroding livelihood foundations, suggesting that the environmental and social costs of Ghana’s gold boom may be much higher than previously thought.

/pdf/impacts-of-surface-gold-mining-on-land-use-systems-in-1bkurarhy2.pdf

Impacts of Surface Gold Mining on Land use Systems in Western Ghana

The political will to reduce global GHG emissions has largely contributed to increased global biofuel production and trade. The expanding cultivation of energy crops may drive changes in the terrestrial ecosystems such as land cover and biodiversity loss. When biomass replaces fossil energy carriers, sustainability criteria are therefore crucial to avoid adverse impacts and ensure a net positive GHG balance. The European Union has set mandatory sustainability criteria for liquid biofuels in its Renewable Energy Directive (RED) 2009/28/EC to ensure net positive impacts of its biofuel policy. The adoption of sustainability criteria in other world regions and their extension to solid and gaseous biomass in the EU is ongoing. This paper examines the effect of the EU RED sustainability criteria on the availability of biomass resources at global and regional scale. It quantifies the relevance of sustainability criteria in biomass resource assessments taking into account the criteria’s spatial distribution. This assessment does not include agricultural and forestry residues and aquatic biomass. Previously unknown interrelations between sustainability criteria are examined and described for ten world regions. The analysis concludes that roughly 10% (98.5 EJ) of the total theoretical potential of 977.2 EJ occurs in areas free of sustainability concerns.

https://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/gcbb.12036

Global biomass potentials under sustainability restrictions defined by the European Renewable Energy Directive 2009/28/EC

Land is under pressure from a number of demands, including the need for increased supplies of bioenergy. While bioenergy is an important ingredient in many pathways compatible with reaching the 2 °C target, areas where cultivation of the biomass feedstock would be most productive appear to co-host other important ecosystems services. We categorize global geo-data on land availability into productivity deciles, and provide a geographically explicit assessment of potentials that are concurrent with EU sustainability criteria. The deciles unambiguously classify the global productivity range of potential land currently not in agricultural production for biomass cultivation. Results show that 53 exajoule (EJ) sustainable biomass potential are available from 167 million hectares (Mha) with a productivity above 10 tons of dry matter per hectare and year (tD Mha−1 a−1), while additional 33 EJ are available on 264 Mha with yields between 4 and 10 tD M ha−1 a−1: some regions lose less of their highly productive potentials to sustainability concerns than others and regional contributions to bioenergy potentials shift when less productive land is considered. Challenges to limit developments to the exploitation of sustainable potentials arise in Latin America, Africa and Developing Asia, while new opportunities emerge for Transition Economies and OECD countries to cultivate marginal land.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/7/074026/pdf

Vivian Schueler

Papers

Impacts of Surface Gold Mining on Land use Systems in Western Ghana

Global biomass potentials under sustainability restrictions defined by the European Renewable Energy Directive 2009/28/EC

Productivity ranges of sustainable biomass potentials from non-agricultural land