Modeling sustainable bioenergy feedstock production in the Alps

(1)

Modeling sustainable bioenergy feedstock production in the Alps

Sylvain Leduc(1), Florian Kraxner(1), Hernán Serrano León(1), Georg Kindermann(1), Sabine Fuss (1,2), Annika Marxen(2,3), Chris Walzer(4)

( 1) Ecosystems Services and Management Program, IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria

(2) Working Group on Sustainable Resource Management and Global Change, Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC), Berlin, Germany (3) Technical University Berlin, Berlin, Germany

(4) Research Institute of Wildlife Ecology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria

European Geosciences Union General Assembly 2016,

Vienna, Austria, 17–22 April 2016

(2)

Objective

To identify

the potential and cost of production of renewable energy (RE) in the Alps

in regards with the protection of the ecosystems services (ESS)

2

(3)

3 Forest resources Crop residuals

Algae

MSW

Solar

Wind

Hydro

Biofuel

Heat

Power

Power to liquid/gas Biogas Fertilizers Biochar

Co-firing Ecosystem services

BECCS Geothermal

The BeWhere Umbrella

(4)

BeWhere Model

4 Reference system Demand

New bioenergy plants Existing industries

Biomas s

Heat

& power

Transport fuel

Fossil fuel Forest

industries

Biomass import Sawmill residuals Domestic

biomass

Biofuel Import CHP

Optional flows

Existing flows

(5)

• G4M estimates the impact of forestry activities on carbon sequestration and supply of biomass in the Alps (258,000 km ² total area, 115,000 km ² forest).

• Forests managed to maximize two ecosystem values through changing the rotation period:

S1: Maximization of carbon stock in forests.

S2: Maximization of biomass production.

tC/ha

Ecosystem trade-offs of forest areas

1: Carbon sequestration scenario (stock)

2: Biomass production scenario (stock) tC/ha

Source: G4M www.iiasa.ac.at/g4m S1:

Carbon sequestra

tion

S2:

Biomass producti

on Harvest

potential Mt C /year

11 23

Carbon stock

Mt C 1,057 577

(6)

Source: BeWhere www.iiasa.ac.at/Bewhere

S2: Biomass production scenario (increment)

Economic bioenergy potential

BeWhere estimates the optimal allocation of bioenergy production plants and associated harvesting intensity.

• Bioenergy is competing with other energy production types (i.e. costs of fossil fuels).

• Economic supply: 14 TWh

(heat & electricity) met by both scenarios.

• Significant local difference of harvesting intensity.

S1: Carbon sequestration scenario (increment)

Harvestin g intensity/c

ell (1,000 m

³

/

yr)

Total harvested amount in

S1:

(1,000 m

³

/ yr)

Total harvested amount in S2: (1,000

m

³

/ yr)

0 – 12 208 88

13 – 32 1,098 498

33 – 60 2,820 1,341

61 – 87 1,851 1,194

88 – 141 478 3,290

1,000 m

³

tC/ha

tC/ha 1,000 m

³

(7)

7 Protected Areas

Combined map of Protection Areas

Sources: combined from EEA - European Environment Agency, WDPA - World

Database on Protected Areas, and ALPARC.

Legend

Particular Protection DESIGN_ENG

Biosphere Park Biosphere reserves Biotope Protection Order Dry Grasslands

Ecological Important Area Emerald Sites

Federal Hunting Reserves

Federal Inventory of Alluvial Zones of National I*

Federal Inventory of Amphibian Spawning Areas of * Federal Inventory of Dry Grasslands and Pastures * Federal Inventory of Fenlands of National Importa*

Federal Inventory of Raised and Transitional Mire*

Federal Inventory of Reserves for Waterbirds and * Fenlands of National Importance

Flora Protection Area Forest Biological Reserve Forest Reserve

Horticultural Monument

Land acquired by Conservatoire du Littoral (natio*

Land acquired by a regional conservatory of natur*

Landscape Park

Landscape Protection Area

Landscapes and Natural Monuments of National Impo*

Mire Landscapes of National Importance National Hunting and Wildlife Reserve Natural Monument

Natural Monument or Site

Other Protected Natural Regional Areas Particular protection

Protected Area Protected Forest Protected Habitat

Protected Landscape Section

Protected Natural Objects of local importance Raised and Transitional Bogs of National Importan*

Rest Area

Sites for compensation of losses during use of us*

Specialy Protected Area regional protected areas special conservation areas townscape protected area Alps Convention EU27

Croatia

Particular Protection Legend

Natural Park Alps Convention EU27

Croatia

Legend

Nature Reserve DESIGN_ENG

National Nature Reserve State Nature Reserve Nature Reserve Natural reserve

Regional/Provincial Nature Reserve Regional Nature Reserve

Alps Convention EU27

Croatia

Legend National Park DESIGN_ENG

National Park

National Park - Core Area National Park - Integrale Reserve

National Park - Buffer zone/Area of adhesion Swiss National Park

Croatia

Legend

Natura 2000 Alps Convention EU27

Croatia

Legend

UNESCO WH + BR

iucn_prote

UNESCO Biosphere Reserve UNESCO World Heritage Alps Convention EU27

Croatia

(8)

8 Legend

National Protection Designation IUCN Categories

Ia Ib II III IV VI V UA NA

Legend

National Protection Designation IUCN Categories

Legend

National Protection Designation IUCN Categories

Ia – Strict Nature Reserve Ib – Wilderness Area

II – National Park

III – Natural Monument or Feature IV – Habitat/Species Management Area

V – Protected Landscape

VI – Protected Area with Sustainable Use of Natural Resources

Legend

National Protection Designation IUCN Categories

Legend

UNESCO WH + BR iucn_prote

UNESCO Biosphere Reserve UNESCO World Heritage Alps Convention

EU27 Croatia

Legend

Natura 2000 Alps Convention EU27

Croatia

IUCN Categories

International Union for Conservation of Nature

Sources: combined from EEA - European Environment Agency, WDPA - World

Database on Protected Areas, and ALPARC.

(9)

9 Harmonized Protected Areas

Scenario 1 –

General protection level

Legend

Prot_scenarios_class Sc1_medium

0 30 50 100

Production restrictions High protection Medium protection

Low protection

(10)

Marginal protection cost

10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

Protection level

A b a tm e n t c o s t c h a n g e

(11)

JECAMI

http://www.jecami.eu/RG_v2/

11

(12)

• Forests provide a number of essential ecosystem services and the full range of implication of changes in management needs to be considered.

• Similar energy demand can be met under different scenarios.

However, -sequestration maximization does not allow for lower cost high-intensity harvesting practices.

• The pros and cons of bioenergy production have to be

weighted against each other in an integrated and systematic manner while considering trade-offs with ecosystem services (e.g., carbon sequestration or biodiversity).

Summary and Outlook

(13)

Modeling sustainable bioenergy feedstock production in the Alps