Ecological impacts and limits of biomass use: a critical review
- PDF / 1,172,381 Bytes
- 21 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 110 Downloads / 206 Views
PERSPECTIVE
Ecological impacts and limits of biomass use: a critical review Oludunsin Arodudu1 · Bunyod Holmatov2 · Alexey Voinov2,3 Received: 27 June 2020 / Accepted: 31 July 2020 © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020
Abstract Conventional biomass sources have been widely exploited for several end uses (mostly food, feed, fuel and chemicals). More unconventional sources are continually being sought for meeting the growing planetary demands for biomass materials. Biofuels are already commercially produced in many countries and are becoming mainstream. The role of biorefineries for production of chemicals is also on the rise. Plant biomass is the primary source of food for all multicellular living organisms. Primary production remains a key link in the chain of life support on planet Earth. Is there enough for all? What new strategies (or technologies) are available or promising for providing plant biomass in a safe and sustainable way? What are the potential impacts (footprints and efficiencies) of such strategies? What can be the limiting factors—land, water, energy and nutrients? What might be the limits for specific regions (OECD vs. non-OECD, advanced vs. developing, dry and warm vs. wet and cool, etc.). In this paper, we provided answers to these questions by critically reviewing the pros and cons associated with current and future production and use pathways for biomass. We conclude that in many cases, the jury is still out, and we cannot come to a solid verdict about the future of biomass production and use. Keywords Bioenergy · Food · Feed · Resource footprints · Waste management · Multifunctional land use
Introduction Historically humans were dependent on biomass. We can argue that the origins of human civilization come from plant biomass (henceforth, biomass refers to plant biomass). Deforestation in Europe was rapidly changing the landscape till the beginning of the industrial era (Kaplan et al. 2009). Forests were removed to give space to agriculture (Williams 2000) but also for timber products and firewood (Reboredo and Pais 2014). Agriculture was introduced as a means to increase production of biomass. Total terrestrial net primary production (NPP) is estimated at 2190 EJ/year or 118 billion tonnes of dry matter/yr, whereas the above-ground terrestrial NPP is reported as 1241EJ/year or 67Gt/yr (Rogner et al. * Oludunsin Arodudu [email protected] 1
Department of Geography, Maynooth University, Rhetoric House, South Campus, Maynooth, Ireland
2
Faculty of Engineering Technology, University of Twente, De Horst 2, Enschede, Netherlands
3
Centre On Persuasive Systems for Wise Adaptive Living (PERSWADE), University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
2012). Some sources put the above-ground terrestrial NPP at 2200 EJ/year (Bang et al. 2013). Such difference between the estimates is mainly attributed to the difference in the carbon content of biomass and the difference in gross calorific value. Humans appropriate approximately 20.1 Gt/year (373 EJ/ye
Data Loading...
