Carbon Sequestration Versus Bioenergy: A Case Study From South India Exploring The Relative Land Use Efficiency Of Two Options For Climate Change Mitigation
Journal article, 2010

This case study has been carried out as a comparison between two different land-use strategies for climate change mitigation, with possible application within the Clean Development Mechanisms. The benefits of afforestation for carbon sequestration versus for bioenergy production are compared in the context of development planning to meet increasing domestic and agricultural demand for electricity in Hosahalli village, Karnataka, India. One option is to increase the local biomass based electricity generation, requiring an increased biomass plantation area. This option is compared with fossil based electricity generation where the area is instead used for producing wood for non-energy purposes while also sequestering carbon in the soil and standing biomass. The different options have been assessed using the PRO-COMAPmodel. The ranking of the different options varies depending on the system boundaries and time period. Results indicate that, in the short term (30 years) perspective, the mitigation potential of the long rotation plantation is largest, followed by the short rotation plantation delivering wood for energy. The bioenergy option is however preferred if a long-term view is taken. Short rotation forests delivering wood for short-lived non-energy products have the smallest mitigation potential, unless a large share of the wood products are used for energy purposes (replacing fossil fuels) after having served their initial purpose. If managed in a sustainable manner all of these strategies can contribute to the improvement of the social and environmental situation of the local community.

CDM

Land use

LULUCF

Bioenergy

Plantation

India

Carbon sequestration

Author

Johan Rootzén

Chalmers, Energy and Environment, Energy Technology

Göran Berndes

Chalmers, Energy and Environment, Physical Resource Theory

N. H. Ravindranath

Indian Institute of Science

H. I. Somashekar

Indian Institute of Science

I. K. Murthy

Indian Institute of Science

P. Sudha

Indian Institute of Science

Madelene Ostwald

University of Gothenburg

Biomass and Bioenergy

0961-9534 (ISSN) 18732909 (eISSN)

Vol. 34 1 116-123

Subject Categories

Other Environmental Engineering

Other Social Sciences not elsewhere specified

DOI

10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.10.008

More information

Created

10/8/2017