1 / 40

Rick Cruse (rmc@iastate.edu)– Iowa Water Center Gene Takle (gstakle@iastate.edu) – Climate Science Initiative Iowa

Climate Change Impacts on Biofuel Production. Presented at : American Chemical Society Meetings April 11, 2008. Rick Cruse (rmc@iastate.edu)– Iowa Water Center Gene Takle (gstakle@iastate.edu) – Climate Science Initiative Iowa State University. ACS Position on Global Climate Change.

skyler
Télécharger la présentation

Rick Cruse (rmc@iastate.edu)– Iowa Water Center Gene Takle (gstakle@iastate.edu) – Climate Science Initiative Iowa

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Climate Change Impacts on Biofuel Production Presented at: American Chemical Society Meetings April 11, 2008 Rick Cruse (rmc@iastate.edu)– Iowa Water Center Gene Takle (gstakle@iastate.edu) – Climate Science Initiative Iowa State University

  2. ACS Position on Global Climate Change Careful and comprehensive scientific assessments have clearly demonstrated that the Earth’s climate system is changing rapidly in response to growing atmospheric burdens of greenhouse gases and absorbing aerosol particles (IPCC, 2007). There is very little room for doubt that observed climate trends are due to human activities. The threats are serious and action is urgently needed to mitigate the risks of climate change.

  3. Vision • Replace equivalent of 30% of liquid fuels by 2030 • Derived dominantly from plant biomass – a renewable resource Perlack, Robert D., Lynn L. Wright, Anthony F. Turnhollow, Robin L. Graham, Bryce J. Stokes, and Donald C. Erbach. 2005. Biomass as a Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: the Technical Feasibility of a Billion-ton Annual Supply. DOE/GO-102005-2135 ORNL/TM-2005/66. Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/research/. Burton C. English, Daniel G. De La Torre Ugarte, Kim Jensen, Chad Hellwinckel, Jamey Menard, Brad Wilson, Roland Roberts, and Marie Walsh. 2006. 25% Renewable Energy for the United States By 2025: Agricultural and Economic Impacts. The University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture Department of Agricultural Economics. http://beag.ag.utk.edu/

  4. Cellulose to Fill the Gap Courtesy of Wally Wilhelm – USDA/ARS 25 x ‘25 October 2007 capacity*(6.9 billion gal) Gap for cellulose ethanol to fill 30 x ‘30 20 in 10 Energy Policy Act Ethanol from corn (NCGA**) *RFA, http://www.ethanolrfa.org/industry/statistics/#C **NCGA, http://www.ncga.com/ethanol/pdfs/2007/HowMuchEthanolCanComeFromCorn0207.pdf REAP

  5. Climate Change – Why might it affect biofuels? • Natural resource degradation

  6. Climate Change – Why might it affect biofuels? • Direct effects: crop yields – stress impacts

  7. Climate Change – Why might it affect biofuels? • PMS, biofuels, & climate change

  8. Future Bioeconomy and Natural Resource Concerns • Plant residues, feedstock for liquid fuels, are renewable • Plant residue production dependent on soil and water resources • Soil resources are not renewable; water is only conditionally renewable • Plant residues required for bioindustry – Plant residues required for soil and water conservation

  9. Future Bioeconomy and Its Impacts on Soil and Water Resources • Do we have the science to identify acceptable removal rates? • Can we balance energy needs, financial interests, and soil/water preservation in the bioenergy industry?

  10. Effect of Residue Cover on Soil Erosion 100 Erosion - % of Bare 50 0 30 % 100% Residue Cover (%) Residue Impacts on Erosion Laflen, J. M., and T. S. Colvin.  Effect of crop residue on soil loss from continuous row cropping. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 24(3):605-609.  1981.

  11. Soil Erosion Impacts Kazemi, Masoud, L.C. Dumenil, and T.E. Fenton. 1990. Effects of accelerated erosion on corn yields of loess-derived and till-derived soils in Iowa. Final report for Soil Conservation Service, Agreement No. 68-6114-0-8, Des Moines, IA.

  12. Trends in Precipitation

  13. Trends in Precipitation Groisman, Pavel Ya., Richard W. Knight, David R. Easterling, Thomas R. Karl, Gabriele C. Hegerl, and Vyacheslav N. Razuvaev. 2005. Trends in intense precipitation in the climate record. J. of Climate. 18:1326-1350.

  14. Climate Change, Soil & Water • 20% precipitation leads to 37% erosion (Lee et al. 1996) • Runoff 10% - 310% for different Midwest regions (O’Neal et al. 2005) • Soil loss 33% - 274% for different Midwest regions (O’Neal et al. 2005) • Lee, J.L., D.L. Phillips, and R.F. Dodson. 1996. Sensitivity of the US Corn Belt to climate • change and elevated CO2:II. Soil erosion and organic carbon. Agric. Systems 52: 503–521. • Monte R. O’Neal, M.A. Nearing, Roel C. Vining, Jane Southworth, and Rebecca A. Pfeifer. • Climate change impacts on soil erosion in Midwest United States with changes in • crop management. Catena 61:165-184.

  15. Natural Resource Goals - Possible • Common market for wide range of crops • Multiple purpose, multiple function

  16. Farmland Ownership • HARVESTED FARMLAND - % Rented1 • Iowa – 56% (Cash rent %: 49, 54, 69% - 1982, 1992, 2002 respectively) • Illinois – 62% • Indiana – 58% • “When farmers and herders lose control or long-term security over the land they use, the incentives for maintaining environmentally sustainable practices are lost.” 2 1http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census02/volume1/us/st99_2_040_040.pdf 2Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Desertification Synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC.

  17. Farmland Ownership • “Nothing accelerates faster, stops quicker, or corners harder than a rented car” 1 1Personal Communication – Trevor Price, Anheuser Busch ‘ethanol’ distributor. 2006.

  18. Connect the Dots • Frequency of extreme climatic events • Industry needs crop residues • Incentives for long term land care • Risk for escalating soil degradation

  19. Crop Yields – Stress Impacts • Water • Heat • Disease • Insect pest

  20. Direct Effects • “It is projected with Medium Confidence (about 5 in 10 chance to be correct) that globally, potential food production will increase for temperature rises of 1-3 °C, but decrease for higher temperature ranges. Fortunately, temperatures are not expected to rise to these ranges in the near future.” IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Summary for Policy Makers

  21. Direct Effects • “Yields of three major crops (corn, soybeans, and cotton) in the United States are predicted to decrease by 25-44% under the slowest warming scenario and 60-79% under the most rapid warming scenario in our preferred model.” Schlenker, Wolfram and Michael J. Roberts. 2006. Estimating the impact of climate change on crop yields: The importance of non-linear temperature effects. Journal of Economic Literature. http://www.agecon.ucdavis.edu/research/seminars/files/michaelroberts_climatechangecropyields.pdf.

  22. Direct Effects • Studies have over estimated the positive higher CO2 concentration effects on crop yields. David Schimel. 2006. Climate Change and Crop Yields: Beyond Cassandra. Science. 312 (5782):1889-1890.

  23. Direct Effects Precipitation minus Evaporation for Western US (25N-40N, 95W-125 W) R. Seager, et al. 2007. Model Projections of an Imminent Transition to a More Arid Climate in Southwestern North America. Science, Vol. 316. no. 5828, pp. 1181 - 1184

  24. Direct Effects Soil and Terrain Suitability Index (SI) for a Range of Rain-Fed Crops and Pasture Types for the Current Climate Fischer, et al., 2002: Global agro-ecological assessment for agriculture in the 21st century: methodology and results. Research Report RR-02-02. ISBN 3-7045-0141-7., International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria, 119 pp. [Online at http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/Papers/gaea.pdf] Cited in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Working Group II, Ch. 5, p. 280.

  25. Direct Effects IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Summary for Policy Makers

  26. Disease and Insect Pest Stress • Crops developed for unique set of • Soils • Climate – means & extremes • Temperature • Precipitation • Insect & disease pressure • Diseases & insects sensitive • Climate – means & extremes • Energy source (food) • Competition

  27. D. Herzmann, Iowa Environmental Mesonet

  28. Connecting the Dots • IPCC science suggests crop productivity will temporarily increase with changing climate • Recent research suggests IPCC report was overly optimistic • Food production will likely not meet food demand. • Food vs. biofuel

  29. PMS response to climate change Political & Moral Standards

  30. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Report • During the next 50 years, demand for food crops is projected to grow by 70–85% under the MA scenarios, and demand for water by between 30% and 85%.

  31. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Report • “Over the past 50 years, humans have changed ecosystems faster and more extensively than in any period in human history.” • “This degradation of ecosystem services could get significantly worseduring the next 50 years. It is a barrier to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals.”

  32. Soil Resources • “Nearly forty percent of the world's agricultural land is seriously degraded”1 1World Resources Institute. 2000. http://www.commondreams.org/news2000/0523-01.htm

  33. Land Clearing and the Biofuel Carbon Debt “Converting rainforests, peatlands, savannas, or grasslands to produce food-based biofuels in Brazil, Southeast Asia, and the United States creates a ‘biofuel carbon debt’ by releasing 17 to 420 times more CO2 than the annual greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions these biofuels provide by displacing fossil fuels”1. 1Joseph Fargione, Jason Hill, David Tilman, Stephen Polasky, and Peter Hawthorne. 2008. Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Sciencexpress. 7 February 2008. Pp. 1 - 3. www.sciencexpress.org

  34. Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land Use Change1 “Using a worldwide agricultural model to estimate emissions from land use change, we found that corn-based ethanol, instead of producing a 20% savings, nearly doubles greenhouse emissions over 30 years and increases greenhouse gases for 167 years.” 1Timothy Searchinger,Ralph Heimlich, R. A. Houghton, Fengxia Dong, Amani Elobeid, Jacinto Fabiosa, Simla Tokgoz, Dermot Hayes, Tun-Hsiang 2008. Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land use change. Sciencexpress. 7 February 2008. Pp. 1 - 3. www.sciencexpress.org

  35. Climate Change “Several recent studies have addressed possible future changes in heat waves, and found that, in a future climate, heat waves are expected to be more intense, longer lasting and more frequent.”1 1Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2007. Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis for Climate Change. http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_TS.pdf

  36. The Ethanol Vision Courtesy of Wally Wilhelm – USDA/ARS 25 x ‘25 October 2007 capaciy*(6.9 billion gal) 30 x ‘30 20 in 10 Energy Policy Act *RFA, http://www.ethanolrfa.org/industry/statistics/#C **NCGA, http://www.ncga.com/ethanol/pdfs/2007/HowMuchEthanolCanComeFromCorn0207.pdf REAP

  37. Connecting the Dots • Food vs. fuel is a real dilemma • Climate change will likely reduce food production potential globally • Demand for food-producing land area will likely increase, as will that for biofuels • PMS will control the extent of biofuel production in an increasingly hungry world

  38. “Simply plugging in ‘renewable resources’ to replace fossil resources is not enough. The world just cannot support the level of energy use that the current ‘developed’ nations enjoy. Either we change our lifestyle to reduce inputs, or we diminish our numbers. Attempting to grow the supply side of energy or any other of a suite of resources will fail in the long haul because we are up against the ultimate carrying capacity of the earth. If we ignore this fact and the current warning signs, Mother Nature will make the choice for us”— Steven Fales, Professor of agronomy and associate director, Office of Biorenewables Programs, ISU

More Related