Global scenarios of irrigation water abstractions for bioenergy production: a systematic review
-
Published:2021-04-06
Issue:4
Volume:25
Page:1711-1726
-
ISSN:1607-7938
-
Container-title:Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.
Author:
Stenzel FabianORCID, Gerten Dieter, Hanasaki NaotaORCID
Abstract
Abstract. Many scenarios of future climate evolution and its anthropogenic drivers include considerable amounts of bioenergy as a fuel source, as a negative emission technology, and for providing electricity. The associated freshwater abstractions for irrigation of dedicated biomass plantations might be substantial and therefore potentially increase water limitation and stress in affected regions; however, assumptions and quantities of water use provided in the literature vary strongly. This paper reviews existing global assessments of freshwater abstractions for bioenergy production and puts these estimates into the context of scenarios of other water-use sectors. We scanned the available literature and (out of 430 initial hits) found 16 publications (some of which include several bioenergy-water-use scenarios) with reported values on global irrigation water abstractions for biomass plantations, suggesting water withdrawals in the range of 128.4 to 9000 km3 yr−1, which would come on top of (or compete with) agricultural, industrial, and domestic water withdrawals.
To provide an understanding of the origins of this large range, we present the diverse underlying assumptions, discuss major study differences, and calculate an inverse water-use efficiency (iwue), which facilitates comparison of the required freshwater amounts per produced biomass harvest.
We conclude that due to the potentially high water demands and the tradeoffs that might go along with them, bioenergy should be an integral part of global assessments of freshwater demand and use.
For interpreting and comparing reported estimates of possible future bioenergy water abstractions, full disclosure of parameters and assumptions is crucial.
A minimum set should include the complete water balances of bioenergy production systems (including partitioning of blue and green water), bioenergy crop species and associated water-use efficiencies, rainfed and irrigated bioenergy plantation locations (including total area and meteorological conditions), and total biomass harvest amounts.
In the future, a model intercomparison project with standardized parameters and scenarios would be helpful.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Engineering,General Environmental Science
Reference94 articles.
1. Al-Ansari, T., Korre, A., Nie, Z., and Shah, N.: Integration of greenhouse gas
control technologies within the energy, water and food nexus to enhance the
environmental performance of food production systems, J. Clean.
Prod., 162, 1592–1606, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.097, 2017. a 2. Alcamo, J., Döll, P., Henrichs, T., Kaspar, F., Lehner, B., Rösch, T., and
Siebert, S.: Global estimates of water withdrawals and availability under
current and future “business-as-usual” conditions, Hydrolog. Sci.
J., 48, 339–348, https://doi.org/10.1623/hysj.48.3.339.45278, 2003. a 3. Alcamo, J., Flörke, M., and Märkner, M.: Future long-term changes in global
water resources driven by socio-economic and climatic changes, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 52, 247–275, 2007. a, b, c 4. Azar, C., Lindgren, K., Larson, E., and Möllersten, K.: Carbon capture and
storage from fossil fuels and biomass – Costs and potential role in
stabilizing the atmosphere, Clim. Change, 74, 47–79,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-005-3484-7, 2006. a 5. Bauer, N., Rose, S. K., Fujimori, S., van Vuuren, D. P., Weyant, J.,
Wise, M., Cui, Y., Daioglou, V., Gidden, M. J., Kato, E., Kitous, A.,
Leblanc, F., Sands, R., Sano, F., Strefler, J., Tsutsui, J., Bibas, R.,
Fricko, O., Hasegawa, T., Klein, D., Kurosawa, A., Mima, S., and Muratori,
M.: Global energy sector emission reductions and bioenergy use: overview of
the bioenergy demand phase of the EMF-33 model comparison, Climatic Change,
163, 1553–1568, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2226-y, 2018. a, b
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|