Global cooling induced by biophysical effects of bioenergy crop cultivation.

Bioenergy crop with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is a key negative emission technology to meet carbon neutrality. However, the biophysical effects of widespread bioenergy crop cultivation on temperature remain unclear. Here, using a coupled atmosphere-land model with an explicit representation of lignocellulosic bioenergy crops, we find that after 50 years of large-scale bioenergy crop cultivation following plausible scenarios, global air temperature decreases by 0.03~0.08 °C, with strong regional contrasts and interannual variability. Over the cultivated regions, woody crops induce stronger cooling effects than herbaceous crops due to larger evapotranspiration rates and smaller aerodynamic resistance. At the continental scale, air temperature changes are not linearly proportional to the cultivation area. Sensitivity tests show that the temperature change is robust for eucalypt but more uncertain for switchgrass among different cultivation maps. Our study calls for new metrics to take the biophysical effects into account when assessing the climate mitigation capacity of BECCS.

Land-use emissions play a critical role in land-based mitigation for Paris climate targets.

Scenarios that limit global warming to below 2 °C by 2100 assume significant land-use change to support large-scale carbon dioxide (CO2) removal from the atmosphere by afforestation/reforestation, avoided deforestation, and Biomass Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). The more ambitious mitigation scenarios require even greater land area for mitigation and/or earlier adoption of CO2 removal strategies. Here we show that additional land-use change to meet a 1.5 °C climate change target could result in net losses of carbon from the land. The effectiveness of BECCS strongly depends on several assumptions related to the choice of biomass, the fate of initial above ground biomass, and the fossil-fuel emissions offset in the energy system. Depending on these factors, carbon removed from the atmosphere through BECCS could easily be offset by losses due to land-use change. If BECCS involves replacing high-carbon content ecosystems with crops, then forest-based mitigation could be more efficient for atmospheric CO2 removal than BECCS.