Prospective contributions of biomass pyrolysis to China’s 2050 carbon reduction and renewable energy goals

Nature Communications - Tập 12 Số 1
Qing Yang1,2,3,4, Hewen Zhou2,4, Pietro Bartocci5, Francesco Fantozzi5, Ondřej Mašek6, Foster A. Agblevor7, Zhiyu Wei1,2, Haiping Yang1, Hanping Chen1, Xi Lu8, G.Q. Chen9, Chuguang Zheng2,4, Chris Nielsen3, Michael B. McElroy3
1China-EU Institute for Clean and Renewable Energy, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, PR China
2Department of New Energy Science and Engineering, School of Energy and Power Engineering, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, PR China
3John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
4State Key Laboratory of Coal Combustion, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, PR China
5Department of Engineering, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
6UK Biochar Research Centre, School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
7USTAR Bioenergy Center, Department of Biological Engineering, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA
8School of Environment and State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, Tsinghua University, Beijing, PR China
9College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, PR China

Tóm tắt

AbstractRecognizing that bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) may still take years to mature, this study focuses on another photosynthesis-based, negative-carbon technology that is readier to implement in China: biomass intermediate pyrolysis poly-generation (BIPP). Here we find that a BIPP system can be profitable without subsidies, while its national deployment could contribute to a 61% reduction of carbon emissions per unit of gross domestic product in 2030 compared to 2005 and result additionally in a reduction in air pollutant emissions. With 73% of national crop residues used between 2020 and 2030, the cumulative greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction could reach up to 8620 Mt CO2-eq by 2050, contributing 13–31% of the global GHG emission reduction goal for BECCS, and nearly 4555 Mt more than that projected for BECCS alone in China. Thus, China’s BIPP deployment could have an important influence on achieving both national and global GHG emissions reduction targets.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Victor, D. et al. Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. In Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds. Edenhofer, O. et al.) (Cambridge University Press, 2013).

Tavoni, M. et al. Post-2020 climate agreements in the major economies assessed in the light of global models. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 119–126 (2015).

Rogelj, J. et al. Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 °C. Nature 534, 631–639 (2016).

Krey, V., Luderer, G., Clarke, L. & Kriegler, E. Getting from here to there–energy technology transformation pathways in the EMF27 scenarios. Clim. Change 123, 369–382 (2014).

Riahi, K. et al. Locked into Copenhagen pledges—implications of short-term emission targets for the cost and feasibility of long-term climate goals. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 90, 8–23 (2015).

Lawrence, M. G. et al. Evaluating climate geoengineering proposals in the context of the Paris Agreement temperature goals. Nat. Commun. 9, 3734 (2018).

Kemper, J. Biomass and carbon dioxide capture and storage: a review. Int. J. Greenh. Gas. Control 40, 401–430 (2015).

Obersteiner, M. et al. How to spend a dwindling greenhouse gas budget. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 7–10 (2018).

Ricke, K. L., Millar, R. J. & MacMartin, D. G. Constraints on global temperature target overshoot. Sci. Rep. 7, 14743 (2017).

Mengel, M., Nauels, A., Rogelj, J. & Schleussner, C. F. Committed sea-level rise under the Paris Agreement and the legacy of delayed mitigation action. Nat. Commun. 9, 601 (2018).

Tan, Y., Nookuea, W., Li, H., Thorin, E. & Yan, J. Property impacts on carbon capture and storage (CCS) processes: a review. Energy Convers. Manag. 118, 204–222 (2016).

Yan, J. Carbon capture and storage (CCS). Appl. Energy 148, A1–A6 (2015).

Fridahl, M. Socio-political prioritization of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage. Energy Policy 104, 89–99 (2017).

Roberts, K. G., Gloy, B. A., Joseph, S., Scott, N. R. & Lehmann, J. Life cycle assessment of biochar systems: estimating the energetic, economic, and climate change potential. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 827–833 (2010).

Paustian, K. et al. Climate-smart soils. Nature 532, 49–57 (2016).

Nguyen, B. T., Lehmann, J., Hockaday, W. C., Joseph, S. & Masiello, C. A. Temperature sensitivity of black carbon decomposition and oxidation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 3324–3331 (2010).

Laird, D. A., Brown, R. C., Amonette, J. E. & Lehmann, J. Review of the pyrolysis platform for coproducing bio-oil and biochar. Biofuels Bioprod. Bioref. 3, 547–562 (2009).

Dhyani, V. & Bhaskar, T. A comprehensive review on the pyrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass. Renew. Energy 129, 695–716 (2018).

Chen, Y., Yang, H., Wang, X., Chen, W. & Chen, H. Biomass pyrolytic polygeneration system: adaptability for different feedstocks. Energy Fuels 30, 414–422 (2016).

Zhang, X. et al. Application of biomass pyrolytic polygeneration by a moving bed: characteristics of products and energy efficiency analysis. Bioresour. Technol. 254, 130–138 (2018).

Kan, T., Strezov, V. & Evans, T. J. Lignocellulosic biomass pyrolysis: a review of product properties and effects of pyrolysis parameters. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 57, 1126–1140 (2016).

Yang, H. et al. Application of biomass pyrolytic polygeneration technology using retort reactors. Bioresour. Technol. 200, 64–71 (2016).

Cross, A. & Sohi, S. P. A method for screening the relative long-term stability of biochar. GCB Bioenergy 5, 215–220 (2013).

Mašek, O., Brownsort, P., Cross, A. & Sohi, S. Influence of production conditions on the yield and environmental stability of biochar. Fuel 103, 151–155 (2013).

Spokas, K. A. Review of the stability of biochar in soils: predictability of O: C molar ratios. Carbon Manag. 1, 289–303 (2010).

Sun, C. et al. Feasibility Report—Biomass Pyrolysis Cogeneration for Demonstration Project (Hubei Electric Power Survey and Design Institute, 2013).

Gaunt, J. L. & Lehmann, J. Energy balance and emissions associated with biochar sequestration and pyrolysis bioenergy production. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 4152–4158 (2008).

Peters, J. F., Iribarren, D. & Dufour, J. Biomass pyrolysis for biochar or energy applications? A life cycle assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 5195–5202 (2015).

Miller-Robbie, L. et al. Life cycle energy and greenhouse gas assessment of the co-production of biosolids and biochar for land application. J. Clean. Prod. 91, 118–127 (2015).

Coninck, H. D. et al. Strengthening and Implementing the Global Response. An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty (IPCC, 2018).

Rogelj, J. et al. Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5 °C in the Context of Sustainable Development. An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty (IPCC, 2018).

Shan, Y. et al. New provincial CO2 emission inventories in China based on apparent energy consumption data and updated emission factors. Appl. Energy 184, 742–750 (2016).

National Development and Reform Commission of China. China’s National Determined Contribution submitted to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2015-06/30/content_2887330.htm (2015).

Woolf, D., Lehmann, J., Fisher, E. M. & Angenent, L. T. Biofuels from pyrolysis in perspective: trade-offs between energy yields and soil-carbon additions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 6492–6499 (2014).

Cong, H. et al. Slow pyrolysis performance and energy balance of corn stover in continuous pyrolysis-based poly-Generation systems. Energy Fuels 32, 3743–3750 (2018).

Crombie, K. & Mašek, O. Investigating the potential for a self-sustaining slow pyrolysis system under varying operating conditions. Bioresour. Technol. 162, 148–156 (2014).

Park, J., Lee, Y., Ryu, C. & Park, Y. K. Slow pyrolysis of rice straw: analysis of products properties, carbon and energy yields. Bioresour. Technol. 155, 63–70 (2014).

Meyer, S., Glaser, B. & Quicker, P. Technical, economical, and climate-related aspects of biochar production technologies: a literature review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 9473–9483 (2011).

Yang, Q. et al. Hybrid life-cycle assessment for energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of a typical biomass gasification power plant in China. J. Clean. Prod. 205, 661–671 (2018).

Lu, X. et al. Gasification of coal and biomass as a net carbon-negative power source for environment-friendly electricity generation in China. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 8206–8213 (2019).

Xue, T. et al. Spatiotemporal continuous estimates of PM2.5 concentrations in China, 2000–2016: a machine learning method with inputs from satellites, chemical transport model, and ground observations. Environ. Int. 123, 345–357 (2019).

Alstone, P., Gershenson, D. & Kammen, D. Decentralized energy systems for clean electricity access. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 305–314 (2015).

Sanchez, D. et al. Biomass enables the transition to a carbon-negative power system across western North America. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 230–234 (2015).

Wright, M. M., Daugaard, D. E., Satrio, J. A. & Brown, R. C. Techno-economic analysis of biomass fast pyrolysis to transportation fuels. Fuel 89, S2–S10 (2010).

Zhou, J. Embodied Ecological Elements Accounting of National Economy (Peking University, 2008).

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Nature Communications

Tập 12 Số 1

Thông tin tác giả