ag-umwelt AT lists.piratenpartei.de
Betreff: Ag-umwelt mailing list
Listenarchiv
- From: Jan Hemme <jan.hemme.berlin AT googlemail.com>
- To: Mailingliste der AG Energiepolitk <energie_und_infrastruktur AT lists.piratenpartei.de>
- Cc: ag-umwelt AT lists.piratenpartei.de
- Subject: [Ag-umwelt] EEA-Studie: Biomasse und "regenerative" vs. "generative" Energien
- Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:10:46 +0100
- List-archive: <https://service.piratenpartei.de/pipermail/ag-umwelt>
- List-id: <ag-umwelt.lists.piratenpartei.de>
Liebe Mitstreiter,
der wissenschaftliche Beirat der European Environmental Agency der EU (EEA - Europäische Umweltagentur) hat eine interessante Stellungnahme zur Energiegewinnung aus Biomasse veröffentlicht: http://www.eea.europa.eu/about-us/governance/scientific-committee/sc-opinions/opinions-on-scientific-issues/sc-opinion-on-greenhouse-gas
Das Ergebnis des Kurzgutachtens passt gut in unsere Argumentation, zwischen "generativen" und "regenerativen" Energien zu unterscheiden... Das Thema kommt ja immer mal wieder hoch (auch im LQFB).
It is widely assumed that biomass combustion would be inherently „carbon neutral‟ because it only releases carbon taken from the atmosphere during plant growth. However, this assumption is not correct and results in a form of double-counting, as it ignores the fact that using land to produce plants for energy typically means that this land is not producing plants for other purposes, including carbon otherwise sequestered. If bioenergy production replaces forests, reduces forest stocks or reduces forest growth, which would otherwise sequester more carbon, it can increase the atmospheric carbon concentration. If bioenergy crops displace food crops, this may lead to more hunger if crops are not replaced and lead to emissions from land-use change if they are. To reduce carbon in the air without sacrificing other human needs, bioenergy production must increase the total amount of plant growth, making more plants available for energy use while preserving other benefits, or it must be derived from biomass wastes that would decompose and neither be used by people nor contribute to carbon sequestration.The potential consequences of this bioenergy accounting error are immense. Based on the assumption that all burning of biomass would not add carbon to the air, several reports have suggested that bioenergy could or should provide 20% to 50% of the world‟s energy needs in coming decades. Doing so would require doubling or tripling the total amount of plant material currently harvested from the planet‟s land. Such an increase in harvested material would compete with other needs, such as providing food for a growing population, and would place enormous pressures on the Earth‟s land-based ecosystems. Indeed, current harvests, while immensely valuable for human well-being, have already caused enormous loss of habitat by affecting perhaps 75% of the world‟s ice- and desert- free land, depleting water supplies, and releasing large quantities of carbon into the air.Building on the bioenergy opinion of 2008, the Scientific Committee of the EEA recommends that:- European Union regulations and policy targets should be revised to encourage bioenergy use only from additional biomass that reduces greenhouse gas emissions, without displacing other ecosystems services such as the provision of food and the production of fibre.- Accounting standards for GHGs should fully reflect all changes in the amount of carbon stored by ecosystems and in the uptake and loss of carbon from them that result from the production and use of bioenergy.- Bioenergy policies should encourage energy production from biomass by-products, wastes and residues (except if those are needed to sustain soil fertility). Bioenergy policies should also promote the integrated production of biomass that adds to, rather than displaces, food production.- Decision makers and stakeholders worldwide should adjust global expectations of bioenergy use to levels based on the planet‟s capacity to generate additional biomass, without jeopardizing natural ecosystems.
Diese Bedenken werden übrigens (stark verdichtet) bereits in der LWFB-Initiative "Energiepolitische Grundsätze" unter dem Punkt drei, "Nachhaltigkeit und Umstellung auf generative Energien", berücksichtigt: https://lqfb.piratenpartei.de/pp/initiative/show/1811.html
Gruss und noch einen schönen Sonntag,
JH
Jan Hemme
Web: http://wiki.piratenpartei.de/Benutzer:Janhemme
Mail: jan.hemme.berlin AT googlemail.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/JanHemme
- [Ag-umwelt] EEA-Studie: Biomasse und "regenerative" vs. "generative" Energien, Jan Hemme, 30.10.2011
Archiv bereitgestellt durch MHonArc 2.6.19.