Negative Emissions in the context
of “Sustainable Development”～Afforestation and BECCS”
26 January 2017
Ayumi Onuma, Keio University

1

Negative Emissions～Afforestation and BECCS• IPCC AR5 showed proportion between
accumulate emissions and rising global averagetemperature– necessary for deployment of negative emissions under2℃ target– total emissions : up to 1010GtCO2(=275GtC)since2012– emissions in 2012: 35.6GtCO2(=9.7GtC)• carbon sink and storage with afforestation andBECCS– Feasibility of low cost2

Co-benefit of Afforestation and BECCS• Afforestation– expansion of forest generate co-beneft
through the ecosystem services• biodiversity• stabilization of local climate and water• BECCS– promote renewable energy– Development in least developing countries
3Forest and carbon• Forest storage 625GtC with biomass anddeadwood• 1ha of forest storage average 162tC-equivalent amount of firing 0.25Mℓ gasoline
・Afforestation absorb carbon
Potential of carbon reduction with afforestation
depends on type of vegetation and scale of area
44

BECCS and carbon• Estimation of BECCS potential: 100EJ in 2050
• Carbon emission reduction in the air andenergy generation- timber biomass- sugar beet, sugar cane
- wheat, corn
- rapeseed- waste , algae5

A Rough Calculation• Afforestation storage 3.3tC/ha in a year for fivedecade• 1GtC/yr of carbon stock require 300Mil hectares ofafforestation– equivalent of area of India• BECCS also requires a large scale of land use– land use change of existing farmland– conversion of ecosystem with low carbon stock e.g. glass
filed– abandoned farmland①biodiversity• Type selection of vegetation ～（fast growingmonoculture)– eucalypts, acacia, poplar– low biodiversity– decrease of ecosystem services• land use – conversion of ecosystem– reduction of biodiversity such as glass field• pollution from increase of fertilizer

②food production ～land use• Possibility of food price increasing
1. trade off between land use change such as
cropland and food production
2. cost increase due to limitation of fertilizer• Dramatically crop price increase due todemand increase of bio fuel in 2008• The rapid crop price rise in 2008 is due to the use of crops
from food to• It is essentially equivalent to a land use conversion from foodto bio fuel production.
International crop prices
US$/tSoybean
WheatCorn

Rice

Source: MAFF
9

③food production ～fertilizer• Increase limitation of fertilizer–nutrition (phosphorus, nitrogen,potassium)• phosphorus are limited and deplorable
resources
Phosphate rocks are eccentrically locatedin China, US, Morocco, Jordan, and South
Africa (90%)

Estimation of Peak Phosphorus in 2030
• After Peak Phosphorus production decrease• demand increase of afforestation and BECCS
leads to price increase of Phosphorus?
⇒food price increase
BOP must be heavily damaged

World consumption of phosphate
fertilizers
30% increase within 2002-14

12

Import prices of phosphate rocksin JapanYen/kg60.0

Phosphate rocks price skyrocketed in
2007-08, due to the increasing demand
for fertilizers in China and India, and also
due to the50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0

10.00.0

2003

Source: MAFF Japan

2013
13

Is sustainable development feasible?
• Reduction of biodiversity• monoculture, conversion of ecosystem,
pollution of fertilizer• Reduction of standard of living in BOP• trade off with food production, price increase offertilizer

BECCS and Afforestation could harm
“Sustainable Development”
14Some measures to challenges• establishing a frame of defecation of credit
created by environmentally friendly manner.

– achievement of premium price rather than additional
cost →control with incentive• technological promotion on capturing
Phosphorus