Balance between climate change mitigation benefits and land use impacts of bioenergy: conservation implications for European birds

被引:11
|
作者
Meller, Laura [1 ,2 ]
Thuiller, Wilfried [2 ]
Pironon, Samuel [2 ,3 ]
Barbet-Massin, Morgane [4 ,5 ]
Hof, Andries [6 ]
Cabeza, Mar [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Helsinki, Dept Biosci, Metapopulat Res Grp, POB 65, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
[2] Univ Grenoble 1, Lab Ecol Alpine UMR CNRS 5553, F-938041 Grenoble 9, France
[3] Inst Pirenaico Ecol CSIC, Zaragoza 50080, Spain
[4] UPMC, Ctr Rech Biol Populat Oiseaux, CNRS, Museum Natl Hist Nat,UMR MNHN 7204, F-75005 Paris, France
[5] Yale Univ, Dept Ecol & Evolutionary Biol, New Haven, CT 06520 USA
[6] PBL Netherlands Environm Assessment Agcy, Bilthoven, Netherlands
来源
GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY BIOENERGY | 2015年 / 7卷 / 04期
基金
芬兰科学院; 欧洲研究理事会;
关键词
biodiversity; climate change adaptation; climate change mitigation; complementarity; renewable energy; spatial conservation prioritization; EXTINCTION RISK; BREEDING BIRDS; BIODIVERSITY; FUTURE; MANAGEMENT; ADAPTATION; MODEL; STATE; LIFE; FACE;
D O I
10.1111/gcbb.12178
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Both climate change and habitat modification exert serious pressure on biodiversity. Although climate change mitigation has been identified as an important strategy for biodiversity conservation, bioenergy remains a controversial mitigation action due to its potential negative ecological and socio-economic impacts which arise through habitat modification by land use change. While the debate continues, the separate or simultaneous impacts of both climate change and bioenergy on biodiversity have not yet been compared. We assess projected range shifts of 156 European bird species by 2050 under two alternative climate change trajectories: a baseline scenario, where the global mean temperature increases by 4 degrees C by the end of the century, and a 2 degrees scenario, where global concerted effort limits the temperature increase to below 2 degrees C. For the latter scenario, we also quantify the pressure exerted by increased cultivation of energy biomass as modelled by IMAGE2.4, an integrated land use model. The global bioenergy use in this scenario is in the lower end of the range of previously estimated sustainable potential. Under the assumptions of these scenarios, we find that the magnitude of range shifts due to climate change is far greater than the impact of land conversion to woody bioenergy plantations within the European Union, and that mitigation of climate change reduces the exposure experienced by species. However, we identified potential for local conservation conflict between priority areas for conservation and bioenergy production. These conflicts must be addressed by strict bioenergy sustainability criteria that acknowledge biodiversity conservation needs beyond existing protected areas and apply also to biomass imported from outside the European Union.
引用
收藏
页码:741 / 751
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Impacts of land use, restoration, and climate change on tropical peat carbon stocks in the twenty-first century: implications for climate mitigation
    Warren, Matthew
    Frolking, Steve
    Dai, Zhaohua
    Kurnianto, Sofyan
    [J]. MITIGATION AND ADAPTATION STRATEGIES FOR GLOBAL CHANGE, 2017, 22 (07) : 1041 - 1061
  • [22] Impacts of Bioenergy Policies on Land-Use Change in Nigeria
    Okoro, Stanley U.
    Schickhoff, Udo
    Schneider, Uwe A.
    [J]. ENERGIES, 2018, 11 (01):
  • [23] Modelling climate change impacts on species' distributions at the European scale: implications for conservation policy
    Harrison, PA
    Berry, PM
    Butt, N
    New, M
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2006, 9 (02) : 116 - 128
  • [24] Land-use transition for bioenergy and climate stabilization: model comparison of drivers, impacts and interactions with other land use based mitigation options
    Popp, Alexander
    Rose, Steven K.
    Calvin, Katherine
    Van Vuuren, Detlef P.
    Dietrich, Jan Phillip
    Wise, Marshall
    Stehfest, Elke
    Humpenoeder, Florian
    Kyle, Page
    Van Vliet, Jasper
    Bauer, Nico
    Lotze-Campen, Hermann
    Klein, David
    Kriegler, Elmar
    [J]. CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2014, 123 (3-4) : 495 - 509
  • [25] Land-use transition for bioenergy and climate stabilization: model comparison of drivers, impacts and interactions with other land use based mitigation options
    Alexander Popp
    Steven K. Rose
    Katherine Calvin
    Detlef P. Van Vuuren
    Jan Phillip Dietrich
    Marshall Wise
    Elke Stehfest
    Florian Humpenöder
    Page Kyle
    Jasper Van Vliet
    Nico Bauer
    Hermann Lotze-Campen
    David Klein
    Elmar Kriegler
    [J]. Climatic Change, 2014, 123 : 495 - 509
  • [26] The Schlamadinger Prize in climate change: forestry, land use and bioenergy
    不详
    [J]. CLIMATE POLICY, 2013, 13 (06) : 785 - 786
  • [27] Forest land use change in the Philippines and climate change mitigation
    Lasco R.D.
    Pulhin F.B.
    [J]. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 2000, 5 (1) : 81 - 97
  • [28] Hydrological Impacts of Climate Change and Land Use
    Petrovic, Frantisek
    [J]. WATER, 2021, 13 (06)
  • [29] Climate change impacts on connectivity in the ocean: Implications for conservation
    Gerber, Leah R.
    Mancha-Cisneros, Maria Del Mar
    O'Connor, Mary I.
    Selig, Elizabeth R.
    [J]. ECOSPHERE, 2014, 5 (03):
  • [30] Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon
    Don, Axel
    Osborne, Bruce
    Hastings, Astley
    Skiba, Ute
    Carter, Mette S.
    Drewer, Julia
    Flessa, Heinz
    Freibauer, Annette
    Hyvonen, Niina
    Jones, Mike B.
    Lanigan, Gary J.
    Mander, Uelo
    Monti, Andrea
    Djomo, Sylvestre Njakou
    Valentine, John
    Walter, Katja
    Zegada-Lizarazu, Walter
    Zenone, Terenzio
    [J]. GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY BIOENERGY, 2012, 4 (04): : 372 - 391