Menu

GSB Project Background

Plant biomass is one of a limited set of options as the world looks to become less reliant on non-renewable fossil resources. Moreover, a strong argument can be made that sustainable energy supply is considerably easier to achieve with bioenergy than without it (Lynd and Cruz, 2010). For example, in the IEA Blue Map Scenario based on reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 80% below current levels in 2050, biomass provides 23% of primary energy supply and is the largest single energy source (IEA, 2010).

Recent assessments of the feasibility and desirability of bioenergy (fuels and electricity) have been sharply divergent, and indeed exhibit a bimodal distribution, with most studies envisioning either a very large or a very small role for biomass in energy supply (Dornburg et al., 2010; Lynd et al., 2007).

Critics, often imagining expanded use of current bioenergy technologies in combination with extrapolation of current trends and practices, see bioenergy as negatively impacting food security, having an inadequate resource base to meaningfully impact energy-related challenges, and contributing to environmental degradation.

Advocates, often imagining future bioenergy technologies and a world motivated to achieve sustainability objectives, foresee possibilities for large-scale renewable energy supply, substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, and benefits associated with improved rural landscapes and economies.

The uncertainty and confusion regarding the merit of bioenergy impedes effective action and is important to resolve in light of the urgency of energy and sustainability challenges facing humanity.

In response to this situation, the Global Sustainable Bioenergy (GSB) project was initiated in 2009 by a group of scientists, engineers, and policy experts from universities, government agencies, and the non-profit sector. The overall goal of the project is to provide guidance with respect to the feasibility and desirability of sustainable, bioenergy-intensive futures.

A statement on behalf of GSB Stage 1 project organizers observed in the summer of 2009 (Lynd, 2009):

Although there is a natural reluctance to consider change, we must do so, because humanity cannot expect to achieve a sustainable and secure future by continuing the practices that have resulted in the unsustainable and insecure present.

Consistent with this perspective, the GSB project seeks to take a different approach from the many other worthy initiatives in the bioenergy field:

The project is structured in three stages:

Stage 1. Hold five continental conventions with outcomes as follows:

  1. Gather input on structuring the analysis to be carried out in Stages 2 and 3.
  2. Approve resolutions addressing bioenergy from each of the world's continents.
  3. Write a report encompassing a and b.
  4. Recruit participants and support for Stages 2 and 3.
  5. Approve a common resolution endorsing the importance of bioenergy and the GSB project.

Stage 2. Explore whether and how it is physically possible for bioenergy to sustainably meet a substantial fraction of future demand for energy services – e.g. 150 EJ annually1, corresponding to 23% of primary energy supply in the IEA Blue Map Scenario (2010) – while feeding humanity and meeting other needs from managed lands, preserving wildlife habitat, and maintaining environmental quality.

Stage 3. Analyze and recommend transition paths and policies in light of Stage 2 results, incorporating analysis of macroeconomic, environmental, ethical and equity issues as well as local-scale effects on rural economies.

Stage 1 was completed in 2010 with the exception of the common resolution. Five continental conventions were held, and each convention drafted and ratified a resolution. A paper detailing Stage 1 (Lynd et al., 2011) was written by GSB project participants from across the globe, most of whom had not met each other prior to the initiation of the project. In the 4th quarter of 2010 and the first quarter of 2011, a management structure featuring a Board of Directors and Executive Committee was adopted, with the expectation that additional Board members and sponsor organizations will be added in the future. The Board has invited the Executive Committee to prepare a vision and action plan to:

  1. Develop and refine plans for Stage 2.
  2. Evaluate the possibility of organizations represented by the members of the Board providing support for Stage 2 activities.
  3. Identify desired Stage 2 activities for which support from additional sponsors is needed.

The approach, structure, and list of tasks proposed for Stage 2 was substantially informed by input and discussions that occurred during Stage 1 and changed considerably as a result of this process.

1Total biomass energy in 2006 was 49.7 EJ of which 30.3 EJ was traditional biomass and 19.4 EJ was modern biomass. These values may be compared to total primary energy demand of 492 EJ (IEA, 2008).

References

Last Updated December 19, 2011