Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

Dr Ajay Gambhir

Faculty of Natural Sciences, The Grantham Institute for Climate Change

Visiting Researcher
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 6363a.gambhir

 
 
//

Location

 

Electrical EngineeringSouth Kensington Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Butnar:2020:1748-9326/ab5c3e,
author = {Butnar, I and Li, P-H and Strachan, N and Portugal, Pereira J and Gambhir, A and Smith, P},
doi = {1748-9326/ab5c3e},
journal = {Environmental Research Letters},
title = {A deep dive into the modelling assumptions for biomass with carbon capture and storage (BECCS): a transparency exercise},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab5c3e},
volume = {15},
year = {2020}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is envisaged as a critical element of most deep decarbonisation pathways compatible with the Paris Agreement. Such a transformational upscaling—to 3–7 Gt CO2/yr by 2050—requires an unprecedented technological, economic, socio-cultural and political effort, along with, crucially, transparent communication between all stakeholders. Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) that underpin the 1.5 °C scenarios assessed by IPCC have played a critical role in building and assessing deep decarbonisation narratives. However, their high-level aggregation and their complexity can cause them to be perceived as non-transparent by stakeholders outside of the IAM community. This paper bridges this gap by offering a comprehensive assessment of BECCS assumptions as used in IAMs so as to open them to a wider audience. We focus on key assumptions that underpin five aspects of BECCS: biomass availability, BECCS technologies, CO2 transport and storage infrastructure, BECCS costs, and wider system conditions which favour the deployment of BECCS. Through a structured review, we find that all IAMs communicate wider system assumptions and major cost assumptions transparently. This quality however fades as we dig deeper into modelling details. This is particularly true for sets of technological elements such as CO2 transport and storage infrastructure, for which we found the least transparent assumptions. We also found that IAMs are less transparent on the completeness of their treatment of the five BECCS aspects we investigated, and not transparent regarding the inclusion and treatment of socio-cultural and institutional-regulatory dimensions of feasibility which are key BECCS elements as suggested by the IPCC. We conclude with a practical discussion around ways of increasing IAM transparency as a bridge between this community and stakeholders from other disciplines, policy decision makers, financiers, and the public.
AU  - Butnar,I
AU  - Li,P-H
AU  - Strachan,N
AU  - Portugal,Pereira J
AU  - Gambhir,A
AU  - Smith,P
DO  - 1748-9326/ab5c3e
PY  - 2020///
SN  - 1748-9326
TI  - A deep dive into the modelling assumptions for biomass with carbon capture and storage (BECCS): a transparency exercise
T2  - Environmental Research Letters
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab5c3e
UR  - http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000552436300001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=1ba7043ffcc86c417c072aa74d649202
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/84812
VL  - 15
ER  -
Download