A shift in emission time profiles of fossil fuel combustion due to energy transitions impacts source receptor matrices for air quality.

Effective air pollution and short-lived climate forcer mitigation strategies can only be designed when the effect of emission reductions on pollutant concentrations and health and ecosystem impacts are quantified. Within integrated assessment modeling source-receptor relationships (SRRs) based on chemistry transport modeling are used to this end. Currently, these SRRs are made using invariant emission time profiles. The LOTOS-EUROS model equipped with a source attribution module was used to test this assumption for renewable energy scenarios. Renewable energy availability and thereby fossil fuel back up are strongly dependent on meteorological conditions. We have used the spatially and temporally explicit energy model REMix to derive time profiles for backup power generation. These time profiles were used in LOTOS-EUROS to investigate the effect of emission timing on air pollutant concentrations and SRRs. It is found that the effectiveness of emission reduction in the power sector is significantly lower when accounting for the shift in the way emissions are divided over the year and the correlation of emissions with synoptic situations. The source receptor relationships also changed significantly. This effect was found for both primary and secondary pollutants. Our results indicate that emission timing deserves explicit attention when assessing the impacts of system changes on air quality and climate forcing from short lived substances.

Setting priorities for land management to mitigate climate change.

BACKGROUND: No consensus has been reached how to measure the effectiveness of climate change mitigation in the land-use sector and how to prioritize land use accordingly. We used the long-term cumulative and average sectorial C stocks in biomass, soil and products, C stock changes, the substitution of fossil energy and of energy-intensive products, and net present value (NPV) as evaluation criteria for the effectiveness of a hectare of productive land to mitigate climate change and produce economic returns. We evaluated land management options using real-life data of Thuringia, a region representative for central-western European conditions, and input from life cycle assessment, with a carbon-tracking model. We focused on solid biomass use for energy production. RESULTS: In forestry, the traditional timber production was most economically viable and most climate-friendly due to an assumed recycling rate of 80% of wood products for bioenergy. Intensification towards "pure bioenergy production" would reduce the average sectorial C stocks and the C substitution and would turn NPV negative. In the forest conservation (non-use) option, the sectorial C stocks increased by 52% against timber production, which was not compensated by foregone wood products and C substitution. Among the cropland options wheat for food with straw use for energy, whole cereals for energy, and short rotation coppice for bioenergy the latter was most climate-friendly. However, specific subsidies or incentives for perennials would be needed to favour this option. CONCLUSIONS: When using the harvested products as materials prior to energy use there is no climate argument to support intensification by switching from sawn-wood timber production towards energy-wood in forestry systems. A legal framework would be needed to ensure that harvested products are first used for raw materials prior to energy use. Only an effective recycling of biomaterials frees land for long-term sustained C sequestration by conservation. Reuse cascades avoid additional emissions from shifting production or intensification.