Thread by @Peters_Glen

The #IPCC 1.5°C Special Report #SR15 used four illustrative pathways that varied by BECCS.

They all have considerable land-use change: 1500 million hectares is 4.5 India's!

If they don't have large-scale BECCS, they have large-scale afforestation. Land impacts unavoidable.

1/

These are the four illustrative pathways. From left to right, they have more and more BECCS (yellow), though this does not correlate with land areas or impacts

From SPM ipcc.ch/sr15/

2/

The #IPCC Special Report on Climate Change & Land #SRCCL says that BECCS is bad at scale (red), while afforestation is good (blue) across all dimensions but food security

But, if "best practice" is used, the BECCS & afforestation seem to be a win-win-win-win. Hmmm...

3/

#SRCCL refers to the scale of BECCS that is bad as 11.3GtCO₂/yr in 2050, which is huge. Very few scenarios have that much BECCS in 2050, 10GtCO₂/yr would be ~10,000 plants at 1MtCO₂/yr by 2050 which is mind boggling.

Not sure why these scales are not linked to area?

4/

When looking at the land areas, bioenergy (of which BECCS is a part) uses quite some land, for scale, India is 330 million hectares.

Land areas for afforestation much larger to take up less carbon, but supposedly much less impact? Forests good, crops bad?

5/5