it is feasible, strategies can be aimed at win–win–win measures to pursue simultaneously adaptation, mitigation and basic development goals (Suckall et al. 2015).
In terms of climate change mitigation, many studies have noted the high GHG
emission savings potential of some bioenergy pathways (Chum et al. 2011; Popp
et al. 2011; Albanito et al. 2016). However, the estimated GHG emissions savings
can vary widely between different bioenergy pathways due to factors as diverse as
the feedstock, mode of production, end use and the different policies and practices
governing bioenergy production, use and trade (Smith et al. 2014; Creutzig et al.
2015; Hurlbert et al. 2019). Modern bioenergy transitions can have substantial
mitigation benefits if they succeed in curbing the use of traditional biomass fuels
such as charcoal, considering the high GHG emissions associated with their production and use (Sect. 2.2).
However, as SSA countries are generally not expected to contribute to large-scale
climate change mitigation efforts due to their low overall GHG emissions (Chap. 1
Vol. 1), the main challenge for sustainable bioenergy transitions is how to phase out
traditional biomass (and/or use it more effectively and efficiently), rather than
maximise emission reductions (Smeets et al. 2012; Karlberg et al. 2015). There are
nevertheless many opportunities to achieve large-scale climate change mitigation
from bioenergy pathways in SSA, particularly in some agro-industries such as
sugarcane where agricultural residues are readily available (Batidzirai and Johnson
2012; da Maia 2018). In this sense, climate change mitigation from bioenergy
transitions in SSA could be a valuable co-benefit to attract climate funding to assist
the transitions themselves (Lee and Lazarus 2013).
Conversely, the links between climate change adaptation and bioenergy transitions can be less obvious and indirect in SSA. Below we attempt to outline some key,
but rather underappreciated, aspects at the interface of modern bioenergy transitions
and climate change adaptation in SSA. In particular, we focus on the (a) mechanisms
linking bioenergy transitions and climate change adaptation and the (b) possible
measures for addressing the adaptation of the bioenergy sector.
One of the most important mechanisms linking modern bioenergy transitions and
climate change adaptation is the reduced reliance on climate-induced fuel scarcity.
Many rural communities in SSA are highly vulnerable to climate change (especially
precipitation changes), as it affects vegetation growth patterns, and thus agricultural
productivity and woody biomass availability (Chaps. 1 and 9 Vol. 1; Chap. 2 Vol. 2).
In this respect, as such climatic factors affect rural livelihoods and contribute to
fuelwood scarcity (Karlberg et al. 2015), then a decreased reliance on traditional
biomass fuels through improved energy access could have substantial adaptation
benefits (Lambe and Johnson 2009). Another mechanism relates to the reduced
reliance on centralised energy systems that are vulnerable and/or prone to disruption.
For example, locally available small-scale renewable energy systems (Type 1 systems, Fig. 2.1) could reduce such dependencies, while also offering useful synergies
between adaptation and development (Venema and Rehman 2007; Batidzirai and
Johnson 2012; Gasparatos et al. 2015).
However, using the same logic as above it is also important to keep in mind that
the bioenergy sector is vulnerable to climate change. This because most bioenergy
66
F. X. Johnson et al.
In terms of climate change mitigation, many studies have noted the high GHG
emission savings potential of some bioenergy pathways (Chum et al. 2011; Popp
et al. 2011; Albanito et al. 2016). However, the estimated GHG emissions savings
can vary widely between different bioenergy pathways due to factors as diverse as
the feedstock, mode of production, end use and the different policies and practices
governing bioenergy production, use and trade (Smith et al. 2014; Creutzig et al.
2015; Hurlbert et al. 2019). Modern bioenergy transitions can have substantial
mitigation benefits if they succeed in curbing the use of traditional biomass fuels
such as charcoal, considering the high GHG emissions associated with their production and use (Sect. 2.2).
However, as SSA countries are generally not expected to contribute to large-scale
climate change mitigation efforts due to their low overall GHG emissions (Chap. 1
Vol. 1), the main challenge for sustainable bioenergy transitions is how to phase out
traditional biomass (and/or use it more effectively and efficiently), rather than
maximise emission reductions (Smeets et al. 2012; Karlberg et al. 2015). There are
nevertheless many opportunities to achieve large-scale climate change mitigation
from bioenergy pathways in SSA, particularly in some agro-industries such as
sugarcane where agricultural residues are readily available (Batidzirai and Johnson
2012; da Maia 2018). In this sense, climate change mitigation from bioenergy
transitions in SSA could be a valuable co-benefit to attract climate funding to assist
the transitions themselves (Lee and Lazarus 2013).
Conversely, the links between climate change adaptation and bioenergy transitions can be less obvious and indirect in SSA. Below we attempt to outline some key,
but rather underappreciated, aspects at the interface of modern bioenergy transitions
and climate change adaptation in SSA. In particular, we focus on the (a) mechanisms
linking bioenergy transitions and climate change adaptation and the (b) possible
measures for addressing the adaptation of the bioenergy sector.
One of the most important mechanisms linking modern bioenergy transitions and
climate change adaptation is the reduced reliance on climate-induced fuel scarcity.
Many rural communities in SSA are highly vulnerable to climate change (especially
precipitation changes), as it affects vegetation growth patterns, and thus agricultural
productivity and woody biomass availability (Chaps. 1 and 9 Vol. 1; Chap. 2 Vol. 2).
In this respect, as such climatic factors affect rural livelihoods and contribute to
fuelwood scarcity (Karlberg et al. 2015), then a decreased reliance on traditional
biomass fuels through improved energy access could have substantial adaptation
benefits (Lambe and Johnson 2009). Another mechanism relates to the reduced
reliance on centralised energy systems that are vulnerable and/or prone to disruption.
For example, locally available small-scale renewable energy systems (Type 1 systems, Fig. 2.1) could reduce such dependencies, while also offering useful synergies
between adaptation and development (Venema and Rehman 2007; Batidzirai and
Johnson 2012; Gasparatos et al. 2015).
However, using the same logic as above it is also important to keep in mind that
the bioenergy sector is vulnerable to climate change. This because most bioenergy
66
F. X. Johnson et al.