Well into the nineteenth century, biomass was a main source
of materials and energy in most countries. The rapid development
of petrochemistry in the twentieth century led to a
shift from biomass to fossil carbon (coal, oil, gas) as the major
source of fuels as well as of building blocks for the generation
of a wide variety of chemicals and materials. The worldwide
share of biomass in energy production is around 10% and
biomass still plays a significant role in some OECD countries,
such as Sweden and Austria. However, fossil carbon is currently
the dominant source of both energy and the materials
on which our society depend.
Climate change and resource constraints now force us to
reconsider the use of plant biomass as a source of materials
and fuels. However, it is well known that prior to the nineteenth
century, overuse of biomass led to deforestation, soil
degeneration, and desertification. In the early twenty-first
century, the world fed, clothed, and sheltered almost 7 billion
people instead of the 1 billion population at the start
of the nineteenth century, while increased wealth, changed
habits, and excessive consumption drastically increased the
per capita use of energy and materials. At the same time,
increasing droughts and changes in weather patterns linked
to climate change have reversed the decades-long trend of
increased global plant growth, according to a new analysis of
NASA satellite data (Zhao and Running, 2010); ocean acidification
threatens to destroy marine ecosystems providing food,
feed, and materials (Fabry et al., 2008); global biodiversity is
collapsing (Ehrlich and Pringle, 2008); and human appropriation
of net primary production (fraction of the net amount of
solar energy converted to plant organic matter through photosynthesis,
used or lost by human activity, HANPP) may have
already reached 50% (Erb et al., 2009). The inescapable conclusion
is that biomass is a limited resource that should be put
to the best (and most efficient) use possible.
Since mankind now depends on fossil fuels for 80–90%
of its energy demands and the present level of biomass use
is already critically high, biomass cannot provide more than
a few percent of present fuel consumption, especially if the
greenhouse gas balance and other unwanted side effects (soil
degradation, water use, eutrophication, loss of nature, loss of
jobs) are taken into account. It is evident that bioenergy will
not be a major solution to our energy and climate change predicament;
energy (carriers) for transport and heating will have
to come from other, non-biological, sources.
The story is different for carbon-based materials, because
most major polymers and chemicals depend on a source of
carbon. If fossil fuels are no longer available, affordable, or
their use politically acceptable, the chemical industry must
become based on heterogeneous biomass sources (agricultural
and forestry waste) or well-defined biomass fractions (sugars,
starch, cellulose, vegetable oils, etc.). The first option is complicated
by the necessity to maintain soil carbon content and
fertility, while the latter competes with the food market as it
Well into the nineteenth century, biomass was a main sourceof materials and energy in most countries. The rapid developmentof petrochemistry in the twentieth century led to ashift from biomass to fossil carbon (coal, oil, gas) as the majorsource of fuels as well as of building blocks for the generationof a wide variety of chemicals and materials. The worldwideshare of biomass in energy production is around 10% andbiomass still plays a significant role in some OECD countries,such as Sweden and Austria. However, fossil carbon is currentlythe dominant source of both energy and the materialson which our society depend.Climate change and resource constraints now force us toreconsider the use of plant biomass as a source of materialsand fuels. However, it is well known that prior to the nineteenthcentury, overuse of biomass led to deforestation, soildegeneration, and desertification. In the early twenty-firstcentury, the world fed, clothed, and sheltered almost 7 billionpeople instead of the 1 billion population at the startof the nineteenth century, while increased wealth, changedhabits, and excessive consumption drastically increased theper capita use of energy and materials. At the same time,increasing droughts and changes in weather patterns linkedto climate change have reversed the decades-long trend ofincreased global plant growth, according to a new analysis ofNASA satellite data (Zhao and Running, 2010); ocean acidificationthreatens to destroy marine ecosystems providing food,feed, and materials (Fabry et al., 2008); global biodiversity iscollapsing (Ehrlich and Pringle, 2008); and human appropriationof net primary production (fraction of the net amount ofsolar energy converted to plant organic matter through photosynthesis,used or lost by human activity, HANPP) may havealready reached 50% (Erb et al., 2009). The inescapable conclusionis that biomass is a limited resource that should be putto the best (and most efficient) use possible.Since mankind now depends on fossil fuels for 80–90%of its energy demands and the present level of biomass useis already critically high, biomass cannot provide more thana few percent of present fuel consumption, especially if thegreenhouse gas balance and other unwanted side effects (soildegradation, water use, eutrophication, loss of nature, loss ofjobs) are taken into account. It is evident that bioenergy willnot be a major solution to our energy and climate change predicament;energy (carriers) for transport and heating will haveto come from other, non-biological, sources.The story is different for carbon-based materials, becausemost major polymers and chemicals depend on a source ofcarbon. If fossil fuels are no longer available, affordable, ortheir use politically acceptable, the chemical industry mustbecome based on heterogeneous biomass sources (agriculturaland forestry waste) or well-defined biomass fractions (sugars,starch, cellulose, vegetable oils, etc.). The first option is complicatedby the necessity to maintain soil carbon content andfertility, while the latter competes with the food market as it
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..