Abstract:Bioenergy with carbon capture and geological storage (BECCS) is a top option to both decrease CO2 emissions and remove CO2 currently in the atmosphere. BECCS requires that we can sustainably produce biomass without impacting the capacity for food and feed production. We modeled yield potential on U.S. marginal land for three promising perennial biomass crops: Miscanthus, switchgrass, and energycane. Under current (2000–2014) and forecasted future (2036–2050) conditions we optimized the spatial distribution of these three crops for yield potential. The predicted biomasses from these crops on marginal land are estimated to offset about 11% of the current U.S. CO2 emissions. Bioenergy with carbon capture and geological storage (BECCS) is considered one of the top options for both offsetting CO2 emissions and removing atmospheric CO2. BECCS requires using limited land resources efficiently while ensuring minimal adverse impacts on the delicate food‐energy‐water nexus. Perennial C4 biomass crops are productive on marginal land under low‐input conditions avoiding conflict with food and feed crops. The eastern half of the contiguous U.S. contains a large amount of marginal land, which is not economically viable for food production and liable to wind and water erosion under annual cultivation. However, this land is suitable for geological CO2 storage and perennial crop growth. Given the climate variation across the region, three perennials are major contenders for planting. The yield potential and stability of Miscanthus, switchgrass, and energycane across the region were compared to select which would perform best under the recent (2000–2014) and future (2036–2050) climates. Miscanthus performed best in the Midwest, switchgrass in the Northeast and energycane in the Southeast. On average, Miscanthus yield decreased from present 19.1 t/ha to future 16.8 t/ha; switchgrass yield from 3.5 to 2.4 t/ha; and energycane yield increased from 14 to 15 t/ha. Future yield stability decreased in the region with higher predicted drought stress. Combined, these crops could produce 0.6–0.62 billion tonnes biomass per year for the present and future. Using the biomass for power generation with CCS would capture 703–726 million tonnes of atmospheric CO2 per year, which would offset about 11% of current total U.S. emission. Further, this biomass approximates the net primary CO2 productivity of two times the current baseline productivity of existing vegetation, suggesting a huge potential for BECCS. Beyond BECCS, C4 perennial grasses could also increase soil carbon and provide biomass for emerging industries developing replacements for non‐renewable products including plastics and building materials.

Decarbonising Industry via BECCS: Promising Sectors, Challenges, and Techno-economic Limits of Negative Emissions

Which bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) pathways can provide net-negative emissions?

Can bioenergy with carbon capture and storage deliver negative emissions? A critical review of life cycle assessment

Net-negative emission opportunities for the iron and steel industry on a global scale

Bioenergy with carbon capture, storage and utilization: Potential technologies to mitigate climate change

Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS): Viability and Potential

Carbon dioxide removal potential from decentralised bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and the relevance of operational choices

Review of carbon capture and storage technologies in selected industries: potentials and challenges

Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in Brazil: A Review

A Review of Influencing Factors for Policy Interventions in the Deployment of Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage

Energetic, Exergetic, and Techno-Economic Analysis of A Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Utilization Process via Integrated Torrefaction–CLC–Methanation

The role of BECCS technology in achieving carbon neutrality: evidences from China' coal power sector

Achieving Carbon-Neutral Iron and Steelmaking in Europe Through the Deployment of Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage

Double Yields and Negative Emissions? Resource, Climate and Cost Efficiencies in Biofuels With Carbon Capture, Storage and Utilization

Technoeconomic Analysis of Negative Emissions Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage through Pyrolysis and Bioenergy District Heating Infrastructure

Negative emission power plants: Techno-economic analysis of a biomass-based integrated gasification solid oxide fuel cell/gas turbine system for power, heat, and biochar co-production—part 2

A bottom-up regional potential assessment of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage in Germany

Energy and Co2 Emission Analysis of a Bio-Energy with Ccs System: Biomass Gasification-Solid Oxide Fuel Cell-Mini Gas Turbine-Co2 Capture

Negative emission potential from biomass/waste combined heat and power plants integrated with CO 2 capture: an approach from the national perspective

Biomass yield potential on U.S. marginal land and its contribution to reach net‐zero emission

Global implications of crop‐based bioenergy with carbon capture and storage for terrestrial vertebrate biodiversity