Keith Kline

Mr. Keith Kline

Environmental Sciences, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Florida, USA
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2018 in Agricultural Systems
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DKDavid R. Kanter
David R. Kanter
MMMark Musumba
Mark Musumba
SWSylvia L.R. Wood
Sylvia L.R. Wood
CPCheryl Palm
Cheryl Palm
JAJohn Antle
John Antle
SASandy Andelman
Sandy Andelman

1 September 2011 in Ecological Indicators
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AMAllen C. McBride
Allen C. McBride
VDVirginia H. Dale
Virginia H. Dale
LBLatha M. Baskaran
Latha M. Baskaran
MDMark E. Downing
Mark E. Downing
LELaurence M. Eaton
Laurence M. Eaton
JSJohn M. Storey
John M. Storey

15 May 2011 in Landscape Ecology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
VDVirginia Dale
Virginia Dale
RERebecca A. Efroymson
Rebecca A. Efroymson
KKKeith Kline
Keith Kline

1 March 2013 in Ecological Indicators
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
VDVirginia H. Dale
Virginia H. Dale
RERebecca A. Efroymson
Rebecca A. Efroymson
KKKeith Kline
Keith Kline
MLMatthew Langholtz
Matthew Langholtz
PLPaul N. Leiby
Paul N. Leiby
Michael HilliardMichael Hilliard
Michael Hilliard

14 June 2016 in GCB Bioenergy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KKKeith Kline
Keith Kline
SMSiwa Msangi
Siwa Msangi
VDVirginia H. Dale
Virginia H. Dale
JWJeremy Woods
Jeremy Woods
GSGlaucia M. Souza
Glaucia M. Souza
HMHarriet K. Mugera
Harriet K. Mugera
Understanding the complex interactions among food security, bioenergy sustainability, and resource management requires a focus on specific contextual problems and opportunities. The United Nations’ 2030 Sustainable Development Goals place a high priority on food and energy security; bioenergy plays an important role in achieving both goals. Effective food security programs begin by clearly defining the problem and asking, ‘What can be done to assist people at high risk?’ Simplistic global analyses, headlines, and cartoons that blame biofuels for food insecurity may reflect good intentions but mislead the public and policymakers because they obscure the main drivers of local food insecurity and ignore opportunities for bioenergy to contribute to solutions. Applying sustainability guidelines to bioenergy will help achieve near‐ and long‐term goals to eradicate hunger. Priorities for achieving successful synergies between bioenergy and food security include the following: (1) clarifying communications with clear and consistent terms, (2) recognizing that food and bioenergy need not compete for land and, instead, should be integrated to improve resource management, (3) investing in technology, rural extension, and innovations to build capacity and infrastructure, (4) promoting stable prices that incentivize local production, (5) adopting flex crops that can provide food along with other products and services to society, and (6) engaging stakeholders to identify and assess specific opportunities for biofuels to improve food security. Systematic monitoring and analysis to support adaptive management and continual improvement are essential elements to build synergies and help society equitably meet growing demands for both food and energy.

7 May 2021 in GCB Bioenergy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ACAnnette Cowie
Annette Cowie
GBGöran Berndes
Göran Berndes
NBNiclas Scott Bentsen
Niclas Scott Bentsen
Miguel BrandãoMiguel Brandão
Miguel Brandão
FCFrancesco Cherubini
Francesco Cherubini
HJHm Junginger
Hm Junginger
The scientific literature contains contrasting findings about the climate effects of forest bioenergy, partly due to the wide diversity of bioenergy systems and associated contexts, but also due to differences in assessment methods. The climate effects of bioenergy must be accurately assessed to inform policy‐making, but the complexity of bioenergy systems and associated land, industry and energy systems raises challenges for assessment. We examine misconceptions about climate effects of forest bioenergy and discuss important considerations in assessing these effects and devising measures to incentivize sustainable bioenergy as a component of climate policy. The temporal and spatial system boundary and the reference (counterfactual) scenarios are key methodology choices that strongly influence results. Focussing on carbon balances of individual forest stands and comparing emissions at the point of combustion neglect system‐level interactions that influence the climate effects of forest bioenergy. We highlight the need for a systems approach, in assessing options and developing policy for forest bioenergy that: (1) considers the whole life cycle of bioenergy systems, including effects of the associated forest management and harvesting on landscape carbon balances; (2) identifies how forest bioenergy can best be deployed to support energy system transformation required to achieve climate goals; and (3) incentivizes those forest bioenergy systems that augment the mitigation value of the forest sector as a whole. Emphasis on short‐term emissions reduction targets can lead to decisions that make medium‐ to long‐term climate goals more difficult to achieve. The most important climate change mitigation measure is the transformation of energy, industry and transport systems so that fossil carbon remains underground. Narrow perspectives obscure the significant role that bioenergy can play by displacing fossil fuels now, and supporting energy system transition. Greater transparency and consistency is needed in greenhouse gas reporting and accounting related to bioenergy.