This appears to be the source: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2e35/pdf https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2e35/...

This appears to be the source: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2e35/pdf https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2e35/... Central claim: "Their revisions most profoundly reduce predicted land use change (LUC) emissions, for which they propose a central estimate that is roughly half the smallest comparable value they review (figure 1). This LUC estimate represents the midpoint of (a) values retained after filtering the predictions of past studies based on a set of unfounded criteria; and (b) a new estimate they generate for domestic (i.e. U.S.) LUC emissions. The filter the authors apply endorses a singular means of LUC assessment which they assert as the ‘best practice’ despite a recent unacknowledged review (Malins et al 2020 J. Clean. Prod. 258 120716) that shows this method almost certainly underestimates LUC. Moreover, their domestic C intensity estimate surprisingly suggests that cropland expansion newly sequesters soil C, counter to ecological theory and empirical evidence. These issues, among others, prove to grossly underestimate the C intensity of corn-grain ethanol and mischaracterize the state of our science at the risk of perversely affecting policy outcomes."