Integrated and spatially explicit assessment of sustainable crop residues potential in Europe

Scarlat, Nicolae; Fahl, Fernando; Lugato, Emanuele; Monforti-Ferrario, Fabio; Dallemand, J.F.

doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.01.021

Cited by 106 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results for crop residues are also well comparable to previous assessments on global and European/ EU scale: For the EU, they are in good agreement with Scarlat et al (2010). Compared to Scarlat et al (2019) on European scale and Daioglou et al (2016) on global scale, our low estimates appear quite conservative. Our conclusion is that BioBaM assumes higher shares of residues being used in the livestock sector, because our sustainable removal rate in the low estimate (40%) is not exceptionally conservative.…”

Section: Comparison With Bioenergy Potentials In Previous Studiessupporting

confidence: 87%

Greenhouse gas implications of mobilizing agricultural biomass for energy: a reassessment of global potentials in 2050 under different food-system pathways

Kalt

Lauk

Mayer

et al. 2020

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global bioenergy potentials have been the subject of extensive research and continued controversy. Due to vast uncertainties regarding future yields, diets and other influencing parameters, estimates of future agricultural biomass potentials vary widely. Most scenarios compatible with ambitious climate targets foresee a large expansion of bioenergy, mainly from energy crops that needs to be kept consistent with projections of agriculture and food production. Using the global biomass balance model BioBaM, we here present an assessment of agricultural bioenergy potentials compatible with the Food and Agriculture Organization's (2018) 'Alternative pathways to 2050' projections. Mobilizing biomass at larger scales may be associated with systemic feedbacks causing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, e.g. crop residue removal resulting in loss of soil carbon stocks and increased emissions from fertilization. To assess these effects, we derive 'GHG cost supply-curves', i.e. integrated representations of biomass potentials and their systemic GHG costs. Livestock manure is most favourable in terms of GHG costs, as anaerobic digestion yields reductions of GHG emissions from manure management. Global potentials from intensive livestock systems are about 5 EJ/yr. Crop residues can provide up to 20 EJ/yr at moderate GHG costs. For energy crops, we find that the medium range of literature estimates (∼40 to 90 EJ/yr) is only compatible with FAO yield and human diet projections if energy plantations expand into grazing areas (∼4-5 million km 2 ) and grazing land is intensified globally. Direct carbon stock changes associated with perennial energy crops are beneficial for climate mitigation, yet there are-sometimes considerable -'opportunity GHG costs' if one accounts the foregone opportunity of afforestation. Our results indicate that the large potentials of energy crops foreseen in many energy scenarios are not freely and unconditionally available. Disregarding systemic effects in agriculture can result in misjudgement of GHG saving potentials and flawed climate mitigation strategies. REN21 2019), have been the subject of extensive research (e.g. Fischer and Schrattenholzer

show abstract

Section: Comparison With Bioenergy Potentials In Previous Studiessupporting

confidence: 87%

Greenhouse gas implications of mobilizing agricultural biomass for energy: a reassessment of global potentials in 2050 under different food-system pathways

Kalt

Lauk

Mayer

et al. 2020

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, keeping excessive amounts can retard ratoon tillering in some specific regions [20], promote an ideal microclimate for pests and diseases development [7], and increase N 2 O emissions to the atmosphere [21]. Such a concern associated with the straw management challenges is not restricted to sugarcane straw in Brazil but is rather a subject of research emerging in other locations using corn stover in the USA [22] and wheat in Europe [23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can reduced tillage sustain sugarcane yield and soil carbon if straw is removed?

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Straw removal for bioelectricity, cellulosic ethanol, or other bio-products has become a common practice in Brazilian sugarcane areas, but long-term effects on soil organic carbon (SOC) and yield are unknown. Our objective was to quantify tillage intensity and removal levels on SOC stocks and sugarcane yield on contrasting edaphoclimatic conditions in Brazil. Conventional tillage-CT and reduced tillage-RT coupled with three straw removal levels (none-NR; moderate-MR; total-TR) were combined to create six treatment combinations: CTNR, CTMR, CTTR, RTNR, RTMR, and RTTR, respectively. Sugarcane yield was measured annually and soil samples to a depth of 40 cm were collected and analyzed before and after 5 years of treatments. Neither tillage practices nor straw removal significantly affected sugarcane yield on sandy loam soil, but CTMR, CTTR, and RTTR showed substantial yield reductions on clayey soil. SOC stocks for RTNR increased by as much as 1.64 Mg ha −1 year −1 on clayey soil, while CTMR and CTTR favored depletion of SOC stocks on both soils. Overall, each Mg of straw returned to the soil increased SOC stock by 95 kg ha −1 for clayey soil under both tillage practices and 55 kg ha −1 for sandy loam under the CT system. Furthermore, straw removal decreased microbial biomass C and b-glucosidase activity. These findings suggest that the adoption of RT attenuates the adverse impacts of straw removal on SOC stocks while ensuring sugarcane yields for a more sustainable bioenergy production in Brazil.

show abstract

“…Examining multiple studies (e.g. Weiser et al [26], Scarlat et al [27], Lindner et al [28]), it can be seen that the calculation of theoretical potential is methodologically consistent. Cereal production gures are multiplied by grain-straw ratios from the literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Temporal and Spatial Availability of Cereal Straw in Germany Case Study: Biomethane for the Transport Sector

Brosowski

Bill

Thrän

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract Background: By 2030, the transport sector needs to achieve additional greenhouse gas savings of 67 million tonnes CO2-eq. and further progress requires swiftly implementable solutions. The fermentation of cereal straw is a promising option. Returning the digestate to the farmland can close agricultural cycles while simultaneously producing biomethane. The world's first large-scale, mono-digestion plant for straw is operational since 2014. The temporal and spatial biomass availability is a key issue when replicating this concept. No detailed calculations on this subject are available, and the strategic relevance of biomethane from straw in the transport sector cannot be sufficiently evaluated. Methods: To assess the balance of straw supply and use, a total of 30 data sets are combined, taking into account the cultivation of the five most important cereal types and the straw required for ten animal species, two special crops and twelve industrial uses. The data are managed at district level and presented for the years 2010 to 2018. In combination with high-resolution geodata, the results are linked to actual arable fields, and the availability of straw throughout the country is evaluated using a GIS. Results: During the analysis period, the mobilisable technical biomass potential for future biomethane production is between 13.9–21.5 Tg fm a-1; this is up to 62 % higher than the previously known level. The annual potential fluctuates considerably due to weather anomalies. The all-time maximum in 2014 and the minimum for the last 26 years in 2018 are separated by just four years and a difference of 7.6 Tg fm. However, large parts of the potential are concentrated only in a few regions and biomethane from straw could provide up to 145 PJ of a low-emission fuel. This would be associated with a greenhouse gas mitigation of roughly twelve million tonnes CO2-eq., which corresponds to around one-sixth of the climate target for the entire sector. Conclusion: Despite the strong fluctuations, the potential is sufficient to supply numerous plants and to produce relevant quantities of biomethane even in weak years. To unlock the potential, the outcomes should be discussed further with stakeholders in the identified priority regions.

show abstract

Integrated and spatially explicit assessment of sustainable crop residues potential in Europe

Cited by 106 publications

References 34 publications

Greenhouse gas implications of mobilizing agricultural biomass for energy: a reassessment of global potentials in 2050 under different food-system pathways

Greenhouse gas implications of mobilizing agricultural biomass for energy: a reassessment of global potentials in 2050 under different food-system pathways

Can reduced tillage sustain sugarcane yield and soil carbon if straw is removed?

Temporal and Spatial Availability of Cereal Straw in Germany Case Study: Biomethane for the Transport Sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About