Identifying potential areas for biofuel production and evaluating the environmental effects: a case study of the<scp>J</scp>ames<scp>R</scp>iver<scp>B</scp>asin in the<scp>M</scp>idwestern<scp>U</scp>nited<scp>S</scp>tates

GCB Bioenergy - Tập 4 Số 6 - Trang 875-888 - 2012
Yiping Wu1, Shuguang Liu2,3, Zhengpeng Li1
1ASRC Research and Technology Solutions, U.S. Geological Survey-USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science-EROS Center, Sioux Falls, SD 57198, USA.
2Geographic Information Science Center of Excellence, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD 57007, USA
3U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center Sioux Falls SD 57198 USA

Tóm tắt

AbstractBiofuels are now an important resource in theUnitedStates because of theEnergyIndependence andSecurityAct of 2007. Both increased corn growth for ethanol production and perennial dedicated energy crop growth for cellulosic feedstocks are potential sources to meet the rising demand for biofuels. However, these measures may cause adverse environmental consequences that are not yet fully understood. This study 1) evaluates the long‐term impacts of increased frequency of corn in the crop rotation system on water quantity and quality as well as soil fertility in theJamesRiverBasin and 2) identifies potential grasslands for cultivating bioenergy crops (e.g. switchgrass), estimating the water quality impacts. We selected the soil and water assessment tool, a physically based multidisciplinary model, as the modeling approach to simulate a series of biofuel production scenarios involving crop rotation and land cover changes. The model simulations with different crop rotation scenarios indicate that decreases in water yield and soil nitrate nitrogen (NO3‐N) concentration along with an increase inNO3‐Nload to stream water could justify serious concerns regarding increased corn rotations in this basin. Simulations with land cover change scenarios helped us spatially classify the grasslands in terms of biomass productivity and nitrogen loads, and we further derived the relationship of biomass production targets and the resulting nitrogen loads against switchgrass planting acreages. The suggested economically efficient (planting acreage) and environmentally friendly (water quality) planting locations and acreages can be a valuable guide for cultivating switchgrass in this basin. This information, along with the projected environmental costs (i.e. reduced water yield and increased nitrogen load), can contribute to decision support tools for land managers to seek the sustainability of biofuel development in this region.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1002/hyp.6890

10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x

10.1016/S0022-1694(99)00139-0

10.13031/2013.34905

Beven KJ, 2001, Rainfall‐runoff Modelling

Bouraoui F, 2004, Workshop on Sustainable Catchment Management, 497

BransbyD(2008)Switchgrass profile. Bionergy Feedstock Information Network (BFIN) Oak Ridge National Laboratory Available at:https://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/switchgrass-profile.html(accessed 10 February 2012).

CEEIIBP NRC(2011)Renewable Fuel Standard: Potential Economic and Environmental Effects of U.S. Biofuel Policy.National Academy of Sciences. Available at:http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/materials-based-on-reports/reports-in-brief/Renewable-Fuel-Standard-Final.pdf(accessed 10 February 2012).

CWIBP, 2008, Water Implications of Biofuels Production in the United States. Committee on Water Implications of Biofuels Production in the United Sates, Water Science and Technology Board

10.13031/2013.34915

10.1029/91WR02985

Elbersen HW, 2001, Switchgrass (panicum virgatum l.) As An Alterative Energy Crop in Europe

10.13031/2013.23637

10.1016/j.envsoft.2007.06.002

10.13031/2013.20415

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.09.008

10.1111/j.1757-1707.2010.01041.x

10.2489/jswc.65.6.342

10.2134/jeq2003.2470

10.2135/cropsci2005.04-0003

10.13031/2013.30578

10.1023/B:EMAS.0000031715.83752.a1

10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.02.041

Monteith JL, 1965, In The state and movement of water in living organisms, XIXth Symposium, 205

10.13031/2013.23153

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.09.005

10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6

Neitsch SL, 2005, Soil and Water Assessment Tool Input/Output File Documentation

Neitsch SL, 2005, Soil and Water Assessment Tool Theoretical Documentation

10.1021/es9039677

10.1080/07352680500316433

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2001.tb03630.x

10.1029/2007WR006644

10.1073/pnas.0704767105

10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.08.047

SharpleyAN WilliamsJR(1990).U.S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service Tech. Bull. 1768.

Sheshuko A, 2009, Proceedings of the 5th International SWAT conference

10.2134/jeq2007.0599

10.13031/2013.34903

10.1016/j.biortech.2009.10.037

10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000095

10.1016/S0961-9534(98)00005-1

10.1007/s11269-010-9598-8

U.S. Congress(2007)Energy independence and security act of 2007. (HR 6. 110th Congress. 1st session. December 2007).

USDA‐NASS(2010). Available at:http://www.nass.usda.gov/research/Cropland/metadata/meta.htm(accessed 10 February 2012).

USDA‐NRCS, Cave‐in‐rock Switchgrass

USDA‐NRCS, Plant Materials Used for Biofuel

Vanloocke A, 2010, The impacts of miscanthus x giganteus production on the midwest us hydrologic cycle, Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 2, 180, 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2010.01053.x

WelchHL GreenCT BebichRA BarlowJRB HicksMB(2010)Unintended consequences of biofuels production: The effects of large‐scale crop conversion on water quality and quantity.U.S. Geological Survey Reston VA.

Williams JR, 1995, Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, 909

WilliamsJR WangE MeinardusA HarmanWL SiemersM AtwoodJD(2006)Epic user's guide (v. 0509)Available at: http://epicapex.brc.tamus.edu/media/23015/epic0509usermanualupdated.pdf (accessed 10 February 2012).

10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.01.030

10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.10.030

10.1002/hyp.7152

10.1111/j.1757-1707.2010.01046.x

10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02499.x

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

GCB Bioenergy

Tập 4 Số 6

875-888

Thông tin tác giả