Abstract
Biomass for bioenergy is debated for its potential synergies or tradeoffs with other provisioning and regulating ecosystem services (ESS). This biomass may originate from different production systems and may be purposefully grown or obtained from residues. Increased concerns globally about the sustainable production of biomass for bioenergy has resulted in numerous certification schemes focusing on best management practices, mostly operating at the plot/field scale. In this study, we compare the ESS of two watersheds in the southeastern US. We show the ESS tradeoffs and synergies of plantation forestry, i.e., pine poles, and agricultural production, i.e., wheat straw and corn stover, with the counterfactual natural or semi-natural forest in both watersheds. The plantation forestry showed less distinct tradeoffs than did corn and wheat production, i.e., for carbon storage, P and sediment retention, groundwater recharge, and biodiversity. Using indicators of landscape composition and configuration, we showed that landscape planning can affect the overall ESS supply and can partly determine if locally set environmental thresholds are being met. Indicators on landscape composition, configuration and naturalness explained more than 30% of the variation in ESS supply. Landscape elements such as largely connected forest patches or more complex agricultural patches, e.g., mosaics with shrub and grassland patches, may enhance ESS supply in both of the bioenergy production systems. If tradeoffs between biomass production and other ESS are not addressed by landscape planning, it may be reasonable to include rules in certification schemes that require, e.g., the connectivity of natural or semi-natural forest patches in plantation forestry or semi-natural landscape elements in agricultural production systems. Integrating indicators on landscape configuration and composition into certification schemes is particularly relevant considering that certification schemes are governance tools used to ensure comparable sustainability standards for biomass produced in countries with variable or absent legal frameworks for landscape planning.
Highlights
Research in the context of bioenergy and ecosystem services (ESS), the perceived human benefits from ecological systems [1], often focuses on largely debated 1st generation liquid biofuel feedstocks such as maize in the US, sugarcane or soybeans in Brazil, or rapeseed in Europe [2]
We focus on phosphorous (P) retention because (i) the nutrient retention efficiency is higher than that for nitrogen, (ii) agricultural sources are responsible for approximately 80% of the P input in the Gulf of Mexico, and (iii) P has been underestimated in its contribution to the eutrophication of the Gulf of Mexico for the Big Sunflower watershed region [46]
Groundwater recharge and sediment retention were mostly higher in the Big Sunflower watershed; c.f
Summary
Research in the context of bioenergy and ecosystem services (ESS), the perceived human benefits from ecological systems [1], often focuses on largely debated 1st generation liquid biofuel feedstocks such as maize in the US, sugarcane or soybeans in Brazil, or rapeseed in Europe [2]. Some papers address scenarios with a shift to 2nd generation liquid biofuel feedstocks, such as grasses or other perennial bioenergy feedstocks [3,4]. Research in this area only partly reflects the fact that only 3% of the global bioenergy supply was obtained from dedicated energy crops in 2008. With respect to modern solid bioenergy carriers, wood pellets have experienced an increased global trade volume, accounting for 120 PJ (*660 Mt) of the total global solid bioenergy carrier trade of 300 PJ (*1640 Mt) as of 2010 [6]. For trade between EU and non-EU countries in 2010, the wood pellet trade volume of 45 PJ (*250 Mt) is comparable to those of biodiesel and bioethanol [7]
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have