Bioenergy crops,biodiversity and ecosystem services in temperate agricultural landscapes—A review of synergies and trade-offs

The Paris agreement on climate change requires rapid reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. One important mitigation strategy, at least in the intermediate future, is the substitution of fossil fuels with bioenergy. However, using agriculture- and forest-derived biomass for energy has sparked controversy regarding both the climate mitigation potential and conflicts with biodiversity conservation. The urgency of the climate crisis calls for using forests for carbon sequestration and storage rather than for bioenergy, making agricultural biomass an attractive alternative for fossil energy substitution. However, this calls for comprehensive assessments of its sustainability in terms of consequences for biodiversity and ecosystem services. In this review, we provide a first holistic overview of the impacts on ecosystems of land-use changes from bioenergy crop production in temperate climates, by synthesizing results on both biodiversity and ecosystem service impacts. We found that bioenergy-related land-use changes can have both positive and negative effects on ecosystems, with original land use, bioenergy crop type and scale of bioenergy production being important moderators of impacts. Despite the risk of opportunity cost for food production, perennial crop cultivation on arable land had the lowest occurrence of negative impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Growing biomass for bioenergy on surplus land has been suggested as a way to alleviate competition with food production and biodiversity conservation, but our results demonstrate that utilizing marginal or abandoned land for bioenergy crop production cannot fully resolve these trade-offs. Furthermore, there is a lack of empirical studies of the biodiversity value of marginal and abandoned land, limiting our understanding of the sustainability implications of biomass cultivation on surplus land. We argue that future research and policies for bioenergy production must explicitly consider biodiversity and ecosystem services in combination to avoid potential trade-offs between the two and to ensure sustainable bioenergy production.     

Predicted avian responses to bioenergy development scenarios in an intensive agricultural landscape

Conversion of native prairie to agriculture has increased food and bioenergy production but decreased wildlife habitat. However, enrollment of highly erodible cropland in conservation programs has compensated for some grassland loss. In the future, climate change and production of second-generation perennial biofuel crops could further transform agricultural landscapes and increase or decrease grassland area. Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) is an alternative biofuel feedstock that may be economically and environmentally superior to maize (Zea mays) grain for ethanol production on marginally productive lands. Switchgrass could benefit farmers economically and increase grassland area, but there is uncertainty as to how conversions between rowcrops, switchgrass monocultures and conservation grasslands might occur and affect wildlife. To explore potential impacts on grassland birds, we developed four agricultural land-use change scenarios for an intensively cultivated landscape, each driven by potential future climatic changes and ensuing irrigation limitations, ethanol demand, commodity prices, and continuation of a conservation program. For each scenario, we calculated changes in area for landcover classes and predicted changes in grassland bird abundances. Overall, birds responded positively to the replacement of rowcrops with switchgrass and negatively to the conversion of conservation grasslands to switchgrass or rowcrops. Landscape context and interactions between climate, crop water use, and irrigation availability could influence future land-use, and subsequently, avian habitat quality and quantity. Switchgrass is likely to provide higher quality avian habitat than rowcrops but lower quality habitat than conservation grasslands, and therefore, may most benefit birds in heavily cultivated, irrigation dependent landscapes under warmer and drier conditions, where economic profitability may also encourage conversions to drought tolerant bioenergy feedstocks.     

The impact of biomass crop cultivation on temperate biodiversity

The urgency for mitigation actions in response to climate change has stimulated policy makers to encourage the rapid expansion of bioenergy, resulting in major land‐use changes over short timescales. Despite the potential impacts on biodiversity and the environment, scientific concerns about large‐scale bioenergy production have only recently been given adequate attention. Environmental standards or legislative provisions in the majority of countries are still lagging behind the rapid development of energy crops. Ranging from the field to the regional scale, this review (i) summarizes the current knowledge about the impact of biomass crops on biodiversity in temperate regions, (ii) identifies knowledge gaps and (iii) drafts guidelines for a sustainable biomass crop production with respect to biodiversity conservation. The majority of studies report positive effects on biodiversity at the field scale but impacts strongly depend on the management, age, size and heterogeneity of the biomass plantations. At the regional scale, significant uncertainties exist and there is a major concern that extensive commercial production could have negative effects on biodiversity, in particular in areas of high nature‐conservation value. However, integration of biomass crops into agricultural landscapes could stimulate rural economy, thus counteracting negative impacts of farm abandonment or supporting restoration of degraded land, resulting in improved biodiversity values. Given the extent of landconversion necessary to reach the bioenergy targets, the spatial layout and distribution of biomass plantations will determine impacts. To ensure sustainable biomass crop production, biodiversity would therefore have to become an essential part of risk assessment measures in all those countries which have not yet committed to making it an obligatory part of strategic landscape planning. Integrated environmental and economic research is necessary to formulate standards that help support long‐term economic and ecological sustainability of biomass production and avoid costly mistakes in our attempts to mitigate climate change.     

How much heat can we grow in our cities? Modelling UK urban biofuel production potential

Biofuel provides a globally significant opportunity to reduce fossil fuel dependence; however, its sustainability can only be meaningfully explored for individual cases. It depends on multiple considerations including: life cycle greenhouse gas emissions, air quality impacts, food versus fuel trade‐offs, biodiversity impacts of land use change and socio‐economic impacts of energy transitions. One solution that may address many of these issues is local production of biofuel on non‐agricultural land. Urban areas drive global change, for example, they are responsible for 70% of global energy use, but are largely ignored in their resource production potential; however, underused urban greenspaces could be utilized for biofuel production near the point of consumption. This could avoid food versus fuel land conflicts in agricultural land and long‐distance transport costs, provide ecosystem service benefits to urban dwellers and increase the sustainability and resilience of cities and towns. Here, we use a Geographic Information System to identify urban greenspaces suitable for biofuel production, using exclusion criteria, in 10 UK cities. We then model production potential of three different biofuels: Miscanthus grass, short rotation coppice (SRC) willow and SRC poplar, within the greenspaces identified and extrapolate up to a UK‐scale. We demonstrate that approximately 10% of urban greenspace (3% of built‐up land) is potentially suitable for biofuel production. We estimate the potential of this to meet energy demand through heat generation, electricity and combined heat and power (CHP) operations. Our findings show that, if fully utilized, urban biofuel production could meet nearly a fifth of demand for biomass in CHP systems in the United Kingdom's climate compatible energy scenarios by 2030, with potentially similar implications for other comparable countries and regions.     

Bioenergy production and forest landscape change in the southeastern United States

Production of woody biomass for bioenergy, whether wood pellets or liquid biofuels, has the potential to cause substantial landscape change and concomitant effects on forest ecosystems, but the landscape effects of alternative production scenarios have not been fully assessed. We simulated landscape change from 2010 to 2050 under five scenarios of woody biomass production for wood pellets and liquid biofuels in North Carolina, in the southeastern United States, a region that is a substantial producer of wood biomass for bioenergy and contains high biodiversity. Modeled scenarios varied biomass feedstocks, incorporating harvest of ‘conventional’ forests, which include naturally regenerating as well as planted forests that exist on the landscape even without bioenergy production, as well as purpose‐grown woody crops grown on marginal lands. Results reveal trade‐offs among scenarios in terms of overall forest area and the characteristics of the remaining forest in 2050. Meeting demand for biomass from conventional forests resulted in more total forest land compared with a baseline, business‐as‐usual scenario. However, the remaining forest was composed of more intensively managed forest and less of the bottomland hardwood and longleaf pine habitats that support biodiversity. Converting marginal forest to purpose‐grown crops reduced forest area, but the remaining forest contained more of the critical habitats for biodiversity. Conversion of marginal agricultural lands to purpose‐grown crops resulted in smaller differences from the baseline scenario in terms of forest area and the characteristics of remaining forest habitats. Each scenario affected the dominant type of land‐use change in some regions, especially in the coastal plain that harbors high levels of biodiversity. Our results demonstrate the complex landscape effects of alternative bioenergy scenarios, highlight that the regions most likely to be affected by bioenergy production are also critical for biodiversity, and point to the challenges associated with evaluating bioenergy sustainability.     

Projected gains and losses of wildlife habitat from bioenergy‐induced landscape change

Domestic and foreign renewable energy targets and financial incentives have increased demand for woody biomass and bioenergy in the southeastern United States. This demand is expected to be met through purpose‐grown agricultural bioenergy crops, short‐rotation tree plantations, thinning and harvest of planted and natural forests, and forest harvest residues. With results from a forest economics model, spatially explicit state‐and‐transition simulation models, and species–habitat models, we projected change in habitat amount for 16 wildlife species caused by meeting a renewable fuel target and expected demand for wood pellets in North Carolina, USA. We projected changes over 40 years under a baseline ‘business‐as‐usual’ scenario without bioenergy production and five scenarios with unique feedstock portfolios. Bioenergy demand had potential to influence trends in habitat availability for some species in our study area. We found variation in impacts among species, and no scenario was the ‘best’ or ‘worst’ across all species. Our models projected that shrub‐associated species would gain habitat under some scenarios because of increases in the amount of regenerating forests on the landscape, while species restricted to mature forests would lose habitat. Some forest species could also lose habitat from the conversion of forests on marginal soils to purpose‐grown feedstocks. The conversion of agricultural lands on marginal soils to purpose‐grown feedstocks increased habitat losses for one species with strong associations with pasture, which is being lost to urbanization in our study region. Our results indicate that landscape‐scale impacts on wildlife habitat will vary among species and depend upon the bioenergy feedstock portfolio. Therefore, decisions about bioenergy and wildlife will likely involve trade‐offs among wildlife species, and the choice of focal species is likely to affect the results of landscape‐scale assessments. We offer general principals to consider when crafting lists of focal species for bioenergy impact assessments at the landscape scale.     

Comparing Bioenergy Production Sites in the Southeastern US Regarding Ecosystem Service Supply and Demand

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.     

Assessing the Ecological Impacts of Bioenergy Projects

One of the major objectives of the current expansion in bioenergy cropping is to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions for environmental benefit. The cultivation of bioenergy and biofuel crops also affects biodiversity more directly, both positively and negatively. Ecological impact assessment methods for bioenergy projects (including changes to policy and land use) should address not simply changes to species abundance at field level, but include larger scale issues, including changes to landscape diversity, potential impacts to primary and secondary habitats and potential impacts on climate change. Such assessments require a correspondingly broad range of scientific methods, including modelling of climate and land use as well as the observation of biodiversity and landscape indicators. It is also possible to adopt evidence-based guidelines for good practice for situations where comprehensive assessments are not available. These might include favouring projects and policies that avoid gene flow to wild relatives of crops in centres of diversity, that do not result in invasion by the crop into other habitats, that enhance field-scale biodiversity, that increase landscape diversity, that do not threaten valued habitats within the local landscape, that promote the sustainable management of biodiverse habitats, that do not increase the risk of loss of primary habitats and that result in a proportionately large reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.     

Dedicated biomass crops can enhance biodiversity in the arable landscape

Suggestions that novel, non‐food, dedicated biomass crops used to produce bioenergy may provide opportunities to diversify and reinstate biodiversity in intensively managed farmland have not yet been fully tested at the landscape scale. Using two of the largest, currently available landscape‐scale biodiversity data sets from arable and biomass bioenergy crops, we take a taxonomic and functional trait approach to quantify and contrast the consequences for biodiversity indicators of adopting dedicated biomass crops on land previously cultivated under annual, rotational arable cropping. The abundance and community compositions of biodiversity indicators in fields of break and cereal crops changed when planted with the dedicated biomass crops, miscanthus and short rotation coppiced (SRC) willow. Weed biomass was consistently greater in the two dedicated biomass crops than in cereals, and invertebrate abundance was similarly consistently higher than in break crops. Using canonical variates analysis, we identified distinct plant and invertebrate taxa and trait‐based communities in miscanthus and SRC willows, whereas break and cereal crops tended to form a single, composite community. Seedbanks were shown to reflect the longer term effects of crop management. Our study suggests that miscanthus and SRC willows, and the management associated with perennial cropping, would support significant amounts of biodiversity when compared with annual arable crops. We recommend the strategic planting of these perennial, dedicated biomass crops in arable farmland to increase landscape heterogeneity and enhance ecosystem function, and simultaneously work towards striking a balance between energy and food security.     

Valuation of ecosystem services in alternative bioenergy landscape scenarios

Agricultural land in the Midwest is a source of food and fuel, as well as biodiversity. It is also a cause of excess nutrients that make their way to the Mississippi River and the Gulf of Mexico. To address unsustainable changes to biogeochemical cycles and ecosystem functions, a multidisciplinary approach involving social science, natural science, and engineering is often effective. Given the potential of second‐generation biofuels, and capitalizing on the deep‐rooted perennial bioenergy crops capable of thriving in poor soils, we demonstrated an integrated socio‐environmental analysis of the impacts of growing switchgrass within row‐crop landscapes in Illinois. In this study, we model land use scenarios that incorporate switchgrass as a biofuel crop in a Midwest corn‐belt watershed using the Soil Water Assessment Tool coupled with an economic analysis for the Vermilion Basin in Illinois. We estimated the values of ecosystem services under an alternative bioenergy landscape, including commodity and bioenergy crops, changes in biogeochemistry, and recreational services. The estimated annual values of nitrate and sediment reduction attributed to bioenergy crops range from $38 million to $97 million and $16,000 to $197,000, respectively. The annual value of carbon dioxide emission reduction ranges from $1.8 million to $6.1 million based on the initial crop rotation pattern. Estimated average annual values for wildlife viewing, water‐based recreation, and pheasant hunting are $1.24 million, $0.17 million, and $0.3 million, respectively. To our knowledge, this study represents the first effort to comprehensively quantify ecosystem services using a process‐based model, and estimate their value in an alternative bioenergy landscape. The information we generate could aid in understanding the potential for biomass production from marginal land and the total economic value of the landscape at various spatial scales. The framework is useful in fostering alternative bioenergy landscapes with synergies in a food, energy, and conservation nexus.     

Multiple ecosystem service synergies and landscape mediation of biodiversity within urban agroecosystems

Ecosystem services (ESs) are essential for human well-being, especially in urban areas where 60% of the global population will live by 2030. While urban habitats have the potential to support biodiversity and ES, few studies have quantified the impact of local and landscape management across a diverse suite of services. We leverage 5 years of data (>5000 observations) across a network of urban community gardens to determine the drivers of biodiversity and ES trade-offs and synergies. We found multiple synergies and few trade-offs, contrasting previous assumptions that food production is at odds with biodiversity. Furthermore, we show that natural landscape cover interacts with local management to mediate services provided by mobile animals, specifically pest control and pollination. By quantifying the factors that support a diverse suite of ES, we highlight the critical role of garden management and urban planning for optimizing biodiversity and human benefit.     

Assessing Environmental Impacts of Short Rotation Coppice (SRC) Expansion: Model Definition and Preliminary Results

Short rotation coppice (SRC) systems can play a role as feedstock for bioenergy supply contributing to EU energy and climate policy targets. A scenario depicting intensive arable crop cultivation in a homogeneous landscape (lacking habitat structures) was compared to a scenario including SRC cultivation on 20 % of arable land. A range of indicators was selected to assess the consequences of SRC on soil, water and biodiversity, using data from the Rating-SRC project (Sweden and Germany). The results of the assessment were presented using spider diagrams. Establishment and use of SRC for bioenergy has both positive and negative effects. The former include increased carbon sequestration and reduced GHG emissions as well as reduced soil erosion, groundwater nitrate and surface runoff. SRC can be used in phytoremediation and improves plant and breeding bird biodiversity (exceptions: grassland and arable land species) but should not be applied in dry areas or on soils high in toxic trace elements (exception: cadmium). The scenario-based analysis was found useful for studying the consequences of SRC cultivation at larger scales. Limitations of the approach are related to data requirements and compatibility and its restricted ability to cover spatial diversity and dynamic processes. The findings should not be generalised beyond the representativeness of the data used.     

The potential impact of second‐generation biofuel landscapes on at‐risk species in the US

The recent increase in corn ethanol production has drawn attention to the environmental sustainability of biofuel production. Environmental assessments of second‐generation biofuel crops (SGBC) have focused primarily on greenhouse gas emissions and water quality. However, expanding the production of cellulosic biomass resources, especially those that require dedicated agricultural land, is also likely to have impacts on biodiversity. We developed an optimization framework for projecting the spatial pattern of SGBC expansion in the United States and intersected these predictions with occurrence data for at‐risk species. In particular, we focused on two candidate perennial grass feedstocks, Panicum virgatum (switchgrass), and Miscanthus × giganteus (Miscanthus). Tradeoffs between biodiversity and economic profitability are assessed using county level data sets of SGBC yield, agricultural land availability, land rents, and at‐risk species occurrences. Results show that future SGBC expansion is likely to occur outside of the Corn Belt, where conventional biofuel feedstocks are currently grown. The set of at‐risk species that could potentially be impacted is therefore likely to be different from the at‐risk species prevalent in the agroecological landscapes of the Upper Midwest that are dominated by corn and soy production. The total number and type of potentially impacted taxa is influenced by several factors, including the total demand for cellulosic biomass, the type of agricultural land used for production, and the method for defining at‐risk species. SGBC production is also concentrated in fewer counties when a national species conservation constraint is combined with a biofuel production mandate. This analysis provides a foundation for future research on species conservation in bioenergy production landscapes and highlights the importance of incorporating biodiversity into broader environmental assessments of biofuel sustainability.     

Spatial assessment of ecosystem goods and services in complex production landscapes: A case study from south-eastern Australia

Many production landscapes are complex human-environment systems operating at various spatio-temporal scales and provide a variety of ecosystem goods and services (EGS) vital to human well-being. EGS change over space and time as a result of changing patterns of land use or changes in the composition and structure of different vegetation types. Spatio-temporal assessment of EGS can provide valuable information on the consequences of changing land use and land cover for EGS and helps to deal with this complexity. We carried out a quantitative and qualitative appraisal of selected EGS (timber production, carbon stock, provision of water, water regulation, biodiversity, and forage production) to understand how these have altered in a complex mosaic of landscape that has undergone significant change over the past 200 years.Land use and land cover types and their associated EGS were assessed and mapped using a wide range of readily available data and tools. We also evaluated the trade-offs among services associated with observed land use change. In contrast to work elsewhere, we found the recent changes in land use and land cover have an overall positive impact on various EGS due mainly to the conversion of pasture to managed plantations which are connected to the larger areas of remnant vegetation. Results also indicate that there was a high level of variation in the distribution of the EGS across the landscape. Relatively intact native vegetation provides mainly regulating services whereas the modified landscapes provides provisioning services such as timber and forage production at the cost of regulating services. Rapidly changing demand and supply of certain goods and services (e.g., timber, pulp or carbon) may also have positive and negative impact on other services. For example, increasing plantation rotation has positive impacts for biodiversity and carbon stock but reduces stream flow and water yield.     

Global change synergies and trade‐offs between renewable energy and biodiversity

Reliance on fossil fuels is causing unprecedented climate change and is accelerating environmental degradation and global biodiversity loss. Together, climate change and biodiversity loss, if not averted urgently, may inflict severe damage on ecosystem processes, functions and services that support the welfare of modern societies. Increasing renewable energy deployment and expanding the current protected area network represent key solutions to these challenges, but conflicts may arise over the use of limited land for energy production as opposed to biodiversity conservation. Here, we compare recently identified core areas for the expansion of the global protected area network with the renewable energy potential available from land‐based solar photovoltaic, wind energy and bioenergy (in the form of Miscanthus × giganteus). We show that these energy sources have very different biodiversity impacts and net energy contributions. The extent of risks and opportunities deriving from renewable energy development is highly dependent on the type of renewable source harvested, the restrictions imposed on energy harvest and the region considered, with Central America appearing at particularly high potential risk from renewable energy expansion. Without restrictions on power generation due to factors such as production and transport costs, we show that bioenergy production is a major potential threat to biodiversity, while the potential impact of wind and solar appears smaller than that of bioenergy. However, these differences become reduced when energy potential is restricted by external factors including local energy demand. Overall, we found that areas of opportunity for developing solar and wind energy with little harm to biodiversity could exist in several regions of the world, with the magnitude of potential impact being particularly dependent on restrictions imposed by local energy demand. The evidence provided here helps guide sustainable development of renewable energy and contributes to the targeting of global efforts in climate mitigation and biodiversity conservation.     

Bioenergy production potential of global biomass plantations under environmental and agricultural constraints

We estimate the global bioenergy potential from dedicated biomass plantations in the 21st century under a range of sustainability requirements to safeguard food production, biodiversity and terrestrial carbon storage. We use a process‐based model of the land biosphere to simulate rainfed and irrigated biomass yields driven by data from different climate models and combine these simulations with a scenario‐based assessment of future land availability for energy crops. The resulting spatial patterns of large‐scale lignocellulosic energy crop cultivation are then investigated with regard to their impacts on land and water resources. Calculated bioenergy potentials are in the lower range of previous assessments but the combination of all biomass sources may still provide between 130 and 270 EJ yr^?1 in 2050, equivalent to 15–25% of the World's future energy demand. Energy crops account for 20–60% of the total potential depending on land availability and share of irrigated area. However, a full exploitation of these potentials will further increase the pressure on natural ecosystems with a doubling of current land use change and irrigation water demand. Despite the consideration of sustainability constraints on future agricultural expansion the large‐scale cultivation of energy crops is a threat to many areas that have already been fragmented and degraded, are rich in biodiversity and provide habitat for many endangered and endemic species.     

Environmental impacts of bioenergy wood production from poplar short‐rotation coppice grown at a marginal agricultural site in Germany

For avoiding competition with food production, marginal land is economically and environmentally highly attractive for biomass production with short‐rotation coppices (SRCs) of fast‐growing tree species such as poplars. Herein, we evaluated the environmental impacts of technological, agronomic, and environmental aspects of bioenergy production from hybrid poplar SRC cultivation on marginal land in southern Germany. For this purpose, different management regimes were considered within a 21‐year lifetime (combining measurements and modeling approaches) by means of a holistic Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). We analyzed two coppicing rotation lengths (7 × 3 and 3 × 7 years) and seven nitrogen fertilization rates and included all processes starting from site preparation, planting and coppicing, wood chipping, and heat production up to final stump removal. The 7‐year rotation cycles clearly resulted in higher biomass yields and reduced environmental impacts such as nitrate (NO₃) leaching and soil nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions. Fertilization rates were positively related to enhanced biomass accumulation, but these benefits did not counterbalance the negative impacts on the environment due to increased nitrate leaching and N₂O emissions. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the heat production from poplar SRC on marginal land ranged between 8 and 46 kg CO₂‐eq. GJ^?1 (or 11–57 Mg CO₂‐eq. ha^?1). However, if the produced wood chips substitute oil heating, up to 123 Mg CO₂‐eq. ha^?1 can be saved, if produced in a 7‐year rotation without fertilization. Dissecting the entire bioenergy production chain, our study shows that environmental impacts occurred mainly during combustion and storage of wood chips, while technological aspects of establishment, harvesting, and transportation played a negligible role.     

Impact Assessment of Biodiversity and Carbon Pools from Land Use and Land Use Changes in Life Cycle Assessment,Exemplified with Forestry Operations in Norway

There is a strong need for methods within life cycle assessment (LCA) that enable the inclusion of all complex aspects related to land use and land use change (LULUC). This article presents a case study of the use of one hectare (ha) of forest managed for the production of wood for bioenergy production. Both permanent and temporary changes in above‐ground biomass are assessed together with the impact on biodiversity caused by LULUC as a result of forestry activities. The impact is measured as a product of time and area requirements, as well as by changes in carbon pools and impacts on biodiversity as a consequence of different management options. To elaborate the usefulness of the method as well as its dependency on assumptions, a range of scenarios are introduced in the study. The results show that the impact on climate change from LULUC dominates the results, compared to the impact from forestry operations. This clearly demonstrates the need to include LULUC in an LCA of forestry products. For impacts both on climate change and biodiversity, the results show large variability based on what assumptions are made; and impacts can be either positive or negative. Consequently, a mere measure of land used does not provide any meaning in LCA, as it is not possible to know whether this contributes a positive or negative impact.     

Life Cycle Assessment of Biomass‐based Combined Heat and Power Plants

Norway, like many countries, has realized the need to extensively plan its renewable energy future sooner rather than later. Combined heat and power (CHP) through gasification of forest residues is one technology that is expected to aid Norway in achieving a desired doubling of bioenergy production by 2020. To assess the environmental impacts to determine the most suitable CHP size, we performed a unit process‐based attributional life cycle assessment (LCA), in which we compared three scales of CHP over ten environmental impact categories—micro (0.1 megawatts electricity [MWe]), small (1 MWe), and medium (50 MWe) scale. The functional units used were 1 megajoule (MJ) of electricity and 1 MJ of district heating delivered to the end user (two functional units), and therefore, the environmental impacts from distribution of electricity and hot water to the consumer were also considered. This study focuses on a regional perspective situated in middle‐Norway's Nord‐ and Sør‐Trøndelag counties. Overall, the unit‐based environmental impacts between the scales of CHP were quite mixed and within the same magnitude. The results indicated that energy distribution from CHP plant to end user creates from less than 1% to nearly 90% of the total system impacts, depending on impact category and energy product. Also, an optimal small‐scale CHP plant may be the best environmental option. The CHP systems had a global warming potential ranging from 2.4 to 2.8 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of thermal (g CO₂‐eq/MJ_th) district heating and from 8.8 to 10.5 grams carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of electricity (g CO₂‐eq/MJ_el) to the end user.     

Short Rotation Coppice (SRC) Plantations Provide Additional Habitats for Vascular Plant Species in Agricultural Mosaic Landscapes

Increasing loss of biodiversity in agricultural landscapes is often debated in the bioenergy context, especially with respect to non-traditional crops that can be grown for energy production in the future. As promising renewable energy source and additional landscape element, the potential role of short rotation coppice (SRC) plantations to biodiversity is of great interest. We studied plant species richness in eight landscapes (225 km²) containing willow and poplar SRC plantations (1,600 m²) in Sweden and Germany, and the related SRC α-diversity to species richness in the landscapes (γ-diversity). Using matrix variables, spatial analyses of SRC plantations and landscapes were performed to explain the contribution of SRC α-diversity to γ-diversity. In accordance with the mosaic concept, multiple regression analyses revealed number of habitat types as a significant predictor for species richness: the higher the habitat type number, the higher the γ-diversity and the lower the proportion of SRC plantation α-diversity to γ-diversity. SRC plantation α-diversity was 6.9 % (±1.7 % SD) of species richness on the landscape scale. The contribution of SRC plantations increased with decreasing γ-diversity. SRC plantations were dominated more by species adapted to frequent disturbances and anthropo-zoogenic impacts than surrounding landscapes. We conclude that by providing habitats for plants with different requirements, SRC α-diversity has a significant share on γ-diversity in rural areas and can promote diversity in landscapes with low habitat heterogeneity and low species pools. However, plant diversity enrichment is mainly due to additional species typically present in disturbed and anthropogenic environments.