18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Potential impacts on ecosystem services of land use transitions to second‐generation bioenergy crops in GB

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We present the first assessment of the impact of land use change ( LUC) to second‐generation (2G) bioenergy crops on ecosystem services ( ES) resolved spatially for Great Britain ( GB). A systematic approach was used to assess available evidence on the impacts of LUC from arable, semi‐improved grassland or woodland/forest, to 2G bioenergy crops, for which a quantitative ‘threat matrix’ was developed. The threat matrix was used to estimate potential impacts of transitions to either Miscanthus, short‐rotation coppice ( SRC, willow and poplar) or short‐rotation forestry ( SRF). The ES effects were found to be largely dependent on previous land uses rather than the choice of 2G crop when assessing the technical potential of available biomass with a transition from arable crops resulting in the most positive effect on ES. Combining these data with constraint masks and available land for SRC and Miscanthus ( SRF omitted from this stage due to lack of data), south‐west and north‐west England were identified as areas where Miscanthus and SRC could be grown, respectively, with favourable combinations of economic viability, carbon sequestration, high yield and positive ES benefits. This study also suggests that not all prospective planting of Miscanthus and SRC can be allocated to agricultural land class (ALC) ALC 3 and ALC 4 and suitable areas of ALC 5 are only minimally available. Beneficial impacts were found on 146 583 and 71 890 ha when planting Miscanthus or SRC, respectively, under baseline planting conditions rising to 293 247 and 91 318 ha, respectively, under 2020 planting scenarios. The results provide an insight into the interplay between land availability, original land uses, bioenergy crop type and yield in determining overall positive or negative impacts of bioenergy cropping on ecosystems services and go some way towards developing a framework for quantifying wider ES impacts of this important LUC.

          Related collections

          Most cited references6

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Bringing Ecosystem Services into Economic Decision-Making: Land Use in the United Kingdom

          Land-use decisions are based largely on agricultural market values. However, such decisions can lead to losses of ecosystem services, such as the provision of wildlife habitat or recreational space, the magnitude of which may overwhelm any market agricultural benefits. In a research project forming part of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment, Bateman et al. (p. [Related article:] 45 ) estimate the value of these net losses. Policies that recognize the diversity and complexity of the natural environment can target changes to different areas so as to radically improve land use in terms of agriculture and greenhouse gas emissions, recreation, and wild species habitat and diversity. The value of using land for recreation and wildlife, not just for agriculture, can usefully factor into planning decisions. Landscapes generate a wide range of valuable ecosystem services, yet land-use decisions often ignore the value of these services. Using the example of the United Kingdom, we show the significance of land-use change not only for agricultural production but also for emissions and sequestration of greenhouse gases, open-access recreational visits, urban green space, and wild-species diversity. We use spatially explicit models in conjunction with valuation methods to estimate comparable economic values for these services, taking account of climate change impacts. We show that, although decisions that focus solely on agriculture reduce overall ecosystem service values, highly significant value increases can be obtained from targeted planning by incorporating all potential services and their values and that this approach also conserves wild-species diversity.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Perennial grasslands enhance biodiversity and multiple ecosystem services in bioenergy landscapes.

            Agriculture is being challenged to provide food, and increasingly fuel, for an expanding global population. Producing bioenergy crops on marginal lands--farmland suboptimal for food crops--could help meet energy goals while minimizing competition with food production. However, the ecological costs and benefits of growing bioenergy feedstocks--primarily annual grain crops--on marginal lands have been questioned. Here we show that perennial bioenergy crops provide an alternative to annual grains that increases biodiversity of multiple taxa and sustain a variety of ecosystem functions, promoting the creation of multifunctional agricultural landscapes. We found that switchgrass and prairie plantings harbored significantly greater plant, methanotrophic bacteria, arthropod, and bird diversity than maize. Although biomass production was greater in maize, all other ecosystem services, including methane consumption, pest suppression, pollination, and conservation of grassland birds, were higher in perennial grasslands. Moreover, we found that the linkage between biodiversity and ecosystem services is dependent not only on the choice of bioenergy crop but also on its location relative to other habitats, with local landscape context as important as crop choice in determining provision of some services. Our study suggests that bioenergy policy that supports coordinated land use can diversify agricultural landscapes and sustain multiple critical ecosystem services.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels' indirect land use change are uncertain but may be much greater than previously estimated.

              The life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions induced by increased biofuel consumption are highly uncertain: individual estimates vary from each other and each has a wide intrinsic error band. Using a reduced-form model, we estimated that the bounding range for emissions from indirect land-use change (ILUC) from US corn ethanol expansion was 10 to 340 g CO(2) MJ(-1). Considering various probability distributions to model parameters, the broadest 95% central interval, i.e., between the 2.5 and 97.5%ile values, ranged from 21 to 142 g CO(2)e MJ(-1). ILUC emissions from US corn ethanol expansion thus range from small, but not negligible, to several times greater than the life cycle emissions of gasoline. The ILUC emissions estimates of 30 g CO(2) MJ(-1) for the California Air Resources Board and 34 g CO(2)e MJ(-1) by USEPA (for 2022) are at the low end of the plausible range. The lack of data and understanding (epistemic uncertainty) prevents convergence of judgment on a central value for ILUC emissions. The complexity of the global system being modeled suggests that this range is unlikely to narrow substantially in the near future. Fuel policies that require narrow bounds around point estimates of life cycle GHG emissions are thus incompatible with current and anticipated modeling capabilities. Alternative policies that address the risks associated with uncertainty are more likely to achieve GHG reductions.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Glob Change Biol Bioenergy
                Glob Change Biol Bioenergy
                10.1111/(ISSN)1757-1707
                GCBB
                Global Change Biology. Bioenergy
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1757-1693
                1757-1707
                08 June 2015
                March 2016
                : 8
                : 2 ( doiID: 10.1111/gcbb.2016.8.issue-2 )
                : 317-333
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Centre for Biological SciencesUniversity of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJUK
                [ 2 ] School of Environmental SciencesUniversity of East Anglia Norwich NR4 7TJUK
                [ 3 ] Institute of Biological and Environmental SciencesUniversity of Aberdeen 23 St Machar Drive Aberdeen AB24 3UUUK
                Author notes
                [*] [* ]Correspondence: Gail Taylor, tel. +02380 592335, fax +02380 594159, e‐mail: g.taylor@ 123456soton.ac.uk
                Article
                GCBB12263
                10.1111/gcbb.12263
                4974899
                27547244
                626cfea8-6183-49f3-9354-181ac18ac2a8
                © 2015 The Authors. Global Change Biology Bioenergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 10 July 2014
                : 06 March 2015
                : 08 March 2015
                Page count
                Pages: 17
                Funding
                Funded by: UKERC
                Funded by: Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)
                Award ID: NE/H013237/1
                Award ID: NE/H010742/1
                Award ID: EP/M013200/1
                Award ID: NE/M019713/1
                Award ID: EP/K036734/1
                Funded by: European Union
                Funded by: BBSRC
                Categories
                Original Research
                Original Research Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                gcbb12263
                March 2016
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:4.9.4 mode:remove_FC converted:04.08.2016

                biofuel crops,ecological processes,ecosystem services,gis,land use,miscanthus,short‐rotation coppice,short‐rotation forestry,sustainability,trade‐offs

                Comments

                Comment on this article