Advertisement

Environmental Management

, Volume 51, Issue 2, pp 291–306 | Cite as

Environmental Indicators of Biofuel Sustainability: What About Context?

  • Rebecca A. Efroymson
  • Virginia H. Dale
  • Keith L. Kline
  • Allen C. McBride
  • Jeffrey M. Bielicki
  • Raymond L. Smith
  • Esther S. Parish
  • Peter E. Schweizer
  • Denice M. Shaw
Article

Abstract

Indicators of the environmental sustainability of biofuel production, distribution, and use should be selected, measured, and interpreted with respect to the context in which they are used. The context of a sustainability assessment includes the purpose, the particular biofuel production and distribution system, policy conditions, stakeholder values, location, temporal influences, spatial scale, baselines, and reference scenarios. We recommend that biofuel sustainability questions be formulated with respect to the context, that appropriate indicators of environmental sustainability be developed or selected from more generic suites, and that decision makers consider context in ascribing meaning to indicators. In addition, considerations such as technical objectives, varying values and perspectives of stakeholder groups, indicator cost, and availability and reliability of data need to be understood and considered. Sustainability indicators for biofuels are most useful if adequate historical data are available, information can be collected at appropriate spatial and temporal scales, organizations are committed to use indicator information in the decision-making process, and indicators can effectively guide behavior toward more sustainable practices.

Keywords

Baseline conditions Bioenergy Natural variability Spatial and temporal scales Supply chain Systems 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper is a collaboration among researchers who attended the workshop “Sustainability of Bioenergy Systems: Cradle to Grave,” sponsored by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL’s) Center for BioEnergy Sustainability and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Researchers at ORNL were supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under the Office of the Biomass Program. Jeffrey Bielicki’s contribution resulted from being a Weinberg Fellow at ORNL. We thank Mark Downing of ORNL and anonymous reviewers for comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. We thank Charles Garten for conversations about relative feasibility of measurement of different indicators and Gangsheng Wang for discussions related to greenhouse-gas emissions from soil. Fred O’Hara provided technical editing of an earlier draft. ORNL is managed by the UT-Battelle, LLC, for DOE under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the USEPA or DOE.

References

  1. Alexander RB, Smith RA, Schwarz GE, Boyer EW, Nolan JV, Brakebill JW (2008) Differences in phosphorus and nitrogen delivery to the Gulf of Mexico from the Mississippi River Basin. Environmental Science & Technology 42:822–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ARB (2009) Proposed regulation to implement the low carbon fuel standard, vol 1. Staff report: initial statement of reasons, California Air Resources Board, pp 374. http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/lcfs09/lcfsisor1.pdf. Accessed 9 Aug 2011
  3. ARB (2011) Low Carbon Fuel Standard Expert Workgroup. California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board, Sacramento. http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/workgroups/ewg/expertworkgroup.htm. Accessed 14 Feb 2011
  4. ARB Comparative and Alternative Modeling Approaches Subgroup (2010) White Paper, Low Carbon Fuel Standard Expert Workgroup. California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board, Sacramento. http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/workgroups/ewg/110110alt-modeling-final-report.pdf. Accessed 9 Aug 2011
  5. ARB Subgroup on Indirect Effects of Other Fuels (2010) White Paper, Low Carbon Fuel Standard Expert Workgroup. California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board, Sacramento. http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/workgroups/ewg/010511-final-rpt-alternative-modeling.pdf. Accessed 9 Aug 2011
  6. ARB Time Accounting Subgroup (2010) White Paper, Low Carbon Fuel Standard Expert Workgroup. California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board, Sacramento. http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/workgroups/ewg/010511-final-rpt-time-accounting.pdf. Accessed 9 Aug 2011
  7. Austin M (2007) Species distribution models and ecological theory: a critical assessment and some possible new approaches. Ecological Modelling 200:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Babcock BA (2009) Measuring unmeasurable land-use changes from biofuels. Iowa Ag Review 15(3):4–6, 11Google Scholar
  9. Bare JC, Norris GA, Pennington DW, McKone T (2003) TRACI: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. Journal of Industrial Ecology 6(3–4):49–78Google Scholar
  10. Barton L, Murphy DV, Kiese R, Butterback-Bahl K (2010) Soil nitrous oxide and methane fluxes are low from a bioenergy crop (canola) grown in a semi-arid climate. GCB Bioenergy 2:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bielicki J, Miller CA, Uria-Martinez R, Perla D, Peterson S, Oladosu G, Nukala S, Davison B, Leiby P, Dale V, Koch A (this issue) Comparative analysis of bioenergy pathways. Environmental ManagementGoogle Scholar
  12. Blanco-Canqui H (2010) Energy crops and their implications on soil and environment. Agronomy Journal 102:403–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blanco-Canqui H, Lal R (2009) Corn stover removal for expanded uses reduces soil fertility and structural stability. Soil Science Society of America Journal 73:418–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bossel H (1997) Deriving indicators of sustainable development. Environmental Modeling & Assessment 1:193–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bouwman AF, Boumans LJM, Batjes NH (2002) Modeling global annual N2O and NO emissions from fertilized fields. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 16(4):1080. doi: 10.1029/2001GB001812 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Buchholz T, Luzadis VA, Volk TA (2009) Sustainability criteria for bioenergy systems: results from an expert survey. Journal of Cleaner Production 17:S86–S98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cairns J, McCormick PV, Niederlehner BR (1993) A proposed framework for developing indicators of ecosystem health. Hydrobiologia 236:1–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carpenter SR, Caraco NF, Correll DL, Howarth RW, Sharpley AN, Smith VH (1998) Nonpoint pollution of surface waters with phosphorus and nitrogen. Ecological Applications 8:559–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jäger J, Mitchell RB (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100:8086–8091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Caughlan L, Oakley KL (2001) Cost considerations for long-term ecological monitoring. Ecological Indicators 1:123–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. CBES (2010) Land-use change and bioenergy: report from the 2009 workshop, ORNL/CBES-001. U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Center for Bioenergy Sustainability, Oak Ridge. http://www.ornl.gov/sci/ees/cbes/workshops/LandUse_Report.pdf. Accessed 10 Aug 2011
  22. Cherubini F, Jungmeier G (2010) LCA of a biorefinery concept producing bioethanol, bioenergy, and chemicals from switchgrass. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15:53–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Clark WC, Cash DW (2006) Evaluating the influence of global environmental assessments. In: Mitchell RB, Clark WC, Cash DW, Dickson NM (eds) Global environmental assessments: information and influence. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 1–28Google Scholar
  24. Corbière-Nicollier T, Blanc I, Erkman S (2011) Towards a global criteria based framework for the sustainability assessment of bioethanol supply chains. Application to the Swiss dilemma: is local produced bioethanol more sustainable than bioethanol imported from Brazil? Ecological Indicators 11:1447–1458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Costello C, Griffin WM, Landis AE, Matthews HS (2009) Impact of biofuel crop production on the formation of hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico. Environmental Science & Technology 43:7985–7991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. CSBP (2010) Draft provisional standard for sustainable production of agricultural biomass. Council on Sustainable Biomass Production. http://www.csbp.org/files/survey/CSBP_Provisional_Standard.pdf. Accessed Apr 2011
  27. Dale VH, Beyeler SC (2001) Challenges in the development and use of ecological indicators. Ecological Indicators 1:3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dale VH, Lowrance R, Mulholland P, Robertson GP (2010) Bioenergy sustainability at the regional scale. Ecology and Society 15:23 [online]. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art23/
  29. Dale VH, Kline KL, Wright LL, Perlack RD, Downing M, Graham RL (2011) Interactions among bioenergy feedstock choices, landscape dynamics and land use. Ecological Applications 21:1039–1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Dauber J, Jones MB, Stout JC (2010) The impact of biomass crop cultivation on temperate biodiversity. Global Change Biology Bioenergy 2:289–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Davidson KM (2011) Reporting systems for sustainability: what are they measuring? Social Indicators Research 100:351–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. de Vries SC, van den Ven WJ, van Ittersum MK, Giller KE (2012) The production-ecological sustainability of cassava, sugarcane and sweet sorghum cultivation for bioethanol in Mozambique. GCB Bioenergy 4:20–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. DG Energy (2010) Prepared for the European Commission. The impact of land use change on greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels and bioliquids. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/consultations/doc/public_consultation_iluc/study_3_land_use_change_literature_review_final_30_7_10.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2011
  34. Di Lucia L (2010) External governance and the EU policy for sustainable biofuels, the case of Mozambique. Energy Policy 38:7395–7403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Efroymson RA, Jones DS, Gold AJ (2007) An ecological risk assessment framework for effects of onsite wastewater treatment systems and other localized sources of nutrients on aquatic ecosystems. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 13:574–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Efroymson RA, Jager HI, Hargrove WW (2010) Valuing Wildlands. In: Kapustka L, Landis W (eds) Environmental risk assessment and management from a landscape perspective. Wiley, New York, pp 157–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. EU (2009) Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:140:0016:0062:en:PDF. Accessed 26 Apr 2011
  38. Fellers GM, Kleeman PM (2007) California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) movement and habitat use: implications for conservation. Journal of Herpetology 41:276–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fike JH, Parrish DJ, Wolf DD, Balasko JA, Green JT Jr, Rasnake M, Reynolds JH (2006) Long-term yield potential of switchgrass-for-biofuel systems. Biomass and Bioenergy 30:198–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Fingerman KR, Torn MS, O’Hare MH, Kammen DM (2010) Accounting for the water impacts of ethanol production. Environmental Research Letters 5:014020. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/5/1/014020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Foote RL, Grogan P (2010) Soil carbon accumulation during temperate forest succession on abandoned low productivity agricultural lands. Ecosystems 13:795–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Frank ED, Han J, Palou-Rivera I, Elgowainy A, Wang MQ (2012) Methane and nitrous oxide emissions affect the life-cycle analysis of algal biofuels. Environmental Research Letters 7:014030. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/7/1/014030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. GBEP (2010) Second draft of GBEP sustainability criteria and indicators for bioenergy. Global Bioenergy Partnership. http://www.globalbioenergy.org/fileadmin/user_upload/gbep/docs/partners_only/sust_docs/2nd_DRAFT_of_GBEP_Criteria_Indicators_with_TEMPLATES.doc. Accessed 26 Apr 2011
  44. Gehlke CE, Biehl K (1934) Certain effects of grouping upon the size of the correlation coefficient in census tract material. Journal of the American Statistical Association 29:169–170Google Scholar
  45. Gnansounou E, Dauriat A, Villegas J, Panichelli L (2009) Life cycle assessment of biofuels: energy and greenhouse gas balances. Bioresource Technology 100:4919–4930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Guinée JB, Heijungs R, van der Voet E (2009) A greenhouse gas indicator for bioenergy: some theoretical issues with practical implications. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14:328–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hansen EM, Christensen BT, Jensen LS, Kristensen K (2004) Carbon sequestration in soil beneath longterm Miscanthus plantations as determined by C-13 abundance. Biomass & Bioenergy 26:97–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Harding JS, Benfield EF, Bolstad PV, Helfman GS, Jones EBD (1998) Stream biodiversity: the ghost of land use past. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 95:14843–14847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hardman-Mountford NJ, Allen JI, Frost MT, Hawkins SJ, Kendall MA, Mieszkowska N, Richardson KA, Somerfield PJ (2005) Diagnostic monitoring of a changing environment: an alternative UK perspective. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50:1463–1471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Harwood J, Heifner R, Coble K, Perry J, Somwaru A (1999) Managing risk in farming: concepts, research, and analysis. Economic Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington DC. http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer774/. Accessed 26 Apr 2011
  51. Hecht AD, Shaw D, Bruins R, Dale V, Kline K, Chen A (2009) Good policy follows good science: using criteria and indicators for assessing sustainable biofuels production. Ecotoxicology 18:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Hess P, Johnston M, Brown-Steiner B, Holloway T, de Andrade J, Artaxo P (2009) Air quality issues associated with biofuel production and use. In: Howarth RW, Bringezu S (eds) Biofuels: environmental consequences and interactions with changing land use. Proceedings of the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE), International Biofuels Project Rapid Assessment, pp 169–194. http://cip.cornell.edu/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&handle=scope. Accessed 26 Apr 2011
  53. Huber P (1983) The old-new division in risk regulation. Virginia Law Review 69:1025–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Huertas DA, Berndes G, Holmén M (2010) Sustainability certification of bioethanol: how is it perceived by Brazilian stakeholders? Biofuels Bioproducts & Biorefining 4:369–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. ISO (2006) International Standard ISO 14044: Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—requirements and guidelines. Reference number ISO 14044:2006(E)Google Scholar
  56. Jenkins-Smith HC, Sabatier PA (1999) The advocacy coalition framework: an assessment. In: Sabatier PA (ed) Theories of the policy process. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 117–166Google Scholar
  57. Johnson TL, Bielicki JM, Dodder RS, Hilliard MR, Kaplan PO, Miller CA (2012, this issue) Advancing sustainable bioenergy: evolving stakeholder interests and the relevance of research. Environmental Management. doi: 10.1007/s00267-012-9884-8
  58. Kates RW (2011) From the unity of nature to sustainability science: ideas and practice. CID Working Paper No. 218. Center for International Development, Harvard University, Cambridge. Available at http://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/cid/publications/faculty-workingpapers/cid-working-paper-no.-218. Accessed Mar 2011
  59. Kates RW, Parris TM, Leiserowitz AA (2005) What is sustainable development? Goals indicators, values and practices. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 47(3):8–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kim SD, Dale BE (2011) Indirect land use change for biofuels: testing predictions and improving analytical methodologies. Biomass and Bioenergy 35:3235–3240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Kline KL, Coleman MD (2010) Woody energy crops in the southeastern United States: two centuries of practitioner experience. Biomass and Bioenergy 34:1655–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kline KL, Dale VH, Lee R, Leiby P (2009) In defense of biofuels, done right. Issues in Science and Technology 25:75–84Google Scholar
  63. Kline KL, Oladosu GA, Dale VH, McBride AC (2011) Scientific analysis is essential to assess biofuel policy effects: in response to the paper by Kim and Dale on “Indirect land use change for biofuels: testing predictions and improving analytical methodologies”. Biomass and Bioenergy 35:4488–4491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Kremen C, Williams NM, Bugg RL, Fay JP, Thorp RW (2004) The area requirements of an ecosystem service. Crop pollination by native bee communities in California. Ecology Letters 7:1109–1119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Kurz A, Apps MJ (1999) A 70-year retrospective analysis of carbon fluxes in the Canadian forest sector. Ecological Applications 9:526–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lackmann S (2010) Carbon storage and forest fire influences in tropical rainforests—an example from a REDD project in Guatemala. Examensarbeten, Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet, Institutionen för skogens ekologi och skötsel, Umea, p 27. ISSN 1654-1898Google Scholar
  67. Lee KC, Short C, Heady EO (1981) Optimal groundwater mining in the Ogallala Aquifer: estimation of economic loss and excessive depletion due to commonality. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 63:1039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Lee JSH, Rist L, Obidzinski K, Ghazoul J, Koh LP (2011) No farmer left behind in sustainable bioenergy production. Biological Conservation 144:2512–2516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Levine SH (1976) Competitive interactions in ecosystems. The American Naturalist 110:903–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Liska AJ, Perrin RK (2009) Indirect land use emissions in the life cycle of biofuels: regulations vs. science. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 3:318–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Liu J, Li S, Ouyang Z, Tam C, Chem X (2008) Ecological and socioeconomic effects of China’s policies for ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105:9477–9582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Lowrance R, Hendrix PF, Odum EP (1986) A hierarchical approach to sustainable agriculture. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 1:169–173Google Scholar
  73. Luk J, Fernandes H, Kumar A (2010) A conceptual framework for siting biorefineries in the Canadian prairies. Biofuels Bioproducts & Biorefining 4:408–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Magnani F, Mencuccini M, Borghetti M, Berbigier P, Berninger F, Delzon S, Grelle A, Hari P, Jarvis PG, Kolari P, Kowalski AS, Lankreijer H, Law BE, Lindroth A, Loustau D, Manca G, Moncrieff J, Rayment M, Tedeschi V, Valentini R, Grace J (2007) The human footprint in the carbon cycle of temperate and boreal forests. Nature 447:848–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. McBride AC, Dale VH, Baskaran LM, Downing ME, Eaton LM, Efroymson RA, Garten CT Jr, Kline KL, Jager HI, Mulholland PJ, Parish ES, Schweizer PE, Storey JM (2011) Indicators to support environmental sustainability of bioenergy systems. Ecological Indicators 11:1277–1289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. McCarthy MC, Hafner HR, Chinkin LR, Charrier JG (2007) Temporal variability of selected air toxics in the United States. Atmospheric Environment 41:7180–7194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Meyer JL, Paul MJ, Taulbee WK (2005) Stream ecosystem function in urbanizing landscapes. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 24:602–612Google Scholar
  78. Mittelbach G (1986) Predator-mediated habitat use; some consequences for species interactions. Environmental Biology of Fishes 16:159–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Montenegro A, Ragab R (2010) Hydrological response of a Brazilian semi-arid catchment to different land use and climate change scenarios: a modelling study. Hydrological Processes 24:2705–2723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Mooney DF, Roberts RK, English BC, Tyler DD, Larson JA (2009) Yield and breakeven price of ‘Alamo’ switchgrass for biofuels in Tennessee. Agronomy Journal 101:1234–1242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Ness B, Urbel-Piirsalu E, Anderberg S, Olsson L (2007) Categorizing tools for sustainability assessment. Ecological Economics 60:498–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Niven RK (2005) Ethanol in gasoline: environmental impacts and sustainability review article. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 9:535–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Nol L, Heuvelink GBM, Veldkamp A, de Vries W, Kros J (2010) Uncertainty propagation analysis of an N2O emission model and the plot and landscape scale. Geoderma 159:9–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Offerman HL, Dale VH, Pearson SM, O’Neill RV, Bierregaard RO Jr (1995) Effects of forest fragmentation on neotropical fauna: current research and data availability. Environmental Reviews/Dossiers Environnement 3:191–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Openshaw S, Taylor P (1979) A million or so correlation coefficients: three experiments on the modifiable areal unit problem. In: Wrigley N, Bennett RJ (eds) Statistical applications in the spatial sciences. Pion, London, pp 127–144Google Scholar
  86. Oregon Environmental Council (2011) Best management practices for biofuels. OEC, Portland. http://www.oeconline.org/our-work/economy/best-management-practices-for-biofuels
  87. Overmars KP, Stehfest E, Ros JPM, Prins AG (2011) Indirect land use change emissions related to EU biofuel consumption: an analysis based on historical data. Environmental Science & Policy 14:248–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Parrish DJ, Fike JH (2005) The biology and agronomy of switchgrass for biofuels. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 24:423–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Parish E, Efroymson RA, Dale VH, Kline KL, McBride AC, Johnson T, Hilliard MR, Jager HI, Bielicki JM (this issue) A multi-scale comparison of environmental effects from gasoline and ethanol production. Environmental ManagementGoogle Scholar
  90. Pfromm PH, Amanor-Boadu V, Nelson R (2011) Sustainability of algae derived biodiesel: a mass balance approach. Bioresource Technology 102:1185–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Pollard AI, Yuan LL (2010) Assessing the consistency of response metrics of the invertebrate benthos: a comparison of trait- and identity-based measures. Freshwater Biology 55:1420–1429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Powers S (2007) Nutrient loads to surface water from row crop production. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 12:399–407Google Scholar
  93. Ranney JW, Mann LK (1994) Environmental considerations in energy crop production. Biomass and Bioenergy 6:211–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Rastetter EB, King AW, Cosby BJ, Hornberger GM, O’Neill RV, Hobbie JE (1992) Aggregating fine-scale ecological knowledge to model coarser-scale attributes of ecosystems. Ecological Applications 2:55–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Reed RL, Sanderson MA, Matches AG (1999) Growth and cadmium accumulation in selected switchgrass cultivars. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 30:2655–2667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Roberts MG, Male TD, Toombs TP (2007) Potential impacts of biofuels expansion on natural resources—a case study of the Ogallala Aquifer Region, Environmental Defense. http://www.edf.org/documents/7011_Potential%20Impacts%20of%20Biofuels%20Expansion.pdf. Accessed 26 Apr 2011
  97. Rosenberg DK, Noon BR, Meslow EC (1997) Biological corridors: form, function, and efficacy. BioScience 47:667–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. RSB (2011) Indicators of compliance for the RSB principles and criteria. RSB-IND–01-001, version 2.0. Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels, École polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, LausanneGoogle Scholar
  99. RSPO (2011) Roundtable on sustainable palm oil. http://www.rspo.org/. Accessed 30 May 2011
  100. Ruiz-Mercado GJ, Smith RL, Gonzalez MA (2012) Sustainability indicators for chemical processes: I. Taxonomy. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 51:2309–2328Google Scholar
  101. Scavia D, Justić D, Bierman VJ (2004) Reducing hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico: advice from three models. Estuaries 27:419–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Schweizer PE, Matlack GR (2005) Annual variation in fish assemblages of watersheds with stable and changing land use. American Midland Naturalist 153:293–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Sharman A, Holmes J (2010) Evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence gathering? Biofuels, the EU and the 10 % target. Environmental Policy and Governance 20:309–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Sheehan J, Aden A, Paustian K, Killian K, Brenner J, Walsh M, Nelson R (2004) Energy and environmental aspects of using stover for fuel ethanol. Journal of Industrial Ecology 7(3–4):117–146Google Scholar
  105. Sih A, Englund G, Wooster D (1998) Emergent impacts of multiple predators on prey. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 13:350–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Smeets EMW, Faaij APC (2010) The impact of sustainability criteria on the costs and potentials of bioenergy production—applied for case studies in Brazil and Ukraine. Biomass & Bioenergy 34:319–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Smith P, Olesen JE (2010) Synergies between the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change in agriculture. The Journal of Agricultural Science 148:543–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Snow AA, Andow DA, Gepts P, Hallerman EM, Power A, Tiedje JM, Wolfenbarger LL (2005) Genetically engineered organisms and the environment: current status and recommendations. Ecological Applications 15:377–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Strömquist L, Yanda P, Msemwa P, Lindberg C, Simonsson-Forsberg L (1999) Utilizing landscape information to analyze and predict environmental change: the extended baseline perspective: two Tanzanian examples. Ambio 28:436–443Google Scholar
  110. Subhadra B, Edwards M (2010) An integrated renewable energy park approach for algal biofuel production in United States. Energy Policy 38:4897–4902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Sumner A (2004) Measuring sustainable development in the era of globalisation: can it be done and what way ahead? World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development 1:116–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Suter GW II, Efroymson RA, Sample BE, Jones DS (2000) Ecological risk assessment for contaminated sites. CRC/Lewis Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Sydorovych O, Wossink A (2008) The meaning of agricultural sustainability: evidence from a conjoint choice survey. Agricultural Systems 98:10–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Thomas MA, Engle BA, Chaubey I (2009) Water quality impacts of corn production to meet biofuel demands. Journal of Environmental Engineering 135:1123–1135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Thornton PE, Law BE, Gholz HL, Clark KL, Falge E, Ellsworth DS, Goldstein AH, Monson RK, Hollinger D, Falk M, Chen J, Sparks JP (2002) Modeling and measuring the effects of disturbance history and climate on carbon and water budgets in evergreen needleleaf forests. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 113:185–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Trites M, Bayley SE (2009) Vegetation communities in continental boreal wetlands along a salinity gradient: implications for oil sands mining reclamation. Aquatic Botany 91:27–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Turnhout E, Hisschemöller M, Eijsackers M (2007) Ecological indicators: between the two fires of science and policy. Ecological Indicators 7:215–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. United Nations (1992) Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Annex I. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. A/CONF.151/26 (vol I). http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm. Accessed 26 Apr 2011
  119. USEPA (2010) Regulation of fuels and fuel additives: changes to renewable fuel standard program; final rule, federal register vol. 75, No. 58, March 26, 40 CFR Part 80Google Scholar
  120. USEPA (2011) Biofuels and the environment: first triennial report to congress. EPA/600/R-10/183F. National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  121. Vaccari DA (2009) Phosphorus: a looming crisis. Scientific American 300(6):54–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. van Dam J, Junginger M, Faaij A, Jurgens I, Best G, Fritsche U (2008) Overview of recent developments in sustainable biomass certification. Biomass & Bioenergy 32:749–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Veldkamp A, Verburg PH, Kok K, de Koning GHJ, Priess J, Bergsma AR (2001) The need for scale sensitive approaches in spatially explicit land use change modeling. Environmental Modeling & Assessment 6:111–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Vitousek PM, Sanford RL Jr (1986) Nutrient cycling in moist tropical forest. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 17:137–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Vitousek PM, Porder S, Houlton BZ, Chadwick OA (2010) Terrestrial phosphorus limitation: mechanisms, implications, and nitrogen–phosphorus interactions. Ecological Applications 20:5–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Wang M, Huo H, Arora S (2011) Methods of dealing with co-products of biofuels in life-cycle analysis and consequent results within the U.S. context. Energy Policy 39:5726–5736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Ward JV, Tockner K, Arscott DB, Claret C (2002) Riverine landscape diversity. Freshwater Biology 47:517–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Wu M, Mintz M, Wang M, Arora S (2009) Water consumption in the production of ethanol and petroleum gasoline. Environmental Management 44:981–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Yang J, Xu M, Zhang XZ, Hu QA, Sommerfeld M, Chen YS (2011) Life-cycle analysis on biodiesel production from microalgae: water footprint and nutrients balance. Bioresource Technology 102:159–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Zilberman D, Hochman G, Rajagopal D (2011) On the inclusion of indirect land use in biofuel regulations. University of Illinois Law Review Issue 2:413–433Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC (outside the USA) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rebecca A. Efroymson
    • 1
  • Virginia H. Dale
    • 1
  • Keith L. Kline
    • 1
  • Allen C. McBride
    • 1
  • Jeffrey M. Bielicki
    • 2
  • Raymond L. Smith
    • 3
  • Esther S. Parish
    • 1
  • Peter E. Schweizer
    • 1
  • Denice M. Shaw
    • 4
  1. 1.Center for BioEnergy Sustainability, Environmental Sciences DivisionOak Ridge National LaboratoryOak RidgeUSA
  2. 2.Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public AffairsUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  3. 3.National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and DevelopmentU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyCincinnatiUSA
  4. 4.National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and DevelopmentU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations