Advertisement

BioEnergy Research

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 537–545 | Cite as

Impact of Willow Short Rotation Coppice on Water Quality

  • Ioannis Dimitriou
  • Blas Mola-Yudego
  • Pär Aronsson
Article

Abstract

Short rotation coppice (SRC) with willow has been grown in Sweden from the late 1980s to produce biomass for energy on agricultural land. This study evaluated the effects of SRC on water quality by determining differences in leaching of nitrogen and phosphorus to groundwater of a number of commercial “old” SRC willow stands in Sweden compared to adjacent arable fields grown with “ordinary” crops. The study was conducted in 16 locations under three vegetation seasons. NO3–N leaching from willow SRC fields was significantly lower than that from reference fields with cereals. The opposite was observed for PO4–P; concentrations in the groundwater of SRC were higher compared to reference fields. Sewage sludge applications were not responsible for the elevated PO4–P leaching under SRC compared to reference crops.

Keywords

Bioenergy Biomass Energy forest Nitrate leaching Phosphorus leaching Salix 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to express their gratitude to all the land owners that allowed us to establish the groundwater pipes and take samples from their fields and provided with valuable information for previous management regimes. Special thanks to Richard Childs who helped with establishing the pipes and with water sampling in all different locations. The study was financed by the Swedish Energy Agency's project 31455-1 within the frame of ERA-Net Bioenergy which is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. 1.
    EEA (European Environmental Agency) (2008) A review of the possible impact of biomass production from agriculture on water. Background paper for the conference “WFD meets CAP – Looking for a consistent approach”. Copenhagen, Denmark. <http://ecologic-events.eu/cap-wfd/conference2/en/documents/Biomass_WFD_report_V7_final260108-2.pdf> [quoted: 28/10/2011]
  2. 2.
    Dimitriou I, Busch G, Jacobs S, Schmidt-Walter P, Lamersdorf N (2009) A review of the impacts of short rotation coppice cultivation on water issues. LBF 59(3):197–206Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ledin S, Alriksson B, Rosenqvist H, Johansson H (1994) Gödsling av salixodlingar. Närings- och teknikutvecklingsverket NUTEK, Ramprogram Energiskog, R 1994:25, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    DEFRA (2002) Growing Short Rotation Coppice. Best practice guidelines. In <http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/short-rotation-coppice_tcm6-4262.pdf > [quoted, 28/9/2009]
  5. 5.
    Boelcke B (2006) Schnellwachsende Baumarten auf landwirt-schaftlichen Flächen. Leitfaden zur Erzeugung von Energieholz. Hrsg. Ministerium f. Ernährg., Landw., Forsten u. Fischerei Mecklenburg-Vorp. Schwerin, In <http://www.dendrom.de/daten/downloads/boelcke_leitfaden%20energieholz.pdf > [quoted, 5/4/2012]
  6. 6.
    Dawson M (2007) Short-Rotation Coppice Willow Best Practice Guidelines. Renew ProjectGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aronsson PG, Bergström LF (2001) Nitrate leaching from lysimeter-grown short-rotation willow coppice in relation to N-application, irrigation and soil type. Biomass Bioenergy 21(3):155–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dimitriou I, Aronsson P (2011) Wastewater and sewage sludge application to willows and poplars grown in lysimeters—plant response and treatment efficiency. Biomass Bioenergy 35(1):161–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aronsson P (2000) Nitrogen Retention in Vegetation Filters in Short-Rotation Willow Coppice. Acta Universit Agricul Sueci 16, Uppsala, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guidi W, Labrecque M (2010) Effects of high water supply on growth, water use, and nutrient allocation in willow and poplar grown in a 1-year pot trial. Water Air Soil Pollut 207(1–4):85–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Börjesson P, Berndes G (2006) The prospects for willow plantations for wastewater treatment in Sweden. Biomass Bioenergy 30(5):428–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dimitriou I, Rosenqvist H (2011) Sewage sludge and wastewater fertilisation of Short Rotation Coppice (SRC) for increased bioenergy production—biological and economic potential. Biomass Bioenergy 35(2):835–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mirck J, Isebrands JG, Verwijst T, Ledin S (2005) Development of short-rotation willow coppice systems for environmental purposes in Sweden. Biomass Bioenergy 28(2):219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bergström L, Johansson R (1992) Influence of fertilized short-rotation forest plantations on nitrogen concentrations in groundwater. Soil Use Manag 8:36–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aronsson PG, Bergström LF, Elowson SNE (2000) Long-term influence of intensively cultured short-rotation Willow Coppice on nitrogen concentrations in groundwater. J Environ Manage 58(2):135–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mortensen J, Nielsen KH, Jørgensen U (1998) Nitrate leaching during establishment of willow (Salix viminalis) on two soil types and at two fertilization levels. Biomass Bioenergy 15(6):457–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jørgensen U, Hansen EM (1998) Nitrate leaching from Miscanthus, willow, grain crops and rape. In: Proceedings of the IEA Bioenergy Task XII Activities 3.1 "Liquid Biofuels" and 3.2 "Lignocellulosic Solid Fuels" workshop (in co-operation with ENEA and ITABIA), Brasimone, Italy, October 9–10, 1997. Eds: Wörgetter , M. & Jørgensen U., BLT Austria, 207–218Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Larsson S, Aronsson P, Backlund A, Carlander A, Clause P, Cuingnet C, et al. (2003) Short-rotation Willow Biomass Plantations Irrigated and Fertilised with Wastewaters (FAIR5-CT97-3947). Final Report, 1–48Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Werner A, McCracken A (2008) The use of Short Rotation Coppice poplar and willow for the bioremediation of sewage effluent. Asp App Biol 90, Biomass and Energy Crops III:317–324Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sugiura A, Tyrrel SF, Seymour I, Burgess PJ (2008) Water renew systems: wastewater polishing using renewable energy crops. Water Sci Technol 57(9):1421–1428PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Aronsson P, Dahlin T, Dimitriou I (2010) Treatment of landfill leachate by irrigation of willow coppice—plant response and treatment efficiency. Environ Pollut 158:795–804PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dimitriou I (2005) Performance and sustainability of short-rotation energy crops treated with municipal and industrial residues Acta Universit Agricul Sueci 44, Uppsala, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goodlass G, Green M, Hilton B, McDonough S (2007) Nitrate leaching from short-rotation coppice. Soil Use Manag 23(2):178–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Labrecque M, Teodorescu TI (2001) Influence of plantation site and wastewater sludge fertilization on the performance and foliar nutrient status of two willow species grown under SRIC in southern Quebec (Canada). Fores Ecol Manag 150(3):223–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sagoo E (2004) Nutrient dynamics and growth at a coppice biofuel site. Doctoral Thesis. The University of Leeds, School of Geograpy, Leeds, UKGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosenqvist H, Dawson M (2005) Economics of using wastewater irrigation of willow in Northern Ireland. Biomass Bioenergy 29(2):83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Howarth RW, Marino R (2006) Nitrogen as the limiting nutrient for eutrophication in coastal marine ecosystems: evolving views over three decades. Limnol Oceanog 51(1):364–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Delgado A, Scalenghe R (2008) Aspects of phosphorus transfer from soils in Europe. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 171:552–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Djodjic F, Bergstrom L (2005) Phosphorus losses from arable fields in Sweden—effects of field-specific factors and long-term trends. Environm Monit Ass 102(1–3):103–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Swedish Board of Agriculture (2009) Riktlinjer för gödsling och kalkning 2010. Jordbruksinformation 13–2009. Jordbruksverket, pp 23–53Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nordh NE, Verwijst T (2004) Above-ground biomass assessments and first cutting cycle production in willow (Salix sp.) coppiceda comparison between destructive and non-destructive methods. Biomass Bioenergy 27:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Börjesson P, Tufvesson LM (2011) Agricultural crop-based biofuels—resource efficiency and environmental performance including direct land use changes. J Clean Produc 19(2–3):108–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Djodjic F, Borling K, Bergstrom L (2005) Phosphorus leaching in relation to soil type and soil phosphorus content. J Environ Qual 33(2):678–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Carlander A, Aronsson P, Allestam G, Stenström TA, Perttu K (2000) Transport and retention of bacteriophages in two types of willow-cropped lysimeters. J Eniron Sc Healt Tox/Hazar Subst Environ Engin 35(8):1477–1492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ulen B, Bechmann M, Folster J, Jarvie HP, Tunney H (2007) Agriculture as a phosphorus source for eutrophication in the north-west European countries, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom and Ireland: a review. Soil Use Manag 23(1):5–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schoumans OF, Groenendijk P (2000) Modeling soil phosphorus levels and phosphorus leaching from agricultural land in The Netherlands. J Environ Qual 29:111–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rytter RM (1997) Fine-root production and carbon and nitrogen allocation in basket willows. Acta Universit Agricul Sueci 39, Uppsala, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Crow P, Houston TJ (2004) The influence of soil and coppice cycle on the rooting habit of short rotation poplar and willow coppice. Biomass Bioenergy 26(6):497–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Baum C, Leinweber P, Weih M, Lamersdorf N, Dimitriou I (2009) Effects of short rotation coppice with willows and poplar on soil ecology. LBF 3(59):183–196Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Makeschin F (1994) Effects of energy forestry on soils. Biomass Bioenergy 6:63–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Yang X, Post WM (2011) Phosphorus transformations as a function of pedogenesis: a synthesis of soil phosphorus data using Hedley fractionation method. Biogeosc 8:2907–2916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Shober AL, Sims JT (2003) Phosphorus restrictions for land application of biosolids: current status and future trends. J Environ Qual 32(6):1955–1964PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    BIOPROS (2008) Guidelines for the safe application of wastewater and sewage sludge for high efficient woody biomass production in Short Rotation Plantations. In <http://biopros.info/137.0.html > [quoted, 5/4/2012]
  44. 44.
    Kostyanovsky KI, Evanylo GK, Lasley KK, Daniels WL, Shang C (2011) Leaching potential and forms of phosphorus in deep row applied biosolids underlying hybrid poplar. Ecol Engin 37(11):1765–1771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Samaras V, Tsadilas CD, Stamatiadis S (2008) Effects of repeated application of municipal sewage sludge on soil fertility, cotton yield, and nitrate leaching. Agronom J 100(3):477–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Qiang Z, Speir TW, van Schaik AP (2004) Leaching of nutrients from soil cores treated with a single large dose of digested sewage sludge. Biolog Fertil Soil 40(4):284–289Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Shepherd MA, Withers PJ (2001) Phosphorus leaching from liquid digested sewage sludge applied to sandy soils. J Agricul Sci 136:433–441Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ioannis Dimitriou
    • 1
  • Blas Mola-Yudego
    • 1
    • 2
  • Pär Aronsson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Crop Production EcologySwedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU)UppsalaSweden
  2. 2.School of Forest SciencesUniversity of Eastern FinlandJoensuuFinland

Personalised recommendations