Climate regulation, energy provisioning and water purification: Quantifying ecosystem service delivery of bioenergy willow grown on riparian buffer zones using life cycle assessment
- 736 Downloads
Whilst life cycle assessment (LCA) boundaries are expanded to account for negative indirect consequences of bioenergy such as indirect land use change (ILUC), ecosystem services such as water purification sometimes delivered by perennial bioenergy crops are typically neglected in LCA studies. Consequential LCA was applied to evaluate the significance of nutrient interception and retention on the environmental balance of unfertilised energy willow planted on 50-m riparian buffer strips and drainage filtration zones in the Skåne region of Sweden. Excluding possible ILUC effects and considering oil heat substitution, strategically planted filter willow can achieve net global warming potential (GWP) and eutrophication potential (EP) savings of up to 11.9 Mg CO2e and 47 kg PO4e ha−1 year−1, respectively, compared with a GWP saving of 14.8 Mg CO2e ha−1 year−1 and an EP increase of 7 kg PO4e ha−1 year−1 for fertilised willow. Planting willow on appropriate buffer and filter zones throughout Skåne could avoid 626 Mg year−1 PO4e nutrient loading to waters.
KeywordsLCA Eutrophication Greenhouse gas emissions Bioenergy Agriculture Environment
The research presented in this paper is a contribution to the strategic research area Biodiversity and Ecosystems in a Changing Climate, BECC. The authors are grateful to BECC for funding a workshop in Lund in February 2014 that initiated this collaborative study.
- Austin, P. 2014. The economic benefits of native shelter belts report 2/14. Warrnambool: Basalt-to-Bay Landcare.Google Scholar
- Börjesson, P., G. Berndes, F. Fredriksson, and T. Kåberger. 2002. Multifunktionella bioenergiodlingar. Slutrapport till Energimyndigheten (Multifunctional bioenergy plantations. Final report to the Swedish Energy Agency). Report No 37, Environmental and Energy Systems Studies, Lund University, Lund.Google Scholar
- Brandt, M. H. Ejhed, and L. Rapp. 2008. Näringsbelastning på Östersjön och Västerhavet 2006 (Nutrient load on the Baltic Sea and the North Sea 2006—OK translation David?). Report 5815, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm.Google Scholar
- CML, 2010. Characterisation factors database available online from Institute of Environmental Sciences (CML), Universiteit Leiden, Leiden. http://cml.leiden.edu/software/data-cmlia.html. Accessed 15 May 2012.
- EC. 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. OJEU: L 140/16.Google Scholar
- Ecoinvent. 2014. Ecoinvent database version 3.1, accessed via SimaPro.Google Scholar
- Eurostat. 2015. Population and employment statistics page. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do. Accessed 22 Sept 2015.
- Fischer, G., E. Hizsnyik, S. Prieler, H., and van Velthuizen. 2007. Assessment of biomass potentials for biofuel feedstock in Europe: Methodology and results. REFUEL project, Workpackage 2. Laxenburg.Google Scholar
- IPCC. 2006. IPCC GUIDELINES for national greenhouse gas inventories. http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.html. Accessed 31 Mar 2016.
- Johnsson, H., and K. Mårtensson. 2002. Kväveläckage från svensk åkermark (Nitrogen leaching from Swedish arable land). Report 5248, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm.Google Scholar
- Jordbruksverket. 2014a. Jordbruksstatistisk årsbok 2014. Jönköping.Google Scholar
- Jordbruksverket. 2014b. Riktlinjer för gödsling och kalkning 2015. Jönköping.Google Scholar
- Kloverpris, J., H. Wenzel, and P. Nielsen. 2008. Life cycle inventory modeling of land use induced by crop consumption. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 13: 13–21.Google Scholar
- Matthews, R.B., and P. Grogan. 2001. Potential C-sequestration rates of short-rotation coppiced willow and Miscanthus biomass crops: A modelling study. Aspects of Applied Biology 65: 303–312.Google Scholar
- McKay, H. ed. 2011. Short rotation forestry: Review of growth and environmental impacts. Forest Research Monograph, 2, Forest Research, Surrey.Google Scholar
- Misselbrook, T.H., S.L. Gilhespy, and L.M. Cardenas (eds.). 2012. Inventory of ammonia emissions from UK agriculture 2011. London: Defra.Google Scholar
- Mulligan, D., R. Edwards, L. Marelli, N. Scarlat, M. Brandao, and F. Monforti-Ferrario. 2010. The effects of increased demand for biofuel feedstocks on the world agricultural markets and areas. JRC, Ispra.Google Scholar
- PBL. 2011. The protein puzzle: The consumption and production of meat, dairy and fish in the European Union. PBL (Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency), The Hague.Google Scholar
- Plassmann, K. 2012. Methods for assessing the carbon footprints of products can favour low- over high-yielding agricultural systems when carbon removals are included. Nature Climate Change 2: 2–6.Google Scholar
- SCB. 2014 Skane land data. Statistiska centralbyrån, Stockholm. http://www.scb.se/. Accessed Nov 2014.
- Styles, D., J. Gibbons, A.P. Williams, H. Stichnothe, D.R. Chadwick, and J.R. Healey. 2015a. Cattle feed or bioenergy? Consequential life cycle assessment of biogas feedstock scenarios on dairy farms, global change biology bioenergy 7: 1034–1049.Google Scholar
- Weidema, B.P., T. Ekvall, and R. Heijungs. 2009. Guidelines for application of deepened and broadened LCA. Deliverable D18 of work package 5 of the CALCAS project. ENEA, Rome.Google Scholar
- Withers, P. 2013. Personal communication, 22 April 2013.Google Scholar