Perennial Grasses for Sustainable European Protein Production

Conference paper

Abstract

Compared with annual grain and seed crops, the production of perennial crops reduces losses of nutrients, the need for pesticides, and supports soil carbon build-up. This may help implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD); the Nitrates Directive; and support the new EU greenhouse gas reduction goals for agriculture. Denmark has an especially vulnerable aquatic environment due to sandy soils, a long coast line, and high precipitation. Thus, fulfilling the WFD means some areas must halve their nitrate leaching, and radical changes are required to reduce losses while maintaining profitable crop production. National scenarios show that up to ten million tonnes of additional biomass can be sourced in Denmark without reducing food production or increasing the area under cultivation if a biorefinery industry is established. In one of the scenarios optimized for additional environmental benefits, a reduction of nitrate leaching equivalent to 23,000 tonnes N annually was estimated. This is approximately the reduction required by the WFD for Denmark. Even though much more organic matter will be mobilized for biorefining, soil carbon levels are estimated to be largely unchanged in the “environment” scenario. This scenario was achieved by converting approx. 9 % of agricultural land from annual crops into perennial grass. New experimental results support the anticipated increase in total biomass yield and reduction in nitrate leaching, when converting land currently used for grain crop production into grass production. Grasses and legumes have higher contents of protein with better quality (high lysine and methionine contents) than grain and seed crops. Thus, substituting imported soya bean protein with protein extracted from perennial grasses is an interesting option.

Keywords

Soya bean import Nitrate Pesticides Soil carbon Green biorefinery Sustainable intensification 

References

  1. Börjesson P, Prade T, Lantz M, Björnsson L (2015) Energy crop-based biogas as vehicle fuel-the impact of crop selection on energy efficiency and greenhouse gas performance. Energies 8:6033–6058Google Scholar
  2. Cadoux S, Ferchaud F, Demay C, Boizard H, Machet JM, Fourdinier E, Preudhomme M, Chabbert B, Gosse G, Mary B (2014) Implications of productivity and nutrient requirements on greenhouse gas balance of annual and perennial bioenergy crops. Glob Chg Biol Bioenergy 6:425–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chiesa S, Gnansounou E (2011) Protein extraction from biomass in a bioethanol refinery—possible dietary applications: use as animal feed and potential extension to human consumption. Bioresour Technol 102:427–436CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Dalgaard T, Hansen B, Hasler B, Hertel O, Hutchings NJ, Jacobsen BH, Jensen LS, Kronvang B, Olesen JE, Schjorring JK, Kristensen IS, Graversgaard M, Termansen M, Vejre H (2014) Policies for agricultural nitrogen management-trends, challenges and prospects for improved efficiency in Denmark. Environmental Research Letters 9.Google Scholar
  5. Danish Environmental Agency (2014) Bekæmpelsesmiddelstatistik 2013. Orientering fra Miljøstyrelsen nr. 6, 2014, 100pGoogle Scholar
  6. Dohleman FG, Long SP (2009) More productive than maize in the Midwest: how does Miscanthus do it? Plant Physiol 150:2104–2115CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. EIP-AGRI (2014) Focus Group on protein crops: Final Report, 48 pp. https://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/en/content/eip-agri-focus-group-protein-crops-final-report
  8. Ferchaud F, Vitte G, Bornet F, Strullu L, Mary B (2015) Soil water uptake and root distribution of different perennial and annual bioenergy crops. Plant and Soil 388:307–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Franzluebbers AJ, Sawchik J, Taboada MA (2014) Agronomic and environmental impacts of pasture-crop rotations in temperate North and South America. Agr Ecosyst Environ 190:18–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gylling M, Jørgensen U, Bentsen NS, Kristensen IT, Dalgaard T, Felby C, Johannsen VK (2013) The +10 Million Tonnes Study: increasing the sustainable production of biomass for biorefineries. University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, 32pGoogle Scholar
  11. Harvey M (2014) The food-energy-climate change Trilemma: toward a socio-economic analysis. Theory, Culture & Society 31:155–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hauggaard-Nielsen H, Lachouani P, Knudsen MT, Ambus P, Boelt B, Gislum R (2016) Productivity and carbon footprint of perennial grass-forage legume intercropping strategies with high or low nitrogen fertilizer input. Sci Total Environ 541:1339–1347CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Houseman RA, Connell J (1976) Utilization of products of green-crop fractionation by pigs and ruminants. Proc Nutr Soc 35:213–220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Jørgensen U, Olesen JE, Lærke PE, Sørensen KK, Raulund-Rasmussen K, Jensen PE, Felby C (2012) Solens energi kan omdannes mere effektivt til biomasse. In: Robust og Bæredygtig Bioenergi, 15-17, Proceedings of the Danish Strategic Research Council seminar at DONG Energy 5/12 2012Google Scholar
  15. Jørgensen U, Elsgaard L, Sørensen P, Olsen P, Vinther FP, Kristensen EF, Ejrnæs R, Nygaard B, Krogh PH, Bruhn A, Rasmussen MB, Johansen A, Jensen SK, Gylling M, Bojesen M (2013) Biomasseudnyttelse i Danmark—potentielle ressourcer og bæredygtighed. DCA Rapport Nr 033, 127pGoogle Scholar
  16. Kammes KL, Bals BD, Dale BE, Allen MS (2011) Grass leaf protein, a coproduct of cellulosic ethanol production, as a source of protein for livestock. Anim Feed Sci Technol 164:79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klop A, Durksz D, Zonderland J, Koopmans B (2015) Livestock research report 790. University, Wageningen, Grasraffinage en gebruik van rasvezel in de rundveevoedingGoogle Scholar
  18. Kuyper TW, Struik PC (2014) Epilogue: global food security, rhetoric, and the sustainable intensification debate. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 8:71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Linnemann AR, Dijkstra DS (2002) Toward sustainable production of protein-rich foods: appraisal of eight crops for Western Europe. PART I. Analysis of the primary links of the production chain. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 42:377–401CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Maciejewicz-Rys J, Hanczakowski P (1990) Improvement of the nutritive value of cereals by leaf protein supplementation. J Sci Food Agric 50:99–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Muylle H, Van Hulle S, De Vliegher A, Baert J, Van Bockstaele E, Roldán-Ruiz I (2015) Yield and energy balance of annual and perennial lignocellulosic crops for bio-refinery use: a 4-year field experiment in Belgium. Eur J Agronomy 63:62–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Parajuli R, Dalgaard T, Jorgensen U, Adamsen AP, Knudsen MT, Birkved M, Gylling M, Schjorring JK (2015) Biorefining in the prevailing energy and materials crisis: a review of sustainable pathways for biorefinery value chains and sustainability assessment methodologies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 43:244–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pugesgaard S, Olesen JE, Jorgensen U, Dalgaard T (2014) Biogas in organic agriculture- effects on productivity, energy self-sufficiency and greenhouse gas emissions. Renew Agric Food Syst 29:28–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pugesgaard S, Schelde K, Larsen SU, Lærke PE, Jørgensen U (2015) Comparing annual and perennial crops for bioenergy production influence on nitrate leaching and energy balance. Glob Chg Biol Bioenergy 7:1136–1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sanders JP, Bos HL (2013) Raw material demand and sourcing options for the development of a bio-based chemical industry in Europe. Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining 7:260–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schmeer M, Loges R, Dittert K, Senbayram M, Horn R, Taube F (2014) Legume-based forage production systems reduce nitrous oxide emissions. Soil Tillage Res 143:17–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Seppala A, Kyntaja S, Blasco L, Siika-Aho M, Hautala S, Byman O, Ilvesniemi H, Ojamo H, Rinne M, Harju M (2014) Grass silage extract, feed component suitable for pigs—prospects for on farm biorefinery. Proceedings of the 5th Nordic Feed Science Conference, Uppsala, Sweden, 10–11 June 2014, 163–168Google Scholar
  28. Sharma HSS, Lyons G, McRoberts C (2011) Biorefining of perennial grasses: a potential sustainable option for Northern Ireland grassland production. Chem Eng Res Design 89:2309–2321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Steinfeld H, Gerber P, Wassenaar T, Castel V, de Haan C (2006) Livestock’s long shadow: environmental issues and options. Food & Agriculture Organisation, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  30. Taghizadeh-Toosi A, Olesen JE, Kristensen K, Elsgaard L, Ostergaard HS, Laegdsmand M, Greve MH, Christensen BT (2014) Changes in carbon stocks of Danish agricultural mineral soils between 1986 and 2009. Eur J Soil Sci 65:730–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Termansen M, Gylling M, Jørgensen U, Hermansen J, Hansen LB, Knudsen MT, Adamsen APS, Ambye-Jensen M, Jensen MV, Jensen SK, Andersen HE, Gyldenkærne S (2015) Grøn biomasse. DCA Rapport 68, 38 pGoogle Scholar
  32. Tonini D, Astrup T (2012) LCA of biomass-based energy systems: a case study for Denmark. Appl Energy 99:234–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tsiplakou E, Economou G, Hadjigeorgiou I, Kominakis A, Zervas G (2014) Plant species mixtures for forage production for ruminant feeding under Mediterranean conditions. Exp Agric 50:426–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van der Veen M (2010) Agricultural innovation: invention and adoption or change and adaptation? World Archaeol 42:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AgroecologyAarhus UniversityTjeleDenmark

Personalised recommendations