Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Species Trials of Short Rotation Woody Crops on Two Wastewater Application Sites in North Carolina, USA

  • Published:
BioEnergy Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Forty-two Populus spp. clones, Eucalyptus benthamii, and seven tree species native to North Carolina were evaluated for survival and height growth through the establishment phase at two municipal wastewater application sites. Groundwater was monitored at each site to determine if establishment of the species trials resulted in exceedances of nutrient mitigation requirements. At the Gibson Wastewater Treatment Facility, 26 Populus clones had 100 % survival, with mean height growths ranging between 152 to 260 cm, and basal diameters ranging between 11.4 and 28.8 mm. Green ash, planted in 2011 and 2012, had high survivorship (>95 %) with first year mean height growth of 30 ± 28 cm (2012) and second year mean height growth of 101 ± 52 cm (2011). Basal diameter for green ash was 33.3 ± 12.6 mm. E. benthamii had moderate survivorship (>77 %) and first year mean height growth of 47 ± 27 cm. At the Jacksonville Wastewater Treatment Facility, green ash and bald cypress had high survivorship (>96 %), first year mean height growths of 14 ± 25 cm and 27 ± 16 cm, and basal diameters of 13.1 ± 3.9 mm and 11.6 ± 4.8 mm, respectively. Survivorship for 12 Populus clones ranged from 50 and 94 % with mean first year height growths between 58 to 121 cm, and basal diameters between 6.8 and 12.5 mm. E. benthamii had low survivorship (43 %) with mean first year height growths of 17 ± 17 cm and basal diameters of 12.0 ± 7.7 mm. Groundwater concentrations of NO3 + NO2 and N-NH4 remained below regulatory requirements at both sites with one exceedance in February 2012 in Jacksonville, NC. The results show that some Populus clones are excellent candidates for woody biomass production on municipal wastewater application fields. Native green ash and bald cypress are also good candidates, but these trees may require longer rotations than Populus to achieve similar biomass yields.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nyland RD (1996) Silviculture: concepts and applications. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. McKay H (ed) (2011) Short rotation forestry: review of growth and environmental impacts, 2nd edn. Forest Research Monograph, Surrey

    Google Scholar 

  3. Christersson, L. (2006). “Short-rotation forestry—a complement to “conventional” forestry.” Unasylva (0041–6436), 57 (223), p. 34.

  4. Dickmann DI (2006) Silviculture and biology of short-rotation woody crops in temperate regions: then and now. Biomass Bioenergy 30(8):696–705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Steinbeck K (1999, February) Thirty years of short-rotation hardwoods research. In Proceedings of the tenth biennial southern silvicultural research conference (Vol. 16, No. 18, pp 63–5)

  6. Perlack RD, Ranney JW, Barron WF, Cushman JH, Trimble JL (1986) Short-rotation intensive culture for the production of energy feedstocks in the US: a review of experimental results and remaining obstacles to commercialization. Biomass 9(2):145–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hansen E, Moore L, Netzer D, Ostry M, Phipps H, Zavitkovski J (1983) Establishing intensively cultured hybrid poplar plantations for fuel and fiber. General Technical Report NC-78 USDA Forest Service, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Rhinelander, Wisconsin. Retrieved online: http://nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/142

  8. Guo Z, Hodges DG, Young TM (2012) Woody biomass utilization policies: state rankings for the U.S. For Policy Econ 21:54–61

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. United States Department of Energy (2007) Executive order (E.O.) 13423, Strengthening federal environmental, energy, and transportation management

  10. North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association (2007) CITIZEN’S GUIDE: The North Carolina renewable energy and energy efficiency portfolio standard. North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association, Raleigh

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dixon R, Solomon A, Brown S, Houghton R, Trexier M, Wisniewski J (1994) Carbon pools and flux of global forest ecosystems. Science 263(5144):185–190

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zalesny Jr RS, Cunningham M, Hall R, Mirck J, Rockwood D, Stanturf J, Volk T (2011) Woody biomass from short rotation energy crops, chapter 2. In: Zhu J, Zhang X, Pan X (eds) Sustainable Prod of Fuels, Chem, Fibers For Biomass (pp. 27–63). American Chemical Society

  13. Coleman MD, Friend AL, Kern CC (2004) Carbon allocation and nitrogen acquisition in a developing Populus deltoides plantation. Tree Physiol 24:1347–1357

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tenenbaum D (1998) Food vs. fuel: diversion of crops could cause more hunger. Env Health Perspect 116(6):254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gerbens-Leenes W, Hoekstra AY, Van Der Meer TH (2009) The water footprint of bioenergy. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106(25):10219–10223

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Stone KC, Hunt PG, Cantrell KB, Ro KS (2010) The potential impacts of biomass feedstock production on water resource availability. Bioresour Technol 101(6):2014–2025

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Campbell JE, Lobell DB, Genova RC, Field CB (2008) The global potential of bioenergy on abandoned agriculture lands. Env Sci Technol 42(15):5791–5794

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Perlack R, Wright L, Turhollow A, Graham R, Stokes B, Erhlbach D (2005) Biomass as feedstock for a bioenergy and bioproducts industry: the technical feasibility of a billion-ton annual supply. U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Oak Ridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Cai X, Zhang X, Wang D (2011) Land availability for biofuel production. Env Sci Techn-Columbus 45(1):334

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gopalakrishnan G, Cristina Negri M, Snyder SW (2011) A novel framework to classify marginal land for sustainable biomass feedstock production. J Env Qual 40(5):1593–1600

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Peterson GM, Galbraith JK (1932) The concept of marginal land. J Farm Econ 14(2):295–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Moulton R, Richards K (1990) Costs of sequestering carbon through tree planting and forest management in the United States. (General Technical Report No. WO-58). Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture

  23. Wiegmann K, Hennenberg KJ, Fritsche UR (2008) Degraded land and sustainable bioenergy feedstock production. In: Joint International Workshop on High Nature Value Criteria and Potential for Sustainable Use of Degraded Lands

  24. Louwagie G, Bojnec Š (2009) Addressing soil degradation in EU agriculture: relevant process, practices and policies; report on the project ‘Sustainable agriculture and soil conservation (SoCo)’. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

  25. Sopper WE, Kerr SN (eds) (1979) Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and sludge on forest and disturbed land. Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park

    Google Scholar 

  26. Börjesson P, Berndes G (2006) The prospects for willow plantations for wastewater treatment in Sweden. Biomass Bioenergy 30(5):428–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 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):835–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Shah FUR, Ahmad N, Masood KR, Peralta-Videa JR, Zahid DM, Zubair M (2010) Response of Eucalyptus camaldulensis to irrigation with the Hudiara drain effluent. Int J Phytoremediation 12(4):343–357

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zalesny RS Jr, Stanturf JA, Evett SR, Kandil NF, Soriano C (2011) Opportunities for woody crop production using treated wastewater in Egypt. I. Afforestation strategies. Int J Phytoremediation 13(sup1):102–121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hopmans P, Stewart HTL, Flinn DW, Hillman TJ (1990) Growth, biomass production and nutrient accumulation by seven tree species irrigated with municipal effluent at Wodonga, Australia. For Ecol Manag 30(1–4):203–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Paerl HW, Valdes LM, Joyner AR, Piehler MF, Lebo ME (2004) Solving problems resulting from solutions: evolution of a dual nutrient management strategy for the eutrophying Neuse river estuary, North Carolina. Environ Sci Technol 38(11):3068–3073

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Biofuels Center of North Carolina (2012) Building a biofuels roadmap to the future. Retrieved from: http://www.biofuelscenter.org/

  33. Breur D, Cole D, Schiess P (1979) Nitrogen transformation and leaching associated with wastewater irrigation in douglas fir, poplar, grass, and unvegetated systems. In: Kerr SN, Sopper WE (eds) Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and sludge on forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, pp 19–33

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wilson F, Dawson W (2001) Bioremediation of municipal wastewater using short rotation coppice. Asp App Biol 65(2001):329–335

    Google Scholar 

  35. Dimitriou I, Mola-Yudego B, Aronsson P (2012) Impact of willow short rotation coppice on water quality. BioEnergy Res, 1–9

  36. 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). For Ecol Manag 150(3):223–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Minogue PJ, Miwa M, Rockwood DL, Mackowiak CL (2012) Removal of nitrogen and phosphorus by Eucalyptus and Populus at a tertiary treated municipal wastewater sprayfield. Int J Phytoremediation 14(10):1010–1023

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Overman A (1979) Wastewater irrigation at Tallahassee, Florida. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ada

    Google Scholar 

  39. Smith WH, Post DM, Adrian FW (1979) Waste management to maintain or enhance productivity. Proc. “Impact of Intensive Harvesting on Forest Nutrient Cycling”. Pub., State University of New York, School of Forestry, Syracuse, New York, 304–320

  40. Cooley J (1978) Survival and early growth of selected trees on wastewater application sites, Research note NC-231. Dept. of Agriculture Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kaczmarek DJ, Coyle DR, Coleman MD (2013) Survival and growth of a range of Populus clones in central South Carolina USA through age ten: do early assessments reflect longer-term survival and growth trends? Biomass Bioenergy 49:260–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Margolis HA, Brand DG (1990) An ecophysiological basis for understanding plantation establishment. Can J Forest Res 20(4):375–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Nielsen L (2011) A GIS database of North Carolina municipal waste land application sites; current uses and potential for biofuels crop production. North Carolina State University, Master of Environmental Assessment

    Google Scholar 

  44. Frederick D, Rubin A, Frederick S, Woody T (1998) Renovation of municipal wastewater and biomass production in hardwood tree plantations. (No. Paper No. 987032). An ASAE Meeting Presentation, Orlando

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kline KL, Coleman MD (2010) Woody energy crops in the southeastern United States: two centuries of practitioner experience. Biomass Bioenergy 34(12):1655–1666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS 2011.Web soil survey. Retrieved, 2012, from http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm

  47. United States Geological Survey, National field manual for the collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chaps. A1–A9, available online at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A

  48. NC DENR—Division of Water Quality (2009) Well Construction Standards, Criteria and Standards Applicable to Water Supply and Certain Other Wells (NC Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02C.0100). Retrieved from http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/aps/gpu/documents/2C.0100RULESFINALSeptember2009.pdf

  49. Gilmour A, Anderson R, Rae A (1985) The analysis of binomial data by a generalized linear mixed model. Biometrika 72(3):593–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Laing FM, Sendak PE, Aleong J (1985) Species trials for biomass production on abandoned farmland. North J Appl For 2(2):43–47

    Google Scholar 

  51. Coyle DR, Coleman MD, Durant JA, Newman LA Survival and growth of 31 Populus clones in South Carolina. Biomass Bioenergy 30(8–9):750–758

  52. Tzanakakis VA, Paranychianakis NV, Angelakis AN (2009) Nutrient removal and biomass production in land treatment systems receiving domestic effluent. Ecol Eng 35(10):1485–1492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Van den Driessche R (1999) First-year growth response of four Populus trichocarpa x Populus deltoides clones to fertilizer placement and level. Can J For Res 29:554–562

    Google Scholar 

  54. Romagosa MA, Robison DJ (2003) Biological constraints on the growth of hardwood regeneration in upland Piedmont forests. For Ecol Manage 175(1–3):545–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Nilsson U, Allen HL (2003) Short- and long-term effects of site preparation, fertilization and vegetation control on growth and stand development of planted loblolly pine. For Ecol Manage 175(1):367–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Grossnickle SC (2012) Why seedlings survive: influence of plant attributes. New Forests 43(5–6):711–738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Morris LA, Lowery RF (1988) Influence of site preparation on soil conditions affecting stand establishment and tree growth. South J Appl For 12(3):170–178

    Google Scholar 

  58. Justin MZ, Pajk N, Zupanc V, Zupančič M (2010) Phytoremediation of landfill leachate and compost wastewater by irrigation of Populus and Salix: biomass and growth response. Waste Manag 30(6):1032–1042

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Aasamaa K, Heinsoo K, Holm B (2010) Biomass production, water use and photosynthesis of Salix clones grown in a wastewater purification system. Biomass Bioenergy 34(6):897–905

    Google Scholar 

  60. Frederick D (1994) Town of Garner: municipal spray irrigation wastewater site. (Hardwood Plantation Establishment Report and Management Guide). Triangle Wetland Consultants, Inc., Raleigh

    Google Scholar 

  61. Burns R, Honkala B (1990) Silvics of North America: 2. Hardwoods. (Agriculture Handbook, 654th edn. Department of Agriculutre, Forest Service, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  62. Keim RF, Izdepski CW, Day JW (2012) Growth responses of baldcypress to wastewater nutrient additions and changing hydrologic regime. Wetlands 1–9

  63. Nercessian G (1994) Renovation of wastewater by a short rotation intensive culture hybrid poplar plantation in Vernon, BC. Dissertation, University of British Colombia

  64. Dimitriou I, Aronsson P (2004) Nitrogen leaching from short-rotation willow coppice after intensive irrigation with wastewater. Biomass Bioenergy 26(5):433–441

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Heilman PE, Fu-Guang X (1993) Influence of nitrogen on growth and productivity of short-rotation Populus trichocarpa × Populus deltoides hybrids. Can J For Res 23(9):1863–1869

    Google Scholar 

  66. Schmidt-Walter P, Lamersdorf NP (2012) Biomass production with willow and poplar short rotation coppices on sensitive areas—the impact on nitrate leaching and groundwater recharge in a drinking water catchment near Hanover Germany. BioEnergy Res 1–17

  67. Ceulmans R, Shao BY, Jiang XN, Kalina J (1995) First- and second-year aboveground growth and productivity of two Populusi hybrids grown at ambient and elevated CO2. Tree Physiol 16:61–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Chambers PG, Borralho NM (1997) Importance of survival in short-rotation tree breeding programs. Can J For Res 27(6):911–917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Balasus A, Bischoff WA, Schwarz A, Scholz V, Kern J (2012) Nitrogen fluxes during the initial stage of willows and poplars in short–rotation coppices. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 175(5):729–738

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Adegbidi HG, Volk TA, White EH, Abrahamson LP, Briggs RD, Bickelhaupt DH (2001) Biomass and nutrient removal by willow clones in experimental bioenergy plantations in New York State. Biomass Bioenergy 20:399–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Haggar JP, Ewel JJ (1995) Establishment, resource acquisition, and early productivity as determined by biomass allocation patterns of three tropical tree species. Forest Science 41(4):689–708

    Google Scholar 

  72. Truax B, Gagnon D, Chevrier N (1994) Nitrate reductase activity in relation to growth and soil N forms in red oak and red ash planted in three different environments: forest, clear-cut and field. For Ecol Manage 64(1):71–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Falkengren-Grerup U (1995) Interspecies differences in the preference of ammonium and nitrate in vascular plants. Oecologia 102(3):305–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. United States Environmental Protection Agency (1973) Nitrification and Denitrification Facilities Wastewater Treatment. EPA Technology Transfer Seminar Publication. Publication No. 625/4-73-004A.

  75. 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):155–164

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge support from the North Carolina Biofuels Center. We would also like to thank and acknowledge ArborGen®, particularly Dr. Jeff Wright, for providing tree material and assisting with experimental design. We also would like to thank Dr. Isik Fikret for his assistance on the statistical analysis on all data and Dr. Jose Stape, North Carolina State University Forest Productivity Cooperative. We are grateful to the Town of Gibson, North Carolina and the City of Jacksonville Wastewater Treatment facility for their cooperation and assistance at the experimental sites.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, North Carolina, NC, USA

    Shawn Dayson Shifflett, Dennis W Hazel, Douglas J Frederick & Elizabeth Guthrie Nichols

Authors
  1. Shawn Dayson Shifflett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dennis W Hazel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Douglas J Frederick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elizabeth Guthrie Nichols
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth Guthrie Nichols.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(PDF 473 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shifflett, S.D., Hazel, D.W., Frederick, D.J. et al. Species Trials of Short Rotation Woody Crops on Two Wastewater Application Sites in North Carolina, USA. Bioenerg. Res. 7, 157–173 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-013-9351-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-013-9351-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation