Bethany Blakely, Caitlin E. Moore, Taylor L. Pederson, Christy D. Gibson, Michael C. Benson, Evan Dracup, Carl J. Bernacchi
{"title":"Climate Forcing of Bioenergy Feedstocks: Insights From Carbon and Energy Flux Measurements","authors":"Bethany Blakely, Caitlin E. Moore, Taylor L. Pederson, Christy D. Gibson, Michael C. Benson, Evan Dracup, Carl J. Bernacchi","doi":"10.1111/gcbb.70026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Bioenergy from biofuels has the potential to slow growing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations by reducing fossil fuel use. However, growing bioenergy feedstocks is a land-intensive process. In the United States, the recent expansion of maize bioethanol has presented some environmental costs, prompting the development of several alternative bioenergy feedstocks. These feedstocks, selected in part for traits associated with ecosystem services, may provide opportunities for environmental benefits beyond fossil fuel displacement. We hypothesized that these bioenergy ecosystems will provide direct climatic cooling through their influence on carbon and radiative energy fluxes (i.e., through albedo). To test this hypothesis, we investigated the potential cooling effect of five current or potential bioenergy feedstocks using multi-year records from eddy covariance towers. Perennial feedstocks were carbon sinks, with an annual mean net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB) of −2.7 ± 2.1 Mg C ha<sup>−1</sup> for miscanthus, −0.8 ± 1.1 Mg C ha<sup>−1</sup> for switchgrass, and −1.4 ± 0.7 Mg C ha<sup>−1</sup> for prairie. In contrast, annual rotations were generally carbon sources, with an annual mean NECB of 2.6 ± 2.4 Mg C ha<sup>−1</sup> for maize-soy and 3.2 ± 2.1 Mg C ha<sup>−1</sup> for sorghum-soy. Using maize-soy as a baseline, conversion to alternative feedstocks increased albedo, inducing further cooling. This effect was strongest for miscanthus, with −3.5 ± 2.0 W m<sup>−2</sup> of radiative forcing, and weakest for sorghum, with −1.4 ± 1.4 W m<sup>−2</sup>. When feedstock effects on carbon and albedo were compared using carbon equivalents, carbon fluxes were the stronger ecosystem effect, underscoring the role of perennial species as effective carbon sinks. This work highlights the impact of feedstock choice on ecosystem processes as an element of bioenergy land conversion strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":55126,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","volume":"17 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gcbb.70026","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.70026","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Bioenergy from biofuels has the potential to slow growing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations by reducing fossil fuel use. However, growing bioenergy feedstocks is a land-intensive process. In the United States, the recent expansion of maize bioethanol has presented some environmental costs, prompting the development of several alternative bioenergy feedstocks. These feedstocks, selected in part for traits associated with ecosystem services, may provide opportunities for environmental benefits beyond fossil fuel displacement. We hypothesized that these bioenergy ecosystems will provide direct climatic cooling through their influence on carbon and radiative energy fluxes (i.e., through albedo). To test this hypothesis, we investigated the potential cooling effect of five current or potential bioenergy feedstocks using multi-year records from eddy covariance towers. Perennial feedstocks were carbon sinks, with an annual mean net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB) of −2.7 ± 2.1 Mg C ha−1 for miscanthus, −0.8 ± 1.1 Mg C ha−1 for switchgrass, and −1.4 ± 0.7 Mg C ha−1 for prairie. In contrast, annual rotations were generally carbon sources, with an annual mean NECB of 2.6 ± 2.4 Mg C ha−1 for maize-soy and 3.2 ± 2.1 Mg C ha−1 for sorghum-soy. Using maize-soy as a baseline, conversion to alternative feedstocks increased albedo, inducing further cooling. This effect was strongest for miscanthus, with −3.5 ± 2.0 W m−2 of radiative forcing, and weakest for sorghum, with −1.4 ± 1.4 W m−2. When feedstock effects on carbon and albedo were compared using carbon equivalents, carbon fluxes were the stronger ecosystem effect, underscoring the role of perennial species as effective carbon sinks. This work highlights the impact of feedstock choice on ecosystem processes as an element of bioenergy land conversion strategies.
期刊介绍:
GCB Bioenergy is an international journal publishing original research papers, review articles and commentaries that promote understanding of the interface between biological and environmental sciences and the production of fuels directly from plants, algae and waste. The scope of the journal extends to areas outside of biology to policy forum, socioeconomic analyses, technoeconomic analyses and systems analysis. Papers do not need a global change component for consideration for publication, it is viewed as implicit that most bioenergy will be beneficial in avoiding at least a part of the fossil fuel energy that would otherwise be used.
Key areas covered by the journal:
Bioenergy feedstock and bio-oil production: energy crops and algae their management,, genomics, genetic improvements, planting, harvesting, storage, transportation, integrated logistics, production modeling, composition and its modification, pests, diseases and weeds of feedstocks. Manuscripts concerning alternative energy based on biological mimicry are also encouraged (e.g. artificial photosynthesis).
Biological Residues/Co-products: from agricultural production, forestry and plantations (stover, sugar, bio-plastics, etc.), algae processing industries, and municipal sources (MSW).
Bioenergy and the Environment: ecosystem services, carbon mitigation, land use change, life cycle assessment, energy and greenhouse gas balances, water use, water quality, assessment of sustainability, and biodiversity issues.
Bioenergy Socioeconomics: examining the economic viability or social acceptability of crops, crops systems and their processing, including genetically modified organisms [GMOs], health impacts of bioenergy systems.
Bioenergy Policy: legislative developments affecting biofuels and bioenergy.
Bioenergy Systems Analysis: examining biological developments in a whole systems context.