I. L. Lloyd, R. Morrison, R. P. Grayson, A. M. J. Cumming, B. D'Acunha, M. V. Galdos, C. D. Evans, P. J. Chapman
{"title":"在泥炭上种植生物能源玉米的碳排放量是在矿质土壤上种植玉米的两倍","authors":"I. L. Lloyd, R. Morrison, R. P. Grayson, A. M. J. Cumming, B. D'Acunha, M. V. Galdos, C. D. Evans, P. J. Chapman","doi":"10.1111/gcbb.13169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The area of land dedicated to growing maize for bioenergy in the United Kingdom is rapidly expanding. To understand how maize production influences soil carbon (C) dynamics, and whether this is influenced by soil type, we measured net ecosystem exchange (NEE) using the eddy covariance technique over the 2021 growing season. We combined the NEE data with C imports and exports to calculate the net ecosystem productivity (NEP) of two maize crops grown for bioenergy in the United Kingdom, one site on mineral soil and the other on lowland agricultural peat. Maize was similarly productive at both sites—gross primary productivity was 1107 g C m<sup>−2</sup> at the site with mineral soil and 1407 g C m<sup>−2</sup> at the peat site. However, total ecosystem respiration was considerably higher from the peat site (1198 g C m<sup>−2</sup>) compared with the mineral soil site (678 g C m<sup>−2</sup>). After accounting for the removal of C in harvested biomass, both sites were net C sources, but C losses were over two times greater from the peat site (NEP = 290 g C m<sup>−2</sup>) than the mineral site (NEP = 136 g C m<sup>−2</sup>). While annual crops may be needed to produce bioenergy in the short term, growing maize for bioenergy in the United Kingdom does not appear to be a viable option for C sequestration over the long term, as it leads to high carbon losses from agroecosystems, especially those on organic soils. Instead, growing perennial bioenergy crops on mineral soils with a low organic C content is a more appropriate option.</p>","PeriodicalId":55126,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","volume":"16 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gcbb.13169","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Maize grown for bioenergy on peat emits twice as much carbon as when grown on mineral soil\",\"authors\":\"I. L. Lloyd, R. Morrison, R. P. Grayson, A. M. J. Cumming, B. D'Acunha, M. V. Galdos, C. D. Evans, P. J. Chapman\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/gcbb.13169\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The area of land dedicated to growing maize for bioenergy in the United Kingdom is rapidly expanding. To understand how maize production influences soil carbon (C) dynamics, and whether this is influenced by soil type, we measured net ecosystem exchange (NEE) using the eddy covariance technique over the 2021 growing season. We combined the NEE data with C imports and exports to calculate the net ecosystem productivity (NEP) of two maize crops grown for bioenergy in the United Kingdom, one site on mineral soil and the other on lowland agricultural peat. Maize was similarly productive at both sites—gross primary productivity was 1107 g C m<sup>−2</sup> at the site with mineral soil and 1407 g C m<sup>−2</sup> at the peat site. However, total ecosystem respiration was considerably higher from the peat site (1198 g C m<sup>−2</sup>) compared with the mineral soil site (678 g C m<sup>−2</sup>). After accounting for the removal of C in harvested biomass, both sites were net C sources, but C losses were over two times greater from the peat site (NEP = 290 g C m<sup>−2</sup>) than the mineral site (NEP = 136 g C m<sup>−2</sup>). While annual crops may be needed to produce bioenergy in the short term, growing maize for bioenergy in the United Kingdom does not appear to be a viable option for C sequestration over the long term, as it leads to high carbon losses from agroecosystems, especially those on organic soils. Instead, growing perennial bioenergy crops on mineral soils with a low organic C content is a more appropriate option.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55126,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Change Biology Bioenergy\",\"volume\":\"16 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gcbb.13169\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Change Biology Bioenergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.13169\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRONOMY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.13169","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
摘要
英国用于种植生物能源玉米的土地面积正在迅速扩大。为了了解玉米生产如何影响土壤碳(C)的动态变化,以及这种变化是否受土壤类型的影响,我们使用涡度协方差技术测量了 2021 年生长季的净生态系统交换(NEE)。我们将净生态系统交换数据与碳输入和输出相结合,计算出了英国两种为生物能源而种植的玉米作物的净生态系统生产力(NEP),其中一种作物生长在矿质土壤上,另一种生长在低地农用泥炭上。两地的玉米产量相似--矿质土壤上的总初级生产力为 1107 克 C m-2,泥炭上的总初级生产力为 1407 克 C m-2。然而,泥炭地的生态系统总呼吸量(1198 克 C m-2)要比矿质土壤地(678 克 C m-2)高得多。考虑到收获生物量中的碳清除量,两个地点都是净碳源,但泥炭地点的碳损失量(NEP = 290 g C m-2)是矿质土壤地点(NEP = 136 g C m-2)的两倍多。虽然短期内可能需要种植一年生作物来生产生物能源,但在英国种植玉米来生产生物能源似乎并不是一个长期固碳的可行方案,因为这会导致农业生态系统,尤其是有机土壤上的农业生态系统碳损失过高。相反,在有机碳含量低的矿质土壤上种植多年生生物能源作物是更合适的选择。
Maize grown for bioenergy on peat emits twice as much carbon as when grown on mineral soil
The area of land dedicated to growing maize for bioenergy in the United Kingdom is rapidly expanding. To understand how maize production influences soil carbon (C) dynamics, and whether this is influenced by soil type, we measured net ecosystem exchange (NEE) using the eddy covariance technique over the 2021 growing season. We combined the NEE data with C imports and exports to calculate the net ecosystem productivity (NEP) of two maize crops grown for bioenergy in the United Kingdom, one site on mineral soil and the other on lowland agricultural peat. Maize was similarly productive at both sites—gross primary productivity was 1107 g C m−2 at the site with mineral soil and 1407 g C m−2 at the peat site. However, total ecosystem respiration was considerably higher from the peat site (1198 g C m−2) compared with the mineral soil site (678 g C m−2). After accounting for the removal of C in harvested biomass, both sites were net C sources, but C losses were over two times greater from the peat site (NEP = 290 g C m−2) than the mineral site (NEP = 136 g C m−2). While annual crops may be needed to produce bioenergy in the short term, growing maize for bioenergy in the United Kingdom does not appear to be a viable option for C sequestration over the long term, as it leads to high carbon losses from agroecosystems, especially those on organic soils. Instead, growing perennial bioenergy crops on mineral soils with a low organic C content is a more appropriate option.
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.