• Energy Research
• Closed Access close
• Open Source close
• Embargo close
• 15. Life on land close
• 2. Zero hunger close
• IT close
• BE close

According to the renewable energy directive 2009/28/EC, the European Union Member States should increase by 2020 the use of renewable energy to 20% of gross final energy consumption and to reach a mandatory share of 10% renewable energy in the transport sector. This study aims to quantify the impact of 2020 bioenergy targets on the land use in the EU, based on the projections of the National Renewable Action Plans in four scenarios: Scenario 1. Bioenergy targets according to NREAPs; Scenario 2. Bioenergy targets according to NREAPs, no second generation biofuels; Scenario 3. Bioenergy targets according to NREAPs, reduced import of biofuels and bioliquids; Scenario 4. Bioenergy targets according to NREAPs, high imports of biofuels and bioliquids. This study also considers the credit for co-products generated from biofuel production. The analysis reveals that the land used in the EU for bioenergy would range between 13.5 Mha and 25.2 Mha in 2020. This represent between 12.2% and 22.5% of the total arable land used and 7.3% and 13.5% of the Utilised Agricultural Area (UAA). In the NREAPS scenario, about 17.4 Mha would be used for bioenergy production, representing 15.7% of arable land and 9.4% of UAA. The increased demand from biofuels would lead to an increased generation of co-products, replacing conventional fodder for animal feed. Considering the co-products, the land used for bioenergy would range between 8.8 Mha and 15.0 Mha in 2020 in the various scenarios. This represent between 7.9% and 13.3% of the total arable land used in the EU and 4.7% and 8.0% of the UAA. In the NREAPS scenario, when co-products are considered, about 10.3 Mha would be used for biofuels, bioliquids and bioenergy production, representing 9.3% of arable land and 5.6% of agricultural land. This study further provides detailed data on the impact on land use in each Member State.

According to the renewable energy directive 2009/28/EC, the European Union Member States should increase by 2020 the use of renewable energy to 20% of gross final energy consumption and to reach a mandatory share of 10% renewable energy in the transport sector. This study aims to quantify the impact of 2020 bioenergy targets on the land use in the EU, based on the projections of the National Renewable Action Plans in four scenarios: Scenario 1. Bioenergy targets according to NREAPs; Scenario 2. Bioenergy targets according to NREAPs, no second generation biofuels; Scenario 3. Bioenergy targets according to NREAPs, reduced import of biofuels and bioliquids; Scenario 4. Bioenergy targets according to NREAPs, high imports of biofuels and bioliquids. This study also considers the credit for co-products generated from biofuel production. The analysis reveals that the land used in the EU for bioenergy would range between 13.5 Mha and 25.2 Mha in 2020. This represent between 12.2% and 22.5% of the total arable land used and 7.3% and 13.5% of the Utilised Agricultural Area (UAA). In the NREAPS scenario, about 17.4 Mha would be used for bioenergy production, representing 15.7% of arable land and 9.4% of UAA. The increased demand from biofuels would lead to an increased generation of co-products, replacing conventional fodder for animal feed. Considering the co-products, the land used for bioenergy would range between 8.8 Mha and 15.0 Mha in 2020 in the various scenarios. This represent between 7.9% and 13.3% of the total arable land used in the EU and 4.7% and 8.0% of the UAA. In the NREAPS scenario, when co-products are considered, about 10.3 Mha would be used for biofuels, bioliquids and bioenergy production, representing 9.3% of arable land and 5.6% of agricultural land. This study further provides detailed data on the impact on land use in each Member State.

Abstract In recent years living walls have increasingly spread, thus becoming a diffuse architectural envelope cladding technology. Consequently, a more precise understanding of their thermal behavior and impact on the building energy balance are needed. One of the most important effects provided by the use of living walls is the shading of the building envelope, with clear benefits during the cooling period. Furthermore, many features characterize the thermal behavior of living walls, namely plant species, leaf area index (LAI), evapotranspiration, emissivity and air cavity type. All these particular characteristics have been accounted in the mathematical model developed in the frame of the presented research, whose aim is to provide a tool for the prediction of the thermal behavior of living walls. Two kinds of living walls, one with grass and closed air cavity and the other one with vertical garden and open air cavity were considered. The results achieved by means of the developed model show a good agreement with the measurements also supported by model efficiency indexes such as Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency index (NSEC). Values of around 0.7 were obtained for the NSEC index for both the investigated living walls.

Abstract In recent years living walls have increasingly spread, thus becoming a diffuse architectural envelope cladding technology. Consequently, a more precise understanding of their thermal behavior and impact on the building energy balance are needed. One of the most important effects provided by the use of living walls is the shading of the building envelope, with clear benefits during the cooling period. Furthermore, many features characterize the thermal behavior of living walls, namely plant species, leaf area index (LAI), evapotranspiration, emissivity and air cavity type. All these particular characteristics have been accounted in the mathematical model developed in the frame of the presented research, whose aim is to provide a tool for the prediction of the thermal behavior of living walls. Two kinds of living walls, one with grass and closed air cavity and the other one with vertical garden and open air cavity were considered. The results achieved by means of the developed model show a good agreement with the measurements also supported by model efficiency indexes such as Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency index (NSEC). Values of around 0.7 were obtained for the NSEC index for both the investigated living walls.

It's not only the carbon in the trees Forest loss affects climate not just because of the impacts it has on the carbon cycle, but also because of how it affects the fluxes of energy and water between the land and the atmosphere. Evaluating global impact is complicated because deforestation can produce different results in different climate zones, making it hard to determine large-scale trends rather than more local ones. Alkama and Cescatti conducted a global assessment of the biophysical effects of forest cover change. Forest loss amplifies diurnal temperature variations, increases mean and maximum air temperatures, and causes a significant amount of warming when compared to CO 2 emission from land-use change. Science , this issue p. 600

It's not only the carbon in the trees Forest loss affects climate not just because of the impacts it has on the carbon cycle, but also because of how it affects the fluxes of energy and water between the land and the atmosphere. Evaluating global impact is complicated because deforestation can produce different results in different climate zones, making it hard to determine large-scale trends rather than more local ones. Alkama and Cescatti conducted a global assessment of the biophysical effects of forest cover change. Forest loss amplifies diurnal temperature variations, increases mean and maximum air temperatures, and causes a significant amount of warming when compared to CO 2 emission from land-use change. Science , this issue p. 600

A procedure for the design of an aerobic cometabolic process for the on-site degradation of chlorinated solvents in a packed bed reactor was developed using groundwater from an aquifer contaminated by trichloroethylene (TCE) and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane (TeCA). The work led to the selection of butane among five tested growth substrates, and to the development and characterization from the site's indigenous biomass of a suspended-cell consortium capable to degrade TCE (first order constant: 96 L gprotein(-1) day(-1) at 30 °C and 4.3 L gprotein(-1) day(-1) at 15 °C) with a 90 % mineralization of the organic chlorine. The consortium immobilization had strong effects on the butane and TCE degradation rates. The microbial community structure was slightly changed by a temperature shift from 30 to 15 °C, but remarkably affected by biomass adhesion. Given the higher TCE normalized degradation rate (0.59 day(-1) at 15 °C) and attached biomass concentration (0.13 gprotein Lbioreactor(-1) at 15 °C) attained, the porous ceramic carrier Biomax was selected as the best option for the packed bed reactor process. The low TeCA degradation rate exhibited by the developed consortium suggested the inclusion of a chemical pre-treatment based on the TeCA to TCE conversion via β-elimination, a very fast reaction at alkaline pH. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this represents the first attempt to develop a procedure for the development of a packed bed reactor process for the aerobic cometabolism of chlorinated solvents.

A procedure for the design of an aerobic cometabolic process for the on-site degradation of chlorinated solvents in a packed bed reactor was developed using groundwater from an aquifer contaminated by trichloroethylene (TCE) and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane (TeCA). The work led to the selection of butane among five tested growth substrates, and to the development and characterization from the site's indigenous biomass of a suspended-cell consortium capable to degrade TCE (first order constant: 96 L gprotein(-1) day(-1) at 30 °C and 4.3 L gprotein(-1) day(-1) at 15 °C) with a 90 % mineralization of the organic chlorine. The consortium immobilization had strong effects on the butane and TCE degradation rates. The microbial community structure was slightly changed by a temperature shift from 30 to 15 °C, but remarkably affected by biomass adhesion. Given the higher TCE normalized degradation rate (0.59 day(-1) at 15 °C) and attached biomass concentration (0.13 gprotein Lbioreactor(-1) at 15 °C) attained, the porous ceramic carrier Biomax was selected as the best option for the packed bed reactor process. The low TeCA degradation rate exhibited by the developed consortium suggested the inclusion of a chemical pre-treatment based on the TeCA to TCE conversion via β-elimination, a very fast reaction at alkaline pH. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this represents the first attempt to develop a procedure for the development of a packed bed reactor process for the aerobic cometabolism of chlorinated solvents.