Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Ecological Applicati...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Ecological Applications
Article . 2011 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

The biogeochemistry of bioenergy landscapes: carbon, nitrogen, and water considerations

Authors: Stephen J. Del Grosso; Stephen J. Del Grosso; G. Philip Robertson; G. Philip Robertson; William J. Parton; Stephen K. Hamilton; Stephen K. Hamilton;

The biogeochemistry of bioenergy landscapes: carbon, nitrogen, and water considerations

Abstract

The biogeochemical liabilities of grain-based crop production for bioenergy are no different from those of grain-based food production: excessive nitrate leakage, soil carbon and phosphorus loss, nitrous oxide production, and attenuated methane uptake. Contingent problems are well known, increasingly well documented, and recalcitrant: freshwater and coastal marine eutrophication, groundwater pollution, soil organic matter loss, and a warming atmosphere. The conversion of marginal lands not now farmed to annual grain production, including the repatriation of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and other conservation set-aside lands, will further exacerbate the biogeochemical imbalance of these landscapes, as could pressure to further simplify crop rotations. The expected emergence of biorefinery and combustion facilities that accept cellulosic materials offers an alternative outcome: agricultural landscapes that accumulate soil carbon, that conserve nitrogen and phosphorus, and that emit relatively small amounts of nitrous oxide to the atmosphere. Fields in these landscapes are planted to perennial crops that require less fertilizer, that retain sediments and nutrients that could otherwise be transported to groundwater and streams, and that accumulate carbon in both soil organic matter and roots. If mixed-species assemblages, they additionally provide biodiversity services. Biogeochemical responses of these systems fall chiefly into two areas: carbon neutrality and water and nutrient conservation. Fluxes must be measured and understood in proposed cropping systems sufficient to inform models that will predict biogeochemical behavior at field, landscape, and regional scales. Because tradeoffs are inherent to these systems, a systems approach is imperative, and because potential biofuel cropping systems and their environmental contexts are complex and cannot be exhaustively tested, modeling will be instructive. Modeling alternative biofuel cropping systems converted from different starting points, for example, suggests that converting CRP to corn ethanol production under conventional tillage results in substantially increased net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that can be only partly mitigated with no-till management. Alternatively, conversion of existing cropland or prairie to switchgrass production results in a net GHG sink. Outcomes and policy must be informed by science that adequately quantifies the true biogeochemical costs and advantages of alternative systems.

Keywords

Geological Phenomena, Nitrogen, Climate Change, Water, Agriculture, Models, Theoretical, Nitrogen Cycle, Carbon, Carbon Cycle, Water Supply, Biofuels, Ecosystem

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    136
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
136
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 1%