IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v13y2009i8p1679-1709.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Large-scale bioenergy production from soybeans and switchgrass in Argentina: Part B. Environmental and socio-economic impacts on a regional level

Author

Listed:
  • van Dam, J.
  • Faaij, A.P.C.
  • Hilbert, J.
  • Petruzzi, H.
  • Turkenburg, W.C.

Abstract

The feasibility of deploying a socio-economic and environmental impact analysis for large-scale bioenergy production on a regional level is analyzed, based on a set of defined criteria and indicators. The analysis is done for La Pampa province in Argentina. The case study results in conclusions in how far the criteria can be verified ex ante based on available methodologies and data sources. The impacts are analyzed for two bioenergy chains (soybeans and switchgrass) for a set of defined land use scenarios. The carbon stock change for switchgrass ranges from 0.2 to 1.2 ton C/ha/year and for soybean from -1.2 to 0 ton C/ha/year, depending on the scenario. The GHG emission reduction ranges from 88% to 133% for the switchgrass bioenergy chain (replacing coal or natural gas) and from 16% to 94% for the soybean bioenergy chain (replacing fossil fuel) for various lifetime periods. The annual soil loss, compared to the reference land use system is 2-10 ton/ha for the soybean bioenergy chain and 1-2 ton/ha for the switchgrass bioenergy chain. In total, nine sustainability principles are analyzed. In the case of switchgrass, most environmental benefits can be achieved when produced on suitable land of abandoned cropland. Soybean production for bioenergy shows a good overall sustainability performance if produced on abandoned cropland. The production of switchgrass on degraded grassland shows socio-economic and environmental benefits, which is not the case for soybean production. The production of bioenergy production on non-degraded grassland is not preferred. It is concluded that the scenario approach enables understanding of the complexity of the bioenergy chain and the underlying factors influencing the sustainability principles. It is difficult to give ex ante a final conclusion whether a bioenergy chain is sustainable or not as this depends not only on the previous land use system but also on other factors as the selection of the bioenergy crop, the suitable agroecological zone and the agricultural management system applied. The results also imply that it is possible to steer for a large part the sustainability performance of a bioenergy chain during project development and implementation. Land use planning plays a key role in this process.

Suggested Citation

  • van Dam, J. & Faaij, A.P.C. & Hilbert, J. & Petruzzi, H. & Turkenburg, W.C., 2009. "Large-scale bioenergy production from soybeans and switchgrass in Argentina: Part B. Environmental and socio-economic impacts on a regional level," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 1679-1709, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:13:y:2009:i:8:p:1679-1709
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364-0321(09)00066-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sinclair, T.R. & Salado-Navarro, L.R. & Salas, Graciela & Purcell, L.C., 2007. "Soybean yields and soil water status in Argentina: Simulation analysis," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 471-477, May.
    2. van Dam, J. & Faaij, A.P.C. & Hilbert, J. & Petruzzi, H. & Turkenburg, W.C., 2009. "Large-scale bioenergy production from soybeans and switchgrass in Argentina: Part A: Potential and economic feasibility for national and international markets," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 1710-1733, October.
    3. Searchinger, Timothy & Heimlich, Ralph & Houghton, R. A. & Dong, Fengxia & Elobeid, Amani & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Tokgoz, Simla & Hayes, Dermot J. & Yu, Hun-Hsiang, 2008. "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12881, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Torre Ugarte, Daniel de la & He, Lixia & Jensen, Kimberly L. & English, Burton C. & Willis, Kaelin, 2008. "Estimating Agricultural Impacts of Expanded Ethanol Production: Policy Implications for Water Demand and Quality," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6700, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    5. Kay Damen & André Faaij, 2006. "A Greenhouse Gas Balance of two Existing International Biomass Import Chains," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 1023-1050, September.
    6. Mathews, John A. & Goldsztein, Hugo, 2009. "Capturing latecomer advantages in the adoption of biofuels: The case of Argentina," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 326-337, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Blengini, G.A. & Brizio, E. & Cibrario, M. & Genon, G., 2011. "LCA of bioenergy chains in Piedmont (Italy): A case study to support public decision makers towards sustainability," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 36-47.
    2. van Dam, J. & Junginger, M. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2010. "From the global efforts on certification of bioenergy towards an integrated approach based on sustainable land use planning," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(9), pages 2445-2472, December.
    3. Hoefnagels, Ric & Smeets, Edward & Faaij, André, 2010. "Greenhouse gas footprints of different biofuel production systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(7), pages 1661-1694, September.
    4. Batidzirai, B. & Smeets, E.M.W. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2012. "Harmonising bioenergy resource potentials—Methodological lessons from review of state of the art bioenergy potential assessments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(9), pages 6598-6630.
    5. Batidzirai, B. & Mignot, A.P.R. & Schakel, W.B. & Junginger, H.M. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2013. "Biomass torrefaction technology: Techno-economic status and future prospects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 196-214.
    6. Zanxin Wang & Fangyuan Zheng & Shiya Xue, 2019. "The Economic Feasibility of the Valorization of Water Hyacinth for Bioethanol Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, February.
    7. André P. C. Faaij, 2022. "Repairing What Policy Is Missing Out on: A Constructive View on Prospects and Preconditions for Sustainable Biobased Economy Options to Mitigate and Adapt to Climate Change," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-25, August.
    8. Julia Tomei & Stella Semino & Helena Paul & Lilian Joensen & Mario Monti & Erling Jelsøe, 2010. "Soy production and certification: the case of Argentinean soy-based biodiesel," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 371-394, April.
    9. Xin-Gang, Zhao & Tian-Tian, Feng & Yu, Ma & Yi-Sheng, Yang & Xue-Fu, Pan, 2015. "Analysis on investment strategies in China: the case of biomass direct combustion power generation sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 760-772.
    10. Soroudi, Alireza & Ehsan, Mehdi, 2011. "A possibilistic-probabilistic tool for evaluating the impact of stochastic renewable and controllable power generation on energy losses in distribution networks--A case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 794-800, January.
    11. van der Hilst, F. & Lesschen, J.P. & van Dam, J.M.C. & Riksen, M. & Verweij, P.A. & Sanders, J.P.M. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2012. "Spatial variation of environmental impacts of regional biomass chains," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 2053-2069.
    12. Diogo, V. & van der Hilst, F. & van Eijck, J. & Verstegen, J.A. & Hilbert, J. & Carballo, S. & Volante, J. & Faaij, A., 2014. "Combining empirical and theory-based land-use modelling approaches to assess economic potential of biofuel production avoiding iLUC: Argentina as a case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 208-224.
    13. van Eijck, Janske & Batidzirai, Bothwell & Faaij, André, 2014. "Current and future economic performance of first and second generation biofuels in developing countries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 115-141.
    14. Miyake, Saori & Smith, Carl & Peterson, Ann & McAlpine, Clive & Renouf, Marguerite & Waters, David, 2015. "Environmental implications of using ‘underutilised agricultural land’ for future bioenergy crop production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 180-195.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Julia Tomei & Stella Semino & Helena Paul & Lilian Joensen & Mario Monti & Erling Jelsøe, 2010. "Soy production and certification: the case of Argentinean soy-based biodiesel," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 371-394, April.
    2. Diogo, V. & van der Hilst, F. & van Eijck, J. & Verstegen, J.A. & Hilbert, J. & Carballo, S. & Volante, J. & Faaij, A., 2014. "Combining empirical and theory-based land-use modelling approaches to assess economic potential of biofuel production avoiding iLUC: Argentina as a case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 208-224.
    3. Tomei, Julia & Upham, Paul, 2009. "Argentinean soy-based biodiesel: An introduction to production and impacts," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 3890-3898, October.
    4. Milazzo, M.F. & Spina, F. & Primerano, P. & Bart, J.C.J., 2013. "Soy biodiesel pathways: Global prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 579-624.
    5. Hassan, Mohd Nor Azman & Jaramillo, Paulina & Griffin, W. Michael, 2011. "Life cycle GHG emissions from Malaysian oil palm bioenergy development: The impact on transportation sector's energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2615-2625, May.
    6. Nikas, A. & Koasidis, K. & Köberle, A.C. & Kourtesi, G. & Doukas, H., 2022. "A comparative study of biodiesel in Brazil and Argentina: An integrated systems of innovation perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    7. Dwivedi, Puneet & Khanna, Madhu & Sharma, Ajay & Susaeta, Andres, 2016. "Efficacy of carbon and bioenergy markets in mitigating carbon emissions on reforested lands: A case study from Southern United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 1-9.
    8. Hoefnagels, Ric & Smeets, Edward & Faaij, André, 2010. "Greenhouse gas footprints of different biofuel production systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(7), pages 1661-1694, September.
    9. Milazzo, M.F. & Spina, F. & Cavallaro, S. & Bart, J.C.J., 2013. "Sustainable soy biodiesel," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 806-852.
    10. Panichelli, Luis & Gnansounou, Edgard, 2015. "Impact of agricultural-based biofuel production on greenhouse gas emissions from land-use change: Key modelling choices," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 344-360.
    11. Suopajärvi, Hannu & Umeki, Kentaro & Mousa, Elsayed & Hedayati, Ali & Romar, Henrik & Kemppainen, Antti & Wang, Chuan & Phounglamcheik, Aekjuthon & Tuomikoski, Sari & Norberg, Nicklas & Andefors, Alf , 2018. "Use of biomass in integrated steelmaking – Status quo, future needs and comparison to other low-CO2 steel production technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 384-407.
    12. Tonini, Davide & Vadenbo, Carl & Astrup, Thomas Fruergaard, 2017. "Priority of domestic biomass resources for energy: Importance of national environmental targets in a climate perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 295-309.
    13. Lotze-Campen, Hermann & von Witzke, Harald & Noleppa, Steffen & Schwarz, Gerald, 2015. "Science for food, climate protection and welfare: An economic analysis of plant breeding research in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 79-84.
    14. Iriarte, Alfredo & Rieradevall, Joan & Gabarrell, Xavier, 2012. "Transition towards a more environmentally sustainable biodiesel in South America: The case of Chile," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 263-273.
    15. Kriegler, Elmar, 2011. "Comment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 594-596, July.
    16. Proost, Stef & Van Dender, Kurt, 2012. "Energy and environment challenges in the transport sector," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 77-87.
    17. repec:fpr:ifprib:2012ghienglish is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Canabarro, N.I. & Silva-Ortiz, P. & Nogueira, L.A.H. & Cantarella, H. & Maciel-Filho, R. & Souza, G.M., 2023. "Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    19. Baral, Nabin & Rabotyagov, Sergey, 2017. "How much are wood-based cellulosic biofuels worth in the Pacific Northwest? Ex-ante and ex-post analysis of local people's willingness to pay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 99-106.
    20. Baka, Jennifer & Roland-Holst, David, 2009. "Food or fuel? What European farmers can contribute to Europe's transport energy requirements and the Doha Round," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2505-2513, July.
    21. Nguyen, Thu Lan T. & Hermansen, John E. & Mogensen, Lisbeth, 2010. "Fossil energy and GHG saving potentials of pig farming in the EU," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2561-2571, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:13:y:2009:i:8:p:1679-1709. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.