IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v169y2022ics1364032122007390.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multifunctional landscapes for dedicated bioenergy crops lead to low-carbon market-competitive biofuels

Author

Listed:
  • Baral, Nawa Raj
  • Mishra, Shruti K.
  • George, Anthe
  • Gautam, Sagar
  • Mishra, Umakant
  • Scown, Corinne D.

Abstract

Switchgrass is a promising feedstock for cellulosic biorefineries, due to its ability to maintain comparatively high biomass yields across a wide range of soil and climatic conditions. However, there is an incomplete understanding of the economic and environmental tradeoffs associated with cultivating switchgrass on low-productivity land for conversion to biofuels. This study surveys prior literature and demonstrates a new integrated assessment framework, including agroecosystem, ecosystem services valuation, technoeconomic, and life-cycle assessment models, to quantify and contextualize the economic and environmental impacts of switchgrass cultivation on marginal land with downstream conversion to biofuels. Monetizing and incorporating the value of ecosystem services, such as improved water quality benefits from nitrate and sediment reductions, climate change mitigation benefits from CO2 emission reduction, and recreational and pollination benefits from increased biodiversity, the modeled multifunctional landscape reduces the ethanol production cost by 33.3–58.9 cents/l-gasoline-equivalent ($1.3–2.2/gge). Planting switchgrass in low productivity land improves soil health, resulting in the carbon footprint reduction credit of 12.8–20.2 gCO2e/MJ. For an improved switchgrass-to-ethanol conversion pathway with the maximum benefits from ecosystem services, the minimum ethanol selling price and carbon footprint of ethanol, respectively, could reach to 31 cents/l-gasoline-equivalent (47% reduction relative to average gasoline price) and 3 gCO2e/MJ (97% reduction relative to gasoline). This low carbon renewable ethanol leads to substantial State and/or Federal policy incentives (∼$1/l-gasoline-equivalent) providing a large benefit to biorefinery operators, farmers, and the public as a whole.

Suggested Citation

  • Baral, Nawa Raj & Mishra, Shruti K. & George, Anthe & Gautam, Sagar & Mishra, Umakant & Scown, Corinne D., 2022. "Multifunctional landscapes for dedicated bioenergy crops lead to low-carbon market-competitive biofuels," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:169:y:2022:i:c:s1364032122007390
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.112857
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122007390
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112857?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Burli, Pralhad & Lal, Pankaj & Wolde, Bernabas & Jose, Shibu & Bardhan, Sougata, 2019. "Factors affecting willingness to cultivate switchgrass: Evidence from a farmer survey in Missouri," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 20-29.
    2. Oskar Englund & Ioannis Dimitriou & Virginia H. Dale & Keith L. Kline & Blas Mola‐Yudego & Fionnuala Murphy & Burton English & John McGrath & Gerald Busch & Maria Cristina Negri & Mark Brown & Kevin G, 2020. "Multifunctional perennial production systems for bioenergy: performance and progress," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(5), September.
    3. Liu, Tingting & Merrill, Nathaniel H. & Gold, Arthur J. & Kellogg, Dorothy Q. & Uchida, Emi, 2013. "Modeling the Production of Multiple Ecosystem Services from Agricultural and Forest Landscapes in Rhode Island," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(1), pages 251-274, April.
    4. Swinton, Scott M. & Lupi, Frank & Robertson, G. Philip & Hamilton, Stephen K., 2007. "Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 245-252, December.
    5. Solarte-Toro, Juan Camilo & Romero-García, Juan Miguel & Martínez-Patiño, Juan Carlos & Ruiz-Ramos, Encarnación & Castro-Galiano, Eulogio & Cardona-Alzate, Carlos Ariel, 2019. "Acid pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for energy vectors production: A review focused on operational conditions and techno-economic assessment for bioethanol production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 587-601.
    6. Katherine Baylis & Peter Feather & Merritt Padgitt & Carmen Sandretto, 2002. "Water-Based Recreational Benefits of Conservation Programs: The Case of Conservation Tillage on U.S. Cropland," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 384-393.
    7. Hansen, LeRoy & Ribaudo, Marc, 2008. "Economic Measures of Soil Conservation Benefits: Regional Values for Policy Assessment," Technical Bulletins 184312, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. Winfree, Rachael & Gross, Brian J. & Kremen, Claire, 2011. "Valuing pollination services to agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-88.
    9. Feng Song & Jinhua Zhao & Scott M. Swinton, 2011. "Switching to Perennial Energy Crops Under Uncertainty and Costly Reversibility," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(3), pages 764-779.
    10. Zheng, Ji-Lu & Zhu, Ya-Hong & Su, Hong-Yu & Sun, Guo-Tao & Kang, Fu-Ren & Zhu, Ming-Qiang, 2022. "Life cycle assessment and techno-economic analysis of fuel ethanol production via bio-oil fermentation based on a centralized-distribution model," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    11. Milbrandt, Anelia R. & Heimiller, Donna M. & Perry, Andrew D. & Field, Christopher B., 2014. "Renewable energy potential on marginal lands in the United States," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 473-481.
    12. Antle, John M. & Capalbo, Susan Marie & Mooney, Sian & Elliott, Edward T. & Paustian, Keith H., 2001. "Economic Analysis Of Agricultural Soil Carbon Sequestration: An Integrated Assessment Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-24, December.
    13. Borrion, Aiduan Li & McManus, Marcelle C. & Hammond, Geoffrey P., 2012. "Environmental life cycle assessment of lignocellulosic conversion to ethanol: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(7), pages 4638-4650.
    14. Katherine Baylis & Peter Feather & Merritt Padgitt & Carmen Sandretto, 2002. "Water-Based Recreational Benefits of Conservation Programs: The Case of Conservation Tillage on U.S. Cropland," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 384-393.
    15. Holland, R.A. & Eigenbrod, F. & Muggeridge, A. & Brown, G. & Clarke, D. & Taylor, G., 2015. "A synthesis of the ecosystem services impact of second generation bioenergy crop production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 30-40.
    16. Liu, Tingting & Merrill, Nathaniel H. & Gold, Arthur J. & Kellogg, Dorothy Q. & Uchida, Emi, 2013. "Modeling the Production of Multiple Ecosystem Services from Agricultural and Forest Landscapes in Rhode Island," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 42(1), pages 1-24, April.
    17. John L. Field & Samuel G. Evans & Ernie Marx & Mark Easter & Paul R. Adler & Thai Dinh & Bryan Willson & Keith Paustian, 2018. "High-resolution techno–ecological modelling of a bioenergy landscape to identify climate mitigation opportunities in cellulosic ethanol production," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 3(3), pages 211-219, March.
    18. Zhang, Jun & Osmani, Atif & Awudu, Iddrisu & Gonela, Vinay, 2013. "An integrated optimization model for switchgrass-based bioethanol supply chain," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1205-1217.
    19. Stehfest, Elke & Heistermann, Maik & Priess, Joerg A. & Ojima, Dennis S. & Alcamo, Joseph, 2007. "Simulation of global crop production with the ecosystem model DayCent," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 209(2), pages 203-219.
    20. Patel, Madhumita & Zhang, Xiaolei & Kumar, Amit, 2016. "Techno-economic and life cycle assessment on lignocellulosic biomass thermochemical conversion technologies: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 1486-1499.
    21. James L. Boutwell & John V. Westra, 2013. "Benefit Transfer: A Review of Methodologies and Challenges," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-11, October.
    22. Khoo, Hsien H., 2015. "Review of bio-conversion pathways of lignocellulose-to-ethanol: Sustainability assessment based on land footprint projections," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 100-119.
    23. Aui, A. & Wang, Y. & Mba-Wright, M., 2021. "Evaluating the economic feasibility of cellulosic ethanol: A meta-analysis of techno-economic analysis studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    24. Nina Zarrineh & Karim C. Abbaspour & Ann Van Griensven & Bernard Jeangros & Annelie Holzkämper, 2018. "Model-Based Evaluation of Land Management Strategies with Regard to Multiple Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-21, October.
    25. Kevin J. Boyle & Nicolai V. Kuminoff & Christopher F. Parmeter & Jaren C. Pope, 2009. "Necessary Conditions for Valid Benefit Transfers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1328-1334.
    26. Li, Xiaogu & Zipp, Katherine Y., 2019. "Dynamics and Uncertainty in Land Use Conversion for Perennial Energy Crop Production: Exploring Effects of Payments for Ecosystem Services Policies," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(2), pages 328-358, August.
    27. Boyd, James & Krupnick, Alan, 2009. "The Definition and Choice of Environmental Commodities for Nonmarket Valuation," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-35, Resources for the Future.
    28. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Semmens, Darius J. & Winthrop, Robert, 2013. "Comparing approaches to spatially explicit ecosystem service modeling: A case study from the San Pedro River, Arizona," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 40-50.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Pamela Kaval & Marjan van den Belt, 2017. "The Organizing Framework of Ecosystem Services and its use in River Management," Working Papers in Economics 17/22, University of Waikato.
    2. Bauer, Dana Marie & Johnston, Robert J., 2013. "Foreword: The Economics of Rural and Agricultural Ecosystem Services: Purism versus Practicality," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 42(1), pages 1-13, April.
    3. Lankoski, Jussi E. & Ollikainen, Markku & Uusitalo, Pekka, 2005. "To Till or Not to Till? Social Profitability of No-Till Technology," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24755, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Griffith, Andrew P. & Haque, Mohua & Epplin, Francis M., 2014. "Cost to produce and deliver cellulosic feedstock to a biorefinery: Switchgrass and forage sorghum," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 44-54.
    5. Escobar, Neus & Laibach, Natalie, 2021. "Sustainability check for bio-based technologies: A review of process-based and life cycle approaches," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    6. Kurkalova, Lyubov A. & Kling, Catherine L. & Zhao, Jinhua, 2003. "Multiple Benefits of Carbon-Friendly Agricultural Practices: Empirical Assessment of Conservation Tillage in Iowa," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10194, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Léa Tardieu, 2017. "The need for integrated spatial assessments in ecosystem service mapping," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 173-200, December.
    8. Larnaudie, Valeria & Ferrari, Mario Daniel & Lareo, Claudia, 2022. "Switchgrass as an alternative biomass for ethanol production in a biorefinery: Perspectives on technology, economics and environmental sustainability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    9. Schuurman, Daniel & Weersink, Alfons & Delaporte, Aaron, 2021. "Optimal Sequential Crop Choices for Soil Carbon Management: A Dynamic Programming Approach," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 314042, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Aaron De Laporte & Alfons Weersink & Wanhong Yang, 2010. "Ecological Goals and Wetland Preservation Choice," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 58(1), pages 131-150, March.
    11. Pindilli, Emily & Sleeter, Rachel & Hogan, Dianna, 2018. "Estimating the Societal Benefits of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration Through Peatland Restoration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 145-155.
    12. Vermunt, D.A. & Wojtynia, N. & Hekkert, M.P. & Van Dijk, J. & Verburg, R. & Verweij, P.A. & Wassen, M. & Runhaar, H., 2022. "Five mechanisms blocking the transition towards ‘nature-inclusive’ agriculture: A systemic analysis of Dutch dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    13. Work, James & Hauer, Grant & Luckert, M.K. (Marty), 2018. "What ethanol prices would induce growers to switch from agriculture to poplar in Alberta? A multiple options approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 51-62.
    14. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2010. "Assessing community values for reducing agricultural emissions to improve water quality and protect coral health in the Great Barrier Reef," Research Reports 107583, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    15. Valbuena, Diego & Tui, Sabine Homann-Kee & Erenstein, Olaf & Teufel, Nils & Duncan, Alan & Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Swain, Braja & Mekonnen, Kindu & Germaine, Ibro & Gérard, Bruno, 2015. "Identifying determinants, pressures and trade-offs of crop residue use in mixed smallholder farms in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 107-118.
    16. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    17. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    18. Kevin Boyle & Sapna Kaul & Ali Hashemi & Xiaoshu Li, 2015. "Applicability of benefit transfers for evaluation of homeland security counterterrorism measures," Chapters, in: Carol Mansfield & V. K. Smith (ed.), Benefit–Cost Analyses for Security Policies, chapter 10, pages 225-253, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Oskar Englund & Ioannis Dimitriou & Virginia H. Dale & Keith L. Kline & Blas Mola‐Yudego & Fionnuala Murphy & Burton English & John McGrath & Gerald Busch & Maria Cristina Negri & Mark Brown & Kevin G, 2020. "Multifunctional perennial production systems for bioenergy: performance and progress," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(5), September.
    20. Ba, Birome Holo & Prins, Christian & Prodhon, Caroline, 2016. "Models for optimization and performance evaluation of biomass supply chains: An Operations Research perspective," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(P2), pages 977-989.

    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:169:y:2022:i:c:s1364032122007390. 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.