Published September 2019 | Version v1
Journal article

Designing bioenergy landscapes to protect water quality

  • 1. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, 37831-6038 (United States)
  • 2. Bredesen Center for Interdisciplinary Research and Graduate Education, University of Tennessee Knoxville, Knoxville, TN, 37996-3394 (United States)
  • 3. The Climate Corporation, Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MO, 63167 (United States)
  • 4. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47907 (United States)
  • 5. Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, 60439 (United States)

Description

Highlights: • Management practices can be used on bioenergy landscapes to protect water quality. • Field- and watershed-scale cost/benefits must be considered when placing practices. • Decision trees can aid in determining optimal placement of management practices. • Management practices interact in synergistic ways on bioenergy landscapes. -- Abstract: Practicing agriculture decreases downstream water quality when compared to non-agricultural lands. Agricultural watersheds that also grow perennial biofuel feedstocks can be designed to improve water quality compared to agricultural watersheds without perennials. The question then becomes which conservation practices should be employed and where in the landscape should they be situated to achieve water quality objectives when growing biofuel feedstocks. In this review, we focused on four types of spatial decisions in a bioenergy landscape: decisions about placement of vegetated strips, artificial drainage, wetlands, and residue removal. The appropriate tools for addressing spatial design questions are optimizations that seek to minimize losses of sediment and nutrients, reduce water temperature, and maximize farmer income. To accomplish these objectives through placing conservation practices, both field-scale and watershed-scale cost and benefits should be considered, as many biophysical processes are scale dependent. We developed decision trees that consider water quality objectives and landscape characteristics when determining the optimal locations of management practices. These decision trees summarize various rules for placing practices and can be used by farmers and others growing biofuels. Additionally, we examined interactions between conservation practices applied to bioenergy landscapes to highlight synergistic effects and to comprehensively address the question of conservation practice usage and placement. We found that combining conservation practices and accounting for their interactive effects can significantly improve water quality outcomes. Based on our review, we determine that by making spatial decisions on conservation practices, bioenergy landscapes can be designed to improve water quality and enhance other ecosystem services.

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.105327;
PII
S0961953419302764;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Biomass and Bioenergy
Journal Volume
128
Journal Page Range
vp.
ISSN
0961-9534
CODEN
BMSBEO

INIS

Country of Publication
Netherlands
Country of Input or Organization
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
INIS RN
55055677
Subject category
S09: BIOMASS FUELS;
Descriptors DEI
AGRICULTURE; BIOFUELS; BIOMASS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION TREE ANALYSIS; FARMS; NUTRIENTS; OPTIMIZATION; RESIDUES; REVIEWS; SEDIMENTS; WATER QUALITY; WATERSHEDS; WETLANDS
Descriptors DEC
ALTERNATIVE FUELS; AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS; DOCUMENT TYPES; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; ECOSYSTEMS; ENERGY SOURCES; ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY; FUELS; RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.