TY - JOUR
T1 - Improving water quality in the Chesapeake Bay using payments for ecosystem services for perennial biomass for bioenergy and biofuel production
AU - Woodbury, Peter B.
AU - Kemanian, Armen R.
AU - Jacobson, Michael
AU - Langholtz, Matthew
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture Grant # 2012-68005-19703 , The Northeast Woody/Warm-Season Biomass Consortium: Building Sustainable Value Chains for Biomass Energy and by the EPA Grant# RD835568 , Center for Integrated Multi-Scale Nutrient Pollution Solutions . This manuscript has been authored by UT-Battelle, LLC under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the U.S. Department of Energy . The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, world-wide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes. The Department of Energy will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan ( http://energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan ).
Funding Information:
This work was supported by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture Grant # 2012-68005-19703, The Northeast Woody/Warm-Season Biomass Consortium: Building Sustainable Value Chains for Biomass Energy and by the EPA Grant# RD835568, Center for Integrated Multi-Scale Nutrient Pollution Solutions. This manuscript has been authored by UT-Battelle, LLC under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the U.S. Department of Energy. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, world-wide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes. The Department of Energy will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan (http://energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017
PY - 2018/7
Y1 - 2018/7
N2 - Replacing row crops with perennial bioenergy crops may reduce nitrogen (N) loading to surface waters. We estimated the benefits, costs, and potential for replacing maize with switchgrass to meet required N loading reduction targets for the Chesapeake Bay (CB) of 26.9 Gg y−1. After subtracting the potential reduction in N loading due to improved N fertilizer practices for maize, a further 22.8 Gg y−1 reduction is required. Replacing maize with fertilized switchgrass could reduce N loading to the CB by 18 kg ha−1 y−1, meeting 31% of the N reduction target. The break-even price of fertilized switchgrass to provide the same profit as maize in the CB is 111 $ Mg−1 (oven-dry basis throughout). Growers replacing maize with switchgrass could receive an ecosystem service payment of 148 $ ha−1 based on the price paid in Maryland for planting a rye cover crop. For our estimated average switchgrass yield of 9.9 Mg ha−1, and the greater N loading reduction of switchgrass compared to a cover crop, this equates to 24 $ Mg−1. The annual cost of this ecosystem service payment to induce switchgrass planting is 13.29 $ kg−1 of N. Using the POLYSYS model to account for competition among food, feed, and biomass markets, we found that with the ecosystem service payment for switchgrass of 25 $ Mg−1 added to a farm-gate price of 111 $ Mg−1, 11% of the N loading reduction target could be met while also producing 1.3 Tg of switchgrass, potentially yielding 420 dam3 y−1 of ethanol.
AB - Replacing row crops with perennial bioenergy crops may reduce nitrogen (N) loading to surface waters. We estimated the benefits, costs, and potential for replacing maize with switchgrass to meet required N loading reduction targets for the Chesapeake Bay (CB) of 26.9 Gg y−1. After subtracting the potential reduction in N loading due to improved N fertilizer practices for maize, a further 22.8 Gg y−1 reduction is required. Replacing maize with fertilized switchgrass could reduce N loading to the CB by 18 kg ha−1 y−1, meeting 31% of the N reduction target. The break-even price of fertilized switchgrass to provide the same profit as maize in the CB is 111 $ Mg−1 (oven-dry basis throughout). Growers replacing maize with switchgrass could receive an ecosystem service payment of 148 $ ha−1 based on the price paid in Maryland for planting a rye cover crop. For our estimated average switchgrass yield of 9.9 Mg ha−1, and the greater N loading reduction of switchgrass compared to a cover crop, this equates to 24 $ Mg−1. The annual cost of this ecosystem service payment to induce switchgrass planting is 13.29 $ kg−1 of N. Using the POLYSYS model to account for competition among food, feed, and biomass markets, we found that with the ecosystem service payment for switchgrass of 25 $ Mg−1 added to a farm-gate price of 111 $ Mg−1, 11% of the N loading reduction target could be met while also producing 1.3 Tg of switchgrass, potentially yielding 420 dam3 y−1 of ethanol.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011312056&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85011312056&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.biombioe.2017.01.024
DO - 10.1016/j.biombioe.2017.01.024
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85011312056
SN - 0961-9534
VL - 114
SP - 132
EP - 142
JO - Biomass and Bioenergy
JF - Biomass and Bioenergy
ER -