Cargando…

Potential impacts on ecosystem services of land use transitions to second‐generation bioenergy crops in GB

We present the first assessment of the impact of land use change (LUC) to second‐generation (2G) bioenergy crops on ecosystem services (ES) resolved spatially for Great Britain (GB). A systematic approach was used to assess available evidence on the impacts of LUC from arable, semi‐improved grasslan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Milner, Suzanne, Holland, Robert A., Lovett, Andrew, Sunnenberg, Gilla, Hastings, Astley, Smith, Pete, Wang, Shifeng, Taylor, Gail
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4974899/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27547244
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12263
_version_ 1782446624900907008
author Milner, Suzanne
Holland, Robert A.
Lovett, Andrew
Sunnenberg, Gilla
Hastings, Astley
Smith, Pete
Wang, Shifeng
Taylor, Gail
author_facet Milner, Suzanne
Holland, Robert A.
Lovett, Andrew
Sunnenberg, Gilla
Hastings, Astley
Smith, Pete
Wang, Shifeng
Taylor, Gail
author_sort Milner, Suzanne
collection PubMed
description We present the first assessment of the impact of land use change (LUC) to second‐generation (2G) bioenergy crops on ecosystem services (ES) resolved spatially for Great Britain (GB). A systematic approach was used to assess available evidence on the impacts of LUC from arable, semi‐improved grassland or woodland/forest, to 2G bioenergy crops, for which a quantitative ‘threat matrix’ was developed. The threat matrix was used to estimate potential impacts of transitions to either Miscanthus, short‐rotation coppice (SRC, willow and poplar) or short‐rotation forestry (SRF). The ES effects were found to be largely dependent on previous land uses rather than the choice of 2G crop when assessing the technical potential of available biomass with a transition from arable crops resulting in the most positive effect on ES. Combining these data with constraint masks and available land for SRC and Miscanthus (SRF omitted from this stage due to lack of data), south‐west and north‐west England were identified as areas where Miscanthus and SRC could be grown, respectively, with favourable combinations of economic viability, carbon sequestration, high yield and positive ES benefits. This study also suggests that not all prospective planting of Miscanthus and SRC can be allocated to agricultural land class (ALC) ALC 3 and ALC 4 and suitable areas of ALC 5 are only minimally available. Beneficial impacts were found on 146 583 and 71 890 ha when planting Miscanthus or SRC, respectively, under baseline planting conditions rising to 293 247 and 91 318 ha, respectively, under 2020 planting scenarios. The results provide an insight into the interplay between land availability, original land uses, bioenergy crop type and yield in determining overall positive or negative impacts of bioenergy cropping on ecosystems services and go some way towards developing a framework for quantifying wider ES impacts of this important LUC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4974899
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49748992016-08-17 Potential impacts on ecosystem services of land use transitions to second‐generation bioenergy crops in GB Milner, Suzanne Holland, Robert A. Lovett, Andrew Sunnenberg, Gilla Hastings, Astley Smith, Pete Wang, Shifeng Taylor, Gail Glob Change Biol Bioenergy Original Research Articles We present the first assessment of the impact of land use change (LUC) to second‐generation (2G) bioenergy crops on ecosystem services (ES) resolved spatially for Great Britain (GB). A systematic approach was used to assess available evidence on the impacts of LUC from arable, semi‐improved grassland or woodland/forest, to 2G bioenergy crops, for which a quantitative ‘threat matrix’ was developed. The threat matrix was used to estimate potential impacts of transitions to either Miscanthus, short‐rotation coppice (SRC, willow and poplar) or short‐rotation forestry (SRF). The ES effects were found to be largely dependent on previous land uses rather than the choice of 2G crop when assessing the technical potential of available biomass with a transition from arable crops resulting in the most positive effect on ES. Combining these data with constraint masks and available land for SRC and Miscanthus (SRF omitted from this stage due to lack of data), south‐west and north‐west England were identified as areas where Miscanthus and SRC could be grown, respectively, with favourable combinations of economic viability, carbon sequestration, high yield and positive ES benefits. This study also suggests that not all prospective planting of Miscanthus and SRC can be allocated to agricultural land class (ALC) ALC 3 and ALC 4 and suitable areas of ALC 5 are only minimally available. Beneficial impacts were found on 146 583 and 71 890 ha when planting Miscanthus or SRC, respectively, under baseline planting conditions rising to 293 247 and 91 318 ha, respectively, under 2020 planting scenarios. The results provide an insight into the interplay between land availability, original land uses, bioenergy crop type and yield in determining overall positive or negative impacts of bioenergy cropping on ecosystems services and go some way towards developing a framework for quantifying wider ES impacts of this important LUC. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-06-08 2016-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4974899/ /pubmed/27547244 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12263 Text en © 2015 The Authors. Global Change Biology Bioenergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research Articles
Milner, Suzanne
Holland, Robert A.
Lovett, Andrew
Sunnenberg, Gilla
Hastings, Astley
Smith, Pete
Wang, Shifeng
Taylor, Gail
Potential impacts on ecosystem services of land use transitions to second‐generation bioenergy crops in GB
title Potential impacts on ecosystem services of land use transitions to second‐generation bioenergy crops in GB
title_full Potential impacts on ecosystem services of land use transitions to second‐generation bioenergy crops in GB
title_fullStr Potential impacts on ecosystem services of land use transitions to second‐generation bioenergy crops in GB
title_full_unstemmed Potential impacts on ecosystem services of land use transitions to second‐generation bioenergy crops in GB
title_short Potential impacts on ecosystem services of land use transitions to second‐generation bioenergy crops in GB
title_sort potential impacts on ecosystem services of land use transitions to second‐generation bioenergy crops in gb
topic Original Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4974899/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27547244
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12263
work_keys_str_mv AT milnersuzanne potentialimpactsonecosystemservicesoflandusetransitionstosecondgenerationbioenergycropsingb
AT hollandroberta potentialimpactsonecosystemservicesoflandusetransitionstosecondgenerationbioenergycropsingb
AT lovettandrew potentialimpactsonecosystemservicesoflandusetransitionstosecondgenerationbioenergycropsingb
AT sunnenberggilla potentialimpactsonecosystemservicesoflandusetransitionstosecondgenerationbioenergycropsingb
AT hastingsastley potentialimpactsonecosystemservicesoflandusetransitionstosecondgenerationbioenergycropsingb
AT smithpete potentialimpactsonecosystemservicesoflandusetransitionstosecondgenerationbioenergycropsingb
AT wangshifeng potentialimpactsonecosystemservicesoflandusetransitionstosecondgenerationbioenergycropsingb
AT taylorgail potentialimpactsonecosystemservicesoflandusetransitionstosecondgenerationbioenergycropsingb