Suchergebnisse

Based on a meta-study, the paper describes the existing options, areal extents, and Swedish farmers' conditions for energy crop production promoted by the governments to mitigate and adapt to climate change. The drivers of and barriers to cultivating various energy crops are described in terms of a variety of motivational factors. The approach used peer-reviewed and gray literature using three Internet sources. Questions addressed include the energy crops available to Swedish farmers and how well established they are in terms of areal extent. What drivers of and barriers to growing energy crops do farmers perceive? How do various motivational factors for these drivers and barriers correspond to the adoption of certain energy crops? The results indicate that 13 energy-related crops are available, of which straw (a residue), oil crops, and wheat are the most extensively produced in terms of cultivated area. Results confirm earlier research findings that converting from annual to perennial crops and from traditional crops or production systems to new ones are important barriers. Economic motivations for changing production systems are strong, but factors such as values (e.g., esthetic), knowledge (e.g., habits and knowledge of production methods), and legal conditions (e.g., cultivation licenses) are crucial for the change to energy crops. Finally, there are knowledge gaps in the literature as to why farmers decide to keep or change a production system. Since the Swedish government and the EU intend to encourage farmers to expand their energy crop production, this knowledge of such motivational factors should be enhanced. ; Ett konkurrenskraftigt jordbruk – kommunikation kring klimatförändring och nya möjligheter (K3), Stiftelsen Lantbruksforskning

Concerns about climate change related to fossil fuel carbon dioxide emissions require the development of alternative energy resources. In most scenario studies on future energy supply, bio-energy is one of the dominant renewable alternatives foreseen. Apart from the use of residues and wastes, the cultivation of dedicated 'energy crops' will be necessary. Especially in densely populated regions such as the Netherlands, energy crop introduction is strongly hampered by lack of available land, related to the low valued added of energy crops compared to e.g. agriculture. A strategy that may help overcome these problems is multiple land use: combining the production of energy crops to other targets on the same tract of land. If a plot not only generates biomass, but also serves other functions such as nature management, more income may be generated, and overall land use efficiency may increase. Central question in this thesis is whether, and to what extent, multiple land use can improve opportunities for energy crops in the Netherlands, in comparison with energy cropping as single land use. We specified this question into three criteria: (1) multiple land use energy farming options should be biophysically feasible; (2) such combinations should lead to lower biomass production prices compared to single land use; (3) the combinations should open up an area for energy cropping significant to the national renewable energy targets. The first research topic was to further identify and specify the concept of multiple land use, and develop an operationalisation procedure. Subsequently, specific options for combination of energy crop cultivation with another function were elaborated. In a relatively simple and qualitative way, we analysed four options with willow as an energy crop: combination with drinking water production (on two levels), with traditional willow coppice management, and with an ecological corridor function. We executed more detailed studies on two combination options: willow in hydrological buffer zones around nature reserves, and willow as a breeding bird habitat. Most studied options of combining willow SRC with another function into a multiple land use type appeared to be biophysically feasible. The effect on financial competitiveness of introducing willow SRC in Multiple Land Use varies per combination: in some cases, like the option in groundwater protection areas, competitiveness remains unchanged, while in others, such as the buffer zones, a significant competitiveness increase can be obtained. However, the price reductions are not in the order of magnitude that the price of energy crops draws near to the current prices of biomass residues, the only resource currently applied for bioenergy. The total of land potentially suitable for the investigated options adds up to ca. 100,000 ha, while the area with improved financial competitiveness is ca 30,000 ha in total. Given the projections on required area for meeting the national renewable energy objective, MLU areas with improved financial competitiveness will only partly meet this area claim. Therefore, multiple land use will enhance opportunities for energy crop introduction in the Netherlands, but it will not be the panacea for large-scale introduction of competitive energy farming. Potential areas remain limited, as well as financial benefits compared to single land use, and several implementation problems may hamper introduction in practice. This limited perspective on the short term may be altered by long-term developments, such as technical innovations, and developments in the EU Common Agricultural Policy and in the global climate policy.

The strategies for the future direction of agriculture in the EU and in Germany increasingly focus on climate and environmental protection. Catch crop cultivation may play a role in protecting soil, climate, water, and biodiversity. Data from a farm survey on sugar beet production in Germany between 2010 and 2019 were evaluated regarding the development of catch crop cultivation in connection with other production factors. The question was whether the cultivation of catch crops would support the intended environmental goals. It was investigated whether (1) fewer herbicides were used and (2) less nitrogen fertilizer was applied on fields with catch crops in comparison to fields without catch crops. The proportion of fields with catch crops before sugar beets has risen since greening was introduced as part of the EU's common agricultural policy. Pesticide and nitrogen fertilizer applications were higher on fields with catch crops than on fields without. As these are results from a survey, it remains open why the use of herbicides and fertilizer in sugar beet cultivation is higher with than without catch crops. However, the results show that an increase in catch crop cultivation does not automatically have positive effects on the environment and climate. Sugar beet cultivation in practice should be further optimized in a targeted manner, so that greater benefits regarding environmental protection can be realized.

Dissertação apresentada na Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia da Universidade Nova de Lisboa Para a obtenção do Grau de Mestre em Energia e Bioenergia ; Energy crops offer ecological advantages over fossil fuels by contributing to the reduction of greenhouse gases and acidifying emissions. However, there could be ecological shortcomings related to the intensity of agricultural production. There is a risk of polluting water and air, losing soil quality, enhancing erosion and reducing biodiversity. In the scope of the project Future Crops for Food, Feed, Fiber and Fuel (4F Crops), supported by the European Union, an environmental impact assessment study was developed and applied to the cultivation of potential energy crops in the Mediterranean Europe. The categories selected were: use of water and mineral resources, soil quality and erosion, emission of minerals and pesticides to soil and water, waste generation and utilization, landscape and biodiversity. Results suggest that annual cropping systems have a more negative impact on the environment than lignocellulosic and woody species, namely regarding erodibility and biodiversity. Annual systems and woody crops are also more damaging to soil quality than herbaceous perennials. However, differences among crop types are not as evident in the remaining indicators. Impact reduction strategies are limited to crop management options, but, site specific factors should be accurately assessed to evaluate the adequacy between crop and location. ; This work was supported by the European Union (Project 4F Crops – Future Crops for Food, Feed, Fiber and Fuel, Grant Agreement No: 212811, Coordination and Support Actions, FP7-KBBE-2007-1)

Perceptions of energy crop production are assessed in this paper. The Görlitz district (Germany) serves as a case study area for this purpose. Semi-structured interviews with farmers and standardized surveys among lay persons were conducted. Many farmers perceive themselves being responsible for providing many ecosystem services. Farmers prefer a regional scale of energy crop cultivation based on conventional crops. Improved legal frameworks and incentives would safeguard equal competition and ecosystem services. Laypersons think that drinking water, food production, biodiversity and pollination are the most important ecosystem services of agricultural landscapes. Providing biomass for renewable energy production is not considered to be an important ecosystem service. Laypersons believe that biomass production should be restricted to fields that are not needed for food production, and the use of residues or landscape management materials. According to laypersons, more money should be spent to halt the decline of ecosystem services. ; V tomto článku je hodnoceno vnímání produkce energetických plodin. Jako případová studie slouží okres Görlitz v Německu. Byly uskutečněny semi-strukturované rozhovory se zemědělci a standardizovaná dotazníková šetření s laickou veřejností. Většina farmářů vnímá sama sebe jako poskytovatele mnoha ekosystémových služeb. Farmáři preferují pěstování konvenčních energetických plodin s podporou na regionální úrovni. Lepší legislativní nástroje a dotace by podle nich zajistily rovnou soutěž a ekosystémové služby. Laická veřejnost se domnívá, že pitná voda, produkce potravin, biodiverzita a opylení představují nejdůležitější ekosystémové služby, které poskytuje zemědělská krajina. Zajištění biomasy pro produkci obnovitelné energie není považováno za důležitou ekosystémovou službu. Laická veřejnost má za to, že produkce biomasy by měla být omezena na plochy, které nejsou potřebné pro produkci potravin, využití zbytkových produktů či management krajiny. Více peněz by naopak mělo být věnováno proti úpadku ekosystémových služeb.

The production system model that has been adopted in most Brazilian regions, the soybean/second corn crop succession, has led to problems in water and soil conservation and favorable conditions for diseases, pests, and weeds in the agricultural system and, consequently, increasing its energy use. Crop rotation is an alternative to this production model, directly interfering with the problematic aspects of the crop succession system and, consequently, its energy balance. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the crop rotation system with the best energy balance and efficiency. The data on the quantity of inputs (seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, and fuel), labor, and grain yield used in the study were collected from a crop rotation experiment conducted at the experimental station of the Rural Development Institute of Paraná - IAPAR-EMATER, Londrina, PR, Brazil, from 2014 to 2020. The experimental design consisted of randomized blocks, with six treatments and four replications. The treatments consisted of T1 (second corn crop/soybean), T2 (white oat/soybean, triticale/corn, and wheat/soybean), T3 (rye + black oat/soybean, black oat + fodder radish/corn, and congo grass/soybean), T4 (canola/corn, crambe/corn; canola/soybean); T5 (buckwheat-fodder radish/corn, bean/soybean, and buckwheat-white oat/ soybean), and T6 (wheat/corn, canola/corn + congo grass, and bean/soybean). The different crop rotations and the traditional second corn crop/soybean system provided positive energy balance and efficiency, that is, they produced more energy than they consumed. The canola/corn, crambe/corn, and canola/soybean rotation systems had the highest energy balance and efficiency, with values of 866,442.27 MJ ha−1 and 10.27, respectively, mainly due to corn cultivation in the summer, which resulted in a higher energy return than the other grain-producing crops.

Abstract Background In Germany, government policies supporting the growth of renewable energies lead to a rapid increase in energy crop cultivation. This increase is linked to possible conflicts between different sustainability goals which so far have been rarely considered in the planning procedure. Methods This article looks at different approaches of assessment and planning methods on a region-specific level. It describes the methodology of the project Efficient Bio-Energy in the Perspective of Nature Conservation - Assessment and Recommendations to Protect Biodiversity and Climate which aims to establish the basis for an integrated sustainability assessment of energy crop cultivation for decentralized energy production in Germany and has been conducted by the author. The method takes into account the three main requirements of agricultural profitability, greenhouse gases (GHG) efficiency, and environmental sustainability of energy crop cultivation for decentralized energy production and has been applied for two sample regions. Results Using ArcGIS, the suitability of energy crops can be displayed, and regional aspects can be considered by overlaying and intersecting the individual output of all three requirements. This allows the definition of 'no-go' areas as well as the overall estimation of the maximum sustainable production capacity for each energy crop or energy path in a specific region. It enables an estimation of the profitability and GHG efficiency of energy crop cultivation paths at regional or communal level under consideration of different indicators for environmental sustainability. Conclusions The article closes with a discussion of the methodological challenges of this integrative method. The conclusion gives an outlook in which planning and policy processes could be beneficial to apply such an integrative method in order to assess the suitability of certain landscape areas for energy production paths.