bioenergy production and environmental implications of ... · change –4.4 –4 –6.4 –4.5...

JRC/Nordic Energy Research/NoBio/Norwegian Centre for Bioenergy Research

Workshop "Biomass resources and bioenergy in Norway and other Nordic countries"

Dr. Ioannis DimitriouSLU

Bioenergy production and environmental implications of Short

Rotation Coppice cultivation in Sweden

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop Production Ecology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLU

© Lantmäteriverketet. Ur GSD –

Översiktskartan, dnr 507-98-4720

Short Rotation Willow Coppice fields in Sweden

UppsalaSLU

Mechanised planting with approx. 12,000 cuttings/ha

Dr. I. Dimitriou, Dep. of CropProduction Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

Dr. I. Dimitriou, Dep. of CropProduction Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop ProductionEcology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLU

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop ProductionEcology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLU

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop Production Ecology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLU

Ca. 14,000 ha are currently cultivated in Sweden for energy (with willow/Salix)

Predictions for rapid increase (e.g. Ministry of Agriculture, 2006)

Grown on agricultural land

Double-row system, fertilisation, weed control

Harvested every 3-4 years, life span app. 25 years

Average production: 6-10 t DM/ha/yr

Short Rotation Coppice in Sweden

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop Production Ecology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLU

SRC cultivated area has remained almost stable during the last 10 years, the predictions have not become true...

…farmers do not usually fertilise and biomass production is therefore lower than the potentially achieved…

…the recent increases in cereal prices give negative signs for area increase…

Short Rotation Coppice in Sweden

Can these trends for SRC be altered in the future?

Probably yes…

… if SRC “value”improves!

SRC improved value can happen due to:

• Increased biomass (better sorts/clones –fertilisation?)

• Cheaper management activities

• Better prices for willow chips

• Additional value, e.g. via environmental impact

So, what is the impact of SRC on the “near”/local

environment?

SRC impact on environment

• Water

• Soil

• Biodiversity

• Landscape?

Dr. I. Dimitriou, Dep. of CropProduction Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

Wastewater treatment in Enköping

100 kg N/ha yrLångaveka (inorganic fertilisation)

150 kg N/ha yrEnköping (wastewater fertilisation)

Klemedtsson et al., unpublished data

SRC impact on environment

• Water

• Soil

• Biodiversity

• Landscape?

Soil C sequestration (0-23 cm) 6 Salix genotypes

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12S

oil C

seq

uest

ratio

n (t

C h

a-1 y

r-1)

BjörnGudrun

JorrLoden

ToraTordis

Mean: 0.08 t/ha/yr

Commercial varieties of Salix vary greatly in terms of C sequestration potential.

(Weih & v Bussel 2006)

Treatments sl+ash (sl+ash)x2 sl ash control Harvest interval (yrs) 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3

Cd Supply 1.2 2.5 1.2 1.3 0 Potential output 5.6 5.2 8.9 7 8 5.7 6.9 7 6.7 5.2 Change –4.4 –4 –6.4 –4.5 –6.8 –4.5 –5.6 –5.7 –6.7 –5.2

Cu Supply 303 606 500 106 0 Potential output 28 14 48 18 34 14 39 14 30 12 Change 275 289 558 588 466 486 67 92 –30 –12

Ni Supply 18 38 13 25 0 Potential output 12 7 15 6 12 5 11 5 10 6 Change 6 11 23 32 1 8 14 20 –10 –6

Zn Supply 449 899 569 330 0 Potential output 243 245 359 330 308 284 258 273 240 213 Change 206 204 540 569 261 285 72 57 –240 –213

Table. Balance between supply via sludge–ash application and potential output via willow plantation harvest (in g ha-1 yr-1), for the various treatments, if a potential harvest occurred annually or every three years. The potential output with a stem harvest was calculated for a 30:70 bark:wood ratio for year 1 and a 25:75 bark:wood ratio for year 3. Changes indicate potential changes in the soil pool (In: Dimitriou et al., 2006)

Cadmium and SRC

SRC impact on environment

• Water

• Soil

• Biodiversity

• Landscape?

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop ProductionEcology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLU

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop ProductionEcology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLU

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop ProductionEcology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLU

Photo: Nils-Erik Nordh

Weih et al. (2003) Basic Appl EcolSite number

05

1015202530

1 2 3 5 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21

Cumulative species numberPoplar standsArable fieldsJoint species

1 2 3 5 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 211 2 3 5 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21

Vascular Flora Diversity in Swedish Poplar Stands

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop ProductionEcology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLUPhoto: Nils-Erik Nordh

SRC impact on environment

• Water

• Soil

• Biodiversity

• Landscape?

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop ProductionEcology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLU

Photo: Nils-Erik Nordh

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop ProductionEcology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLUPhoto: Nils-Erik Nordh

Dr I. Dimitriou, Dep. of Crop ProductionEcology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural

Sciences SLU

More information on related work

• …within Rating-SRC, an ERA-NET Bioenergy project under the SRC Call (Sweden, Germany).

• http://ratingsrc.slu.se/

Will/should all these environmental advantages

offering additional value to SRC compared to other agricultural crops be translated into “real”

value (in terms of compensation to the farmer)?