Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Investigating the Efficacy of Integrating Energy Crops into Non-Profitable Subfields in Iowa

  • Published:
BioEnergy Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Within-field spatial variability reduces growers’ return on investment and overall productivity while potentially increasing negative environmental impacts through increased soil erosion, nutrient runoff, and leaching. The hypothesis that integrating energy crops into non-profitable segments of agricultural fields could potentially increase grain yield and biomass feedstock production was tested in this study using a statewide analysis of predominantly corn- and soy-producing counties in Iowa. Basic and rigorous controls on permissible soil and soil-carbon losses were imposed on harvest of crop residues to enhance year-to-year sustainability of crop and residue production. Additional criteria limiting harvesting costs and focus on large-area subfields for biomass production were imposed to reduce the impacts of energy crop integration on grain production. Model simulations were conducted using 4 years (2013–2016) of soil, weather, crop yield, and management practice data on all counties in Iowa. Miscanthus (Miscanthus x giganteus), switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), and crop-residue-based bioenergy feedstock systems were evaluated as biomass. Average energy crop and plant residue harvesting efficiencies were estimated at 50 and 60%, respectively. Because of higher potential yields, average logistics costs for miscanthus-based biomass production were 15 and 23% lower than switchgrass-based and crop residue-based biomass productions, respectively, under basic sustainability controls, and 17 and 26% lower under rigorous sustainability controls. Subfield shape, size, area, and harvest equipment size were the dominant factors influencing harvesting cost and efficiency suggesting that in areas where subfields are predominantly profitable or harvesting efficiencies low, other options such as prairie strips, buffer zones around fields, and riparian areas should be investigated for more profitable biomass production and sustainable farming systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bonner IJ, Muth DJ, Tomer MD, James DE, Porter SA, Karelen DL (2014) Opportunities for energy crop production based on subfield scale distribution of profitability. Energies 7(10):6509–6526. https://doi.org/10.3390/en7106509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Nair SK, Hartley DS, Gardner TA, McNunn G, Searcy EM (2017) An integrated landscape management approach to sustainable bioenergy production. BioEnergy Res 10(3):929–948. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-017-9854-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Muth DJ, McCorkle DS, Koch JB, Bryden KM (2012) Modeling sustainable agricultural residue removal at the subfield scale. Agron J 104(4):970

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sanchez OJ, Cardona CA (2007) Trends in biotechnological production of fuel ethanol from different feedstocks. Bioresour Technol 99(13):5270–5295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2007.11.013

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Hill J, Nelson E, Tilman D, Polasky S, Tiffany D (2006) Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103(30):11206–11210. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0604600103

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Mussatto SI, Dragone G, Guimaraes PMR, Silva JPA, Carneiro LM, Roberto IC, Vicente A, Domingues L, Teixeira JA (2010) Technological trends, global market, and challenges of bioethanol production. Biotechnol Adv 28(6):817–830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2010.07.001

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Demirbas MF, Balat M (2005) Recent advances on the production and utilization trends in biofuels: a global perspective. Energy Conserv Manag 47(15-16):2371–2381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2005.11.014

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. McPhail LL, Babcock BA (2011) Impact of US biofuel policy on US corn and gasoline price variability. Energy 37(1):505–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.11.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Condon N, Klemick H, Wolverton A (2014) Impacts of ethanol policy on corn prices: a review and meta-analysis of recent evidence. Food Policy 51(February):63–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.12.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Zulauf C (2016) US corn ethanol market: understanding the past to assess the future. Farmdoc Daily (6):218, http://farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/2016/11/us-corn-ethanol-market-past-and-future.html

  11. Wisner R (2008) Impact of biofuels on corn and soybean prices. In September Issue of AgMRC, Agricultural Marketing Resource Center. http://farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/2016/11/us-corn-ethanol-market-past-and-future.html

  12. Lark TJ, Salmon JM, Gibbs HK (2015) Cropland expansion outpaces agricultural and biofuel policies in the United States. Environ Res Lett 10:044003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Donner SD, Kucharik CJ (2008) Corn-based ethanol production compromises goal of reducing nitrogen export by the Mississippi River. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105:4513–4518

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Dale VH, Kling C, Meyer JL, Sanders J, Stallworth H, Armitage T, Wangsness D, Bianchi T, Blumberg A, Boynton W, Conley DJ, Crumpton W, David MB, Gilbert D, Howarth RW, Lowrance R, Mankin K, Opaluch J, Pearl H, Reckhow K, Sharpley AN, Simpson TW, Snyder C, Wright D (2010) Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Springer Series on Environmental Management. ISBN 0172-6161, ISBN 978-0-387-89685-4, e-ISBN 978–0–387-89686-1. Springer, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-89686-1

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Smith VH, Tilman GD, Nekola JC (1999) Eutrophication: impacts of excess nutrient inputs on freshwater, marine, and terrestrial ecosystems. Environ Pollut 100(1–3):179–196

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Min QW, Jiao YL (2002) Effects of agricultural non-point source pollution on eutrophication of water body and its control measure. Acta Ecol Sin 22(03):291–299

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jager HI, Baskaran LM, Schweizer PE, Turhollow AF, Brandt CC, Srinivasan R (2015) Forecasting changes in water quality in rivers associated with growing biofuels in the Arkansas-White-Red river drainage, USA. GCB Bioenergy 7:774–784. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12169

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Dodds WK, Oakes RM (2008) Headwater influences on downstream water quality. Environ Manag 41:367–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Negri MC (2016) Bioenergy sustaianbility and the food, energy, land and water nexus. Presented at DOE’s Bioenergy Solutions to Gulf Hypoxia Workshop. Aug 30–31, 2016, Washington, DC

  20. Wu M (2016) Modeling water quality in the Mississippi River Basin: Upper Mississippi, Ohio, and Missouri River Basins. Presented at DOE’s Bioenergy Solutions to Gulf Hypoxia Workshop. Aug 30–31, 2016, Washington, DC

  21. McIsaac GF (2016) Framing the problem: nutrient source identification, accounting, and attribution. Presented at DOE’s Bioenergy Solutions to Gulf Hypoxia Workshop. Aug 30–31, 2016, Washington, DC

  22. Demissie Y, Yan E, Wu M, Zhang Z (2012) Watershed modeling of potential impacts of biofuel feedstock production in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. Environmental Sciences Division, Argonne National Laboratory Report, ANL/EVS/AGEM/TR-12-07, April 2012

  23. Nocentini A, Virgilio ND, Monti A (2015) Model simulation of cumulative carbon sequestration by switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) in the Mediterranean area using the DAYSENT model. Bioenerg Res 8:1512–1522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-015-9672-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cosentino SL, Copani V, Scalici G, Scordia D, Testa G (2015) Soil erosion mitigation by perennial species under Mediterranean environment. Bioenerg Res 8:1538–1547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Brye KE, Norman JM, Bundy LG, Gower ST (2000) Nitrogen and carbon leaching in agroecosystems and their role in denitrification potential. J Environ Qual 1(3):58–70. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2001.30158x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gelfand I, Zenone T, Jasrotia P, Chen J, Hamilton SK, Robertson GP (2011) Carbon debt of conservation reserve program (CRP) grasslands converted to bioenergy production. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108(33):13864–13869

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Koph I, Lonsdorf EV, Williams NM, Brittain C, Isaacs R, Gibbs J, Ricketts TH (2015) Modeling the status, trends, and impacts of wild bee abundance in the United States. PNAS 113(1):140–145. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1517685113

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Brittain C, Potts SG (2010) The potential impacts of insecticides on the life-history traits of bees and the consequences for pollination. Basic Appl Ecol 12(4):321–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2010.12.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. White S (2017) Biofuels phase-out will raise demand for feed imports, industry warns. In EURACTIV.com. https://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/news/biofuels-phase-out-will-increase-demand-for-feed-imports-industry-warns/

  30. Bonner IJ, Mcunn G, Muth DJ, Tyner W, Leirer J, Dakins M (2016) Development of integrated bioenergy production systems using precision conservation and multimedia decision analysis techniques. J Soil Water Conserv 71(3):180–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Brandes E, McNunn GS, Schulte IA, Bonner IJ, Muth DJ, Babcock BA, Sharma B, Heaton EA (2016) Subfield profitability analysis reveals an economic case for cropland diversification. Environ Res Lett 11(2016):014009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy (2013) A science and technology-based framework to assess and reduce nutrients to Iowa waters and the Gulf of Mexico. Iowa Dept. of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources and Iowa State University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (www.nutrientstrategy.iastate.edu)

  33. Muth DJ, Bryden KM (2013) An integrated model for assessment of sustainable agricultural residue removal limits for bioenergy systems. Environ Model Softw 39:50–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Muth DJ, Bryden KM, Nelson RG (2013) Sustainable agricultural residue removal for bioenergy: a spatially comprehensive US national assessment. Appl Energy 102:403–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. McKendry P (2002) Energy production from biomass (part 1): overview of biomass. Bioresour Technol 83(1):37–46

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service Cropland Data Layer (2016) Published crop-specific data layer. Available at https://nassgeodata.gmu.edu/CropScape/. USDA-NASS, Washington, DC

  37. Revised universal soil loss equation, version 2 (RUSLE2), Official NRCS RUSLE2 Program Official NRCS Database http://fargo.nserl.purdue.edu/rusle2_dataweb/RUSLE2_Index.htm

  38. Scheffe L, Ferruzzi G, Boetger S, Woodruff S (2015) RUSLE2 advanced data management. http://fargo.nserl.purdue.edu/RUSLE2_ftp/NRCS_Base_Database/RUSLE2%20Instructional%20Material/Training%20Presentations/RUSLE2%20Advanced%20Data%20Management.pptx

  39. Miller GA, Fenton TE, Oneal BR, Tiffany BJ, Burras CL (2010) Iowa soil properties and interpretations database. ISPAID Version 7

  40. Plastina A (2015-2016) Estimated costs of crop production in Iowa. Ag decision maker. Available at https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/crops/html/a1-20.html

  41. Duffy M (2013-2014) Estimated costs of crop production in Iowa. Ag decision maker. Available at http://econ2.econ.iastate.edu/faculty/duffy/extensionnew.html

  42. Edwards W, Johanns A, Chamra A, Neighbor J (2013) Cash rental rates for Iowa. Ag decision maker. Available at https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/pdf/c2-10_2013.pdf

  43. Edwards W, Johanns A, Neighbor J (2014) Cash rental rates for Iowa. Ag decision maker. Available at https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/pdf/c2-10_2014.pdf

  44. Plastina A, Edwards W, Johanns A (2015) Cash rental rates for Iowa. Ag decision maker. Available at https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/pdf/c2-10_2015.pdf

  45. Plastina A, Johanns A, Welter C (2016) Cash rental rates for Iowa. Ag decision maker. Available at https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/pdf/c2-10_2016.pdf

  46. Mitchell RB, Schmer MR, Anderson WF, Jin V, Blakcom KS, Kiniry J (2016) Dedicated energy crops and crop residues for bioenergy feedstocks in the central and eastern USA. Bioenerg Res 9:384–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-016-9734-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Langholtz MH, Stokes BJ, Eaton LM (2016) 2016 billion-ton report: advancing domestic resources for a thriving bioeconomy, volume 1: economic availability of feedstock. OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, managed by UT-Battelle, LLC for the US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, 2016, 1–411

  48. Jacobson JJ, Roni MS, Lamers P, Cafferty KG (2014) Biomass feedstock and conversion supply system design and analysis. Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls INL/EXT-14-32377

    Google Scholar 

  49. Cafferty KG, Muth DJ, Jacobson JJ, Bryden KM (2013a) Model based biomass system design of feedstock supply systems for bioenergy production. In: ASME 2013 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, August 4–7, Portland, OR, USA

  50. Ferrarini A, Fornasir F, Serra P, Ferrari F, Trevisan M, Amaducci S (2017) Impacts of willow and miscanthus bioenergy buffers on biogeochemical N removal processes along the soil-groundwater continuum. GCB Bioenergy 9(1):246–261

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Schroeder J (2010) The pros and cons of miscanthus. In http://energy.agwired.com/2010/09/09/the-pros-cons-of-miscanthus/. Accessed March 2018

  52. Song L (2010) Study: Miscanthus guzzles more water than corn but soaks up more nitrates too. In Inside Climate News, October 4, 2010. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/20101004/study-miscanthus-guzzles-more-water-corn-soaks-more-nitrates-too. Accessed March 2018

  53. Schultz RC, Collettil JP, Isenhart TM, Simpkins WW, Mize CW, Thompson ML (1995) Design and placement of a multi-species riparian buffer strip system. Agrofor Syst 29(3):201–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ssegane H, Negri CM (2016) An integrated landscape designed for commodity and bioenergy crops for a tile-drained agricultural watershed. J Environ Qual 45(5):1588–1596. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2015.10.0518

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Wightman JL, Ahmed ZU, Volk TA, Castellano PJ, Peters CJ, DeGloria AD, Duxbury JM, Woddbury PB (2015) Assessing sustainable bioenergy feedstock production potential by integrated geospatial analysis of land use and land quality. Bioenerg Res 8:1671–1680. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-015-9618-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the US Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Bioenergy Technologies Office, under DOE Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517. Accordingly, the US Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free license to publish or reproduce the published form of this contribution, or allow others to do so, for US Government purposes. The authors would also like to acknowledge the analytical support provided by AgSolver to this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bioenergy Technologies, Clean Energy and Transportation Science & Technology, EES&T Division, Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID, 83415, USA

    Shyam K. Nair, L. Michael Griffel, Damon S. Hartley & M. Ross Kunz

  2. AgSolver, 2701 Kent Ave, Suite 130, Ames, IA, 50010, USA

    Gabe S. McNunn

Authors
  1. Shyam K. Nair
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. Michael Griffel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Damon S. Hartley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gabe S. McNunn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Ross Kunz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shyam K. Nair.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nair, S.K., Griffel, L.M., Hartley, D.S. et al. Investigating the Efficacy of Integrating Energy Crops into Non-Profitable Subfields in Iowa. Bioenerg. Res. 11, 623–637 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-018-9925-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-018-9925-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation