skip to main content
DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

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

Abstract

We present that 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,more » and 17 and 26% lower under rigorous sustainability controls. Lastly, 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.« less

Authors:
ORCiD logo [1]; ORCiD logo [1]; ORCiD logo [1];  [2]; ORCiD logo [1]
  1. Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States). Bioenergy Technologies, Clean Energy and Transportation Science & Technology, EES&T Division
  2. AgSolver, Inc., Ames, IA (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Bioenergy Technologies Office (EE-3B)
OSTI Identifier:
1478466
Report Number(s):
INL/JOU-17-44011-Rev000
Journal ID: ISSN 1939-1234
Grant/Contract Number:  
AC07-05ID14517
Resource Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
BioEnergy Research
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 11; Journal Issue: 3; Journal ID: ISSN 1939-1234
Publisher:
Springer
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
09 BIOMASS FUELS; 54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; Landscape Environmental Assessment Framework; LEAF; biomass; energy crops; switchgrass; miscanthus; feedstock; herbaceous biomass; logistics cost; bioenergy; variability; harvesting cost; harvesting efficiency

Citation Formats

Nair, Shyam K., Griffel, L. Michael, Hartley, Damon S., McNunn, Gabe S., and Kunz, M. Ross. Investigating the Efficacy of Integrating Energy Crops into Non-Profitable Subfields in Iowa. United States: N. p., 2018. Web. doi:10.1007/s12155-018-9925-0.
Nair, Shyam K., Griffel, L. Michael, Hartley, Damon S., McNunn, Gabe S., & Kunz, M. Ross. Investigating the Efficacy of Integrating Energy Crops into Non-Profitable Subfields in Iowa. United States. doi:10.1007/s12155-018-9925-0.
Nair, Shyam K., Griffel, L. Michael, Hartley, Damon S., McNunn, Gabe S., and Kunz, M. Ross. Tue . "Investigating the Efficacy of Integrating Energy Crops into Non-Profitable Subfields in Iowa". United States. doi:10.1007/s12155-018-9925-0. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1478466.
@article{osti_1478466,
title = {Investigating the Efficacy of Integrating Energy Crops into Non-Profitable Subfields in Iowa},
author = {Nair, Shyam K. and Griffel, L. Michael and Hartley, Damon S. and McNunn, Gabe S. and Kunz, M. Ross},
abstractNote = {We present that 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. Lastly, 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.},
doi = {10.1007/s12155-018-9925-0},
journal = {BioEnergy Research},
number = 3,
volume = 11,
place = {United States},
year = {2018},
month = {6}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Figures / Tables:

Table 1 Table 1: Equipment Assumptions Used for Harvest Simulations 281

Save / Share:

Works referenced in this record:

Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels
journal, July 2006

  • Hill, J.; Nelson, E.; Tilman, D.
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 103, Issue 30
  • DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0604600103

Technological trends, global market, and challenges of bio-ethanol production
journal, November 2010


Modeling Sustainable Agricultural Residue Removal at the Subfield Scale
journal, January 2012


An integrated model for assessment of sustainable agricultural residue removal limits for bioenergy systems
journal, January 2013


Impacts of ethanol policy on corn prices: A review and meta-analysis of recent evidence
journal, February 2015


Impacts of willow and miscanthus bioenergy buffers on biogeochemical N removal processes along the soil-groundwater continuum
journal, February 2016

  • Ferrarini, Andrea; Fornasier, Flavio; Serra, Paolo
  • GCB Bioenergy, Vol. 9, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1111/gcbb.12340

Opportunities for Energy Crop Production Based on Subfield Scale Distribution of Profitability
journal, October 2014

  • Bonner, Ian; Cafferty, Kara; Muth, David
  • Energies, Vol. 7, Issue 10
  • DOI: 10.3390/en7106509

Sustainable agricultural residue removal for bioenergy: A spatially comprehensive US national assessment
journal, February 2013


Carbon debt of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) grasslands converted to bioenergy production
journal, August 2011

  • Gelfand, I.; Zenone, T.; Jasrotia, P.
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 108, Issue 33
  • DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1017277108

Nitrogen and Carbon Leaching in Agroecosystems and Their Role in Denitrification Potential
journal, January 2001

  • Brye, K. R.; Norman, J. M.; Bundy, L. G.
  • Journal of Environment Quality, Vol. 30, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.2134/jeq2001.30158x

Forecasting changes in water quality in rivers associated with growing biofuels in the Arkansas-White-Red river drainage, USA
journal, May 2014

  • Jager, Henriette I.; Baskaran, Latha M.; Schweizer, Peter E.
  • GCB Bioenergy, Vol. 7, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1111/gcbb.12169

Soil Erosion Mitigation by Perennial Species Under Mediterranean Environment
journal, November 2015

  • Cosentino, Salvatore Luciano; Copani, Venera; Scalici, Giovanni
  • BioEnergy Research, Vol. 8, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1007/s12155-015-9690-2

Energy production from biomass (part 1): overview of biomass
journal, May 2002


Impact of US biofuel policy on US corn and gasoline price variability
journal, January 2012


Subfield profitability analysis reveals an economic case for cropland diversification
journal, January 2016


Model Simulation of Cumulative Carbon Sequestration by Switchgrass (Panicum Virgatum L.) in the Mediterranean Area Using the DAYCENT Model
journal, September 2015


Cropland expansion outpaces agricultural and biofuel policies in the United States
journal, April 2015


Corn-based ethanol production compromises goal of reducing nitrogen export by the Mississippi River
journal, March 2008

  • Donner, S. D.; Kucharik, C. J.
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 105, Issue 11
  • DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0708300105

Trends in biotechnological production of fuel ethanol from different feedstocks
journal, September 2008


Recent advances on the production and utilization trends of bio-fuels: A global perspective
journal, September 2006


Model Based Biomass System Design of Feedstock Supply Systems for Bioenergy Production
conference, February 2014

  • Cafferty, Kara G.; Muth, David J.; Jacobson, Jacob J.
  • ASME 2013 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Volume 2B: 33rd Computers and Information in Engineering Conference
  • DOI: 10.1115/DETC2013-13559

An Integrated Landscape Designed for Commodity and Bioenergy Crops for a Tile-Drained Agricultural Watershed
journal, January 2016

  • Ssegane, Herbert; Negri, M. Cristina
  • Journal of Environment Quality, Vol. 45, Issue 5
  • DOI: 10.2134/jeq2015.10.0518

Assessing Sustainable Bioenergy Feedstock Production Potential by Integrated Geospatial Analysis of Land Use and Land Quality
journal, May 2015


Eutrophication: impacts of excess nutrient inputs on freshwater, marine, and terrestrial ecosystems
journal, January 1999


The potential impacts of insecticides on the life-history traits of bees and the consequences for pollination
journal, June 2011


Development of integrated bioenergy production systems using precision conservation and multicriteria decision analysis techniques
journal, May 2016

  • Bonner, I.; McNunn, G.; Muth, D.
  • Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, Vol. 71, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.2489/jswc.71.3.182

Dedicated Energy Crops and Crop Residues for Bioenergy Feedstocks in the Central and Eastern USA
journal, June 2016


Design and placement of a multi-species riparian buffer strip system
journal, March 1995

  • Schultz, R. C.; Collettil, J. P.; Isenhart, T. M.
  • Agroforestry Systems, Vol. 29, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1007/BF00704869

Modeling the status, trends, and impacts of wild bee abundance in the United States
journal, December 2015

  • Koh, Insu; Lonsdorf, Eric V.; Williams, Neal M.
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 113, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1517685113

Headwater Influences on Downstream Water Quality
journal, November 2007


An Integrated Landscape Management Approach to Sustainable Bioenergy Production
journal, June 2017