2 Search Results

Abstract A socioeconomic model is used to estimate the land‐use implications on the U.S. Conservation Reserve Program from potential increases in second‐generation biofuel production. A baseline scenario with no second‐generation biofuel production is compared to a scenario where the Renewable Fuels Standard ( RFS 2) volumes are met by 2022. We allow for the possibility of converting expiring CRP lands to alternative uses such as conventional crops, dedicated second‐generation biofuel crops, or harvesting existing CRP grasses for biomass. Results indicate that RFS 2 volumes ( RFS 2‐v) can be met primarily with crop residues (78% of feedstock demand) and woodymore » residues (19% of feedstock demand) compared with dedicated biomass (3% of feedstock demand), with only minimal conversion of cropland (0.27 million hectares, <1% of total cropland), pastureland (0.28 million hectares of pastureland, <1% of total pastureland), and CRP lands (0.29 million hectares of CRP lands, 3% of existing CRP lands) to biomass production. Meeting RFS 2 volumes would reduce CRP re‐enrollment by 0.19 million hectares, or 4%, below the baseline scenario where RFS 2 is not met. Yet under RFS 2‐v scenario, expiring CRP lands are more likely to be converted to or maintain perennial cover, with 1.78 million hectares of CRP lands converting to hay production, and 0.29 million hectares being harvested for existing grasses. A small amount of CRP is harvested for existing biomass, but no conversion of CRP to dedicated biomass crops, such as switchgrass, are projected to occur. Although less land is enrolled in CRP under RFS 2‐v scenario, total land in perennial cover increases by 0.15 million hectares, or 2%, under RFS 2‐v. Sensitivity to yield, payment and residue retention assumptions are evaluated.« less

Daily minimum temperature (T_min) has increased faster than daily maximum temperature (T_max) in many parts of the world, leading to decreases in diurnal temperature range (DTR). Projections suggest these trends are likely to continue in many regions, particularly northern latitudes and in arid regions. Despite wide speculation that asymmetric warming has different impacts on plant and ecosystem production than equal-night-and-day warming, there has been little direct comparison of these scenarios. Reduced DTR has also been widely misinterpreted as a result of night-only warming, when in fact T_min occurs near dawn, indicating higher morning as well as night temperatures. We reportmore » on the first experiment to examine ecosystem-scale impacts of faster increases in T_min than T_max, using precise temperature controls to create realistic diurnal temperature profiles with gradual day-night temperature transitions and elevated early morning as well as night temperatures. Studying a constructed grassland ecosystem containing species native to Oregon, USA, we found the ecosystem lost more carbon at elevated than ambient temperatures, but was unaffected by the 3ºC difference in DTR between symmetric warming (constantly ambient +3.5ºC) and asymmetric warming (dawn T_min=ambient +5ºC, afternoon T_max= ambient +2ºC). Reducing DTR had no apparent effect on photosynthesis, likely because temperatures were most different in the morning and late afternoon when light was low. Respiration was also similar in both warming treatments, because respiration temperature sensitivity was not sufficient to respond to the limited temperature differences between asymmetric and symmetric warming. We concluded that changes in daily mean temperatures, rather than changes in T_min/T_max, were sufficient for predicting ecosystem carbon fluxes in this reconstructed Mediterranean grassland system.« less