IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v329y2023ics0306261922014490.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The crop residue conundrum: Maintaining long-term soil organic carbon stocks while reinforcing the bioeconomy, compatible endeavors?

Author

Listed:
  • Andrade Díaz, Christhel
  • Clivot, Hugues
  • Albers, Ariane
  • Zamora-Ledezma, Ezequiel
  • Hamelin, Lorie

Abstract

Crop residues are a key bulk feedstock for supplying renewable carbon for bioenergy production and the broader bioeconomy without compromising food security. However, it is frequently advised to harvest no more than half of this potential to ensure the preservation of soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks. In this study, we challenge this recommendation and demonstrate that the crop residue potential allowing to maintain long-term SOC stocks is spatially differentiated and strongly dependent upon the bioeconomy conversion pathway for which it is intended. We assessed the interaction between the residues' usage for the bioeconomy and the maintenance of SOC stocks over 100 years by considering the coproduct return to soils from five bioeconomy pathways: pyrolysis, gasification, hydrothermal liquefaction, anaerobic digestion, and lignocellulosic ethanol production. To compare the long-term SOC changes from these scenarios against a reference where crop residues are unharvested, we developed a novel framework, applicable to any site or region, by coupling a SOC model that includes recalcitrant organic matter deriving from a bioeconomy calculation module. The adapted SOC model considers the recalcitrance to degradation of each coproduct, while the bioeconomy module determines the share of carbon from the crop residues ending in the coproducts. The framework was tested and applied with a high spatial resolution (>60,000 simulation units) to the context of French croplands over the period of 2020–2120, with state-of-the-art sensitivity analyses. The case study results revealed, among others, that an additional crop residue potential equivalent to 71–225 PJ (pathway-dependent) could be available for the French bioeconomy without SOC decreases, compared to applying a stringent removal limit of 31.5%.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrade Díaz, Christhel & Clivot, Hugues & Albers, Ariane & Zamora-Ledezma, Ezequiel & Hamelin, Lorie, 2023. "The crop residue conundrum: Maintaining long-term soil organic carbon stocks while reinforcing the bioeconomy, compatible endeavors?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 329(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:329:y:2023:i:c:s0306261922014490
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.120192
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261922014490
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.120192?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hamelin, Lorie & Borzęcka, Magdalena & Kozak, Małgorzata & Pudełko, Rafał, 2019. "A spatial approach to bioeconomy: Quantifying the residual biomass potential in the EU-27," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 127-142.
    2. Lars Wietschel & Lukas Messmann & Andrea Thorenz & Axel Tuma, 2021. "Environmental benefits of large‐scale second‐generation bioethanol production in the EU: An integrated supply chain network optimization and life cycle assessment approach," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(3), pages 677-692, June.
    3. Antonio Molino & Vincenzo Larocca & Simeone Chianese & Dino Musmarra, 2018. "Biofuels Production by Biomass Gasification: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-31, March.
    4. Qi Zhang & Jing Xiao & Jianhui Xue & Lang Zhang, 2020. "Quantifying the Effects of Biochar Application on Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Agricultural Soils: A Global Meta-Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-14, April.
    5. Hamelin, Lorie & Naroznova, Irina & Wenzel, Henrik, 2014. "Environmental consequences of different carbon alternatives for increased manure-based biogas," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 774-782.
    6. Taras Lychuk & Roberto Izaurralde & Robert Hill & William McGill & Jimmy Williams, 2015. "Biochar as a global change adaptation: predicting biochar impacts on crop productivity and soil quality for a tropical soil with the Environmental Policy Integrated Climate (EPIC) model," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(8), pages 1437-1458, December.
    7. Muth, D.J. & Bryden, K.M. & Nelson, R.G., 2013. "Sustainable agricultural residue removal for bioenergy: A spatially comprehensive US national assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 403-417.
    8. Dominic Woolf & James E. Amonette & F. Alayne Street-Perrott & Johannes Lehmann & Stephen Joseph, 2010. "Sustainable biochar to mitigate global climate change," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 1(1), pages 1-9, December.
    9. Watson, Jamison & Zhang, Yuanhui & Si, Buchun & Chen, Wan-Ting & de Souza, Raquel, 2018. "Gasification of biowaste: A critical review and outlooks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-17.
    10. Monforti, F. & Lugato, E. & Motola, V. & Bodis, K. & Scarlat, N. & Dallemand, J.-F., 2015. "Optimal energy use of agricultural crop residues preserving soil organic carbon stocks in Europe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 519-529.
    11. Ankit Mathanker & Snehlata Das & Deepak Pudasainee & Monir Khan & Amit Kumar & Rajender Gupta, 2021. "A Review of Hydrothermal Liquefaction of Biomass for Biofuels Production with a Special Focus on the Effect of Process Parameters, Co-Solvents, and Extraction Solvents," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-60, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Barrios Latorre, Sergio Alejandro & Aronsson, Helena & Björnsson, Lovisa & Viketoft, Maria & Prade, Thomas, 2024. "Exploring the benefits of intermediate crops: Is it possible to offset soil organic carbon losses caused by crop residue removal?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    2. Andrade Díaz, Christhel & Albers, Ariane & Zamora-Ledezma, Ezequiel & Hamelin, Lorie, 2024. "The interplay between bioeconomy and the maintenance of long-term soil organic carbon stock in agricultural soils: A systematic review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrade Díaz, Christhel & Albers, Ariane & Zamora-Ledezma, Ezequiel & Hamelin, Lorie, 2024. "The interplay between bioeconomy and the maintenance of long-term soil organic carbon stock in agricultural soils: A systematic review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).
    2. Soha, Tamás & Papp, Luca & Csontos, Csaba & Munkácsy, Béla, 2021. "The importance of high crop residue demand on biogas plant site selection, scaling and feedstock allocation – A regional scale concept in a Hungarian study area," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    3. Ru Fang, Yan & Zhang, Silu & Zhou, Ziqiao & Shi, Wenjun & Hui Xie, Guang, 2022. "Sustainable development in China: Valuation of bioenergy potential and CO2 reduction from crop straw," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    4. Gojiya, Anil & Deb, Dipankar & Iyer, Kannan K.R., 2019. "Feasibility study of power generation from agricultural residue in comparison with soil incorporation of residue," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 416-425.
    5. Siegrist, Armin & Bowman, Gillianne & Burg, Vanessa, 2022. "Energy generation potentials from agricultural residues: The influence of techno-spatial restrictions on biomethane, electricity, and heat production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 327(C).
    6. Mukherjee, C. & Denney, J. & Mbonimpa, E.G. & Slagley, J. & Bhowmik, R., 2020. "A review on municipal solid waste-to-energy trends in the USA," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    7. Lening Hu & Shuangli Li & Ke Li & Haiyan Huang & Wenxin Wan & Qiuhua Huang & Qiuyan Li & Yafen Li & Hua Deng & Tieguang He, 2020. "Effects of Two Types of Straw Biochar on the Mineralization of Soil Organic Carbon in Farmland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-18, December.
    8. Giovanna Croxatto Vega & Juliën Voogt & Joshua Sohn & Morten Birkved & Stig Irving Olsen, 2020. "Assessing New Biotechnologies by Combining TEA and TM-LCA for an Efficient Use of Biomass Resources," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-35, May.
    9. Kim, Jong-Woo & Jeong, Yong-Seong & Kim, Joo-Sik, 2022. "Bubbling fluidized bed biomass gasification using a two-stage process at 600 °C: A way to avoid bed agglomeration," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 250(C).
    10. Thellufsen, J.Z. & Lund, H. & Sorknæs, P. & Østergaard, P.A. & Chang, M. & Drysdale, D. & Nielsen, S. & Djørup, S.R. & Sperling, K., 2020. "Smart energy cities in a 100% renewable energy context," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    11. Tonini, Davide & Vadenbo, Carl & Astrup, Thomas Fruergaard, 2017. "Priority of domestic biomass resources for energy: Importance of national environmental targets in a climate perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 295-309.
    12. Octávio Alves & Luís Calado & Roberta M. Panizio & Catarina Nobre & Eliseu Monteiro & Paulo Brito & Margarida Gonçalves, 2022. "Gasification of Solid Recovered Fuels with Variable Fractions of Polymeric Materials," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-19, November.
    13. Genel, Salih & Durak, Halil & Durak, Emre Demirer & Güneş, Hasret & Genel, Yaşar, 2023. "Hydrothermal liquefaction of biomass with molybdenum, aluminum, cobalt metal powder catalysts and evaluation of wastewater by fungus cultivation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 20-32.
    14. Gheorghe Lazaroiu & Lucian Mihaescu & Gabriel Negreanu & Constantin Pana & Ionel Pisa & Alexandru Cernat & Dana-Alexandra Ciupageanu, 2018. "Experimental Investigations of Innovative Biomass Energy Harnessing Solutions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Huang, Yawen & Tao, Bo & Lal, Rattan & Lorenz, Klaus & Jacinthe, Pierre-Andre & Shrestha, Raj K. & Bai, Xiongxiong & Singh, Maninder P. & Lindsey, Laura E. & Ren, Wei, 2023. "A global synthesis of biochar's sustainability in climate-smart agriculture - Evidence from field and laboratory experiments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    16. Andrea Di Giuliano & Stefania Lucantonio & Katia Gallucci, 2021. "Devolatilization of Residual Biomasses for Chemical Looping Gasification in Fluidized Beds Made Up of Oxygen-Carriers," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Jan K. Kazak & Joanna A. Kamińska & Rafał Madej & Marta Bochenkiewicz, 2020. "Where Renewable Energy Sources Funds are Invested? Spatial Analysis of Energy Production Potential and Public Support," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-26, October.
    18. Toka, Agorasti & Iakovou, Eleftherios & Vlachos, Dimitrios & Tsolakis, Naoum & Grigoriadou, Anastasia-Loukia, 2014. "Managing the diffusion of biomass in the residential energy sector: An illustrative real-world case study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 56-69.
    19. Zhang, Hanfei & Wang, Ligang & Pérez-Fortes, Mar & Van herle, Jan & Maréchal, François & Desideri, Umberto, 2020. "Techno-economic optimization of biomass-to-methanol with solid-oxide electrolyzer," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    20. Kim, Jun Young & Kim, Dongjae & Li, Zezhong John & Dariva, Claudio & Cao, Yankai & Ellis, Naoko, 2023. "Predicting and optimizing syngas production from fluidized bed biomass gasifiers: A machine learning approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PC).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:329:y:2023:i:c:s0306261922014490. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.