Smart integration of food and bioenergy production delivers on multiple ecosystem services

被引:12
|
作者
Koppelmaki, Kari [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Lamminen, Marjukka [2 ,4 ]
Helenius, Juha [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Schulte, Rogier P. O. [1 ]
机构
[1] Wageningen Univ & Res, Farming Syst Ecol, POB 430, NL-6700 AK Wageningen, Netherlands
[2] Univ Helsinki, Dept Agr Sci, Helsinki, Finland
[3] Univ Helsinki, Ruralia Inst, Mikkeli, Finland
[4] Univ Helsinki, HELSUS Helsinki Inst Sustainabil Sci, Helsinki, Finland
来源
FOOD AND ENERGY SECURITY | 2021年 / 10卷 / 02期
关键词
circularity; food-feed-fuel competition; renewable energy; soil functions; sustainable intensification; BIOGAS PRODUCTION; SUSTAINABLE INTENSIFICATION; ANAEROBIC-DIGESTION; LIVESTOCK SYSTEMS; LAND MANAGEMENT; CARBON STOCKS; SOIL CARBON; CROP YIELD; NITROGEN; EMISSIONS;
D O I
10.1002/fes3.279
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Agriculture is expected to feed an increasing global population while at the same time meeting demands for renewable energy and the supply of ecosystem services such as provision of nutrient cycling and carbon sequestration. However, the current structure of the agricultural system works against meeting these expectations. The spatial separation of crop and livestock farms has created negative environmental consequences, and bioenergy production has created a trade-off between food and energy production. In this paper, we explore the opportunities for ecological intensification at a regional scale made possible by combining food and energy production. We built three scenarios representing farming systems including biogas production using grass biomass and manure. These scenarios included the following: (a) The current system with energy production (CSE) from non-edible agricultural biomasses (CSE). (b) Agroecological symbiosis (AES) identical to CSE except with 20% of the arable cropping area converted to clover-grasses for use in biogas production. (c) Agroecological symbiosis with livestock (AES-LST) where the available grass biomass (20% as in the AES) is fed to livestock and manure then used as a feedstock in biogas production. In each scenario, nutrients were circulated back to crops in the form of digestate. The supply of soil functions (primary production for food and energy, provision of nutrient cycling, and climate mitigation) and impacts on water quality through nutrient losses in these three scenarios were then compared to the current system. Integrating biogas production into food production resulted in an increased supply of nutrient recycling, reduced nutrient losses, and increased carbon inputs to the soils indicating enhanced climate mitigation. Food production was either not affected (CSE), increased (AES-LST), or decreased (AES), and biogas was produced in substantial quantities in each scenario. Our study demonstrated potential synergies in integrating food and energy production without compromising other ecosystem services in each scenario.
引用
收藏
页码:351 / 367
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Delivery of multiple ecosystem services in pasture by shelter created from the hybrid sterile bioenergy grass Miscanthus x giganteus
    Christopher P. Littlejohn
    Rainer W. Hofmann
    Stephen D. Wratten
    [J]. Scientific Reports, 9
  • [32] A synergetic integration of bioenergy and rice production in rice farms
    Chitawo, Maxon L.
    Chimphango, Annie F. A.
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2017, 75 : 58 - 67
  • [33] Food production, ecosystem services and biodiversity: We can't have it all everywhere
    Holt, Alison R.
    Alix, Anne
    Thompson, Anne
    Maltby, Lorraine
    [J]. SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2016, 573 : 1422 - 1429
  • [34] Tradeoffs and synergies among ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, and food production in coffee agroforestry
    Mayorga, Isabella
    de Mendonca, Jose Luiz Vargas
    Hajian-Forooshani, Zachary
    Lugo-Perez, Javier
    Perfecto, Ivette
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN FORESTS AND GLOBAL CHANGE, 2022, 5
  • [35] Ecosystem services between integration and economics imperialism
    Thoren, Henrik
    Stalhammar, Sanna
    [J]. ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY, 2018, 23 (04):
  • [36] Advancing the integration of ecosystem services and livelihood adaptation
    King, Elizabeth G.
    Nelson, Donald R.
    McGreevy, John R.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2019, 14 (12):
  • [37] Ecosystem services: Multiple classifications or confusion?
    Wallace, Ken
    [J]. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2008, 141 (02) : 353 - 354
  • [38] Multiple ecosystem services in a working landscape
    Eastburn, Danny J.
    O'Geen, Anthony T.
    Tate, Kenneth W.
    Roche, Leslie M.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (03):
  • [39] Smart agriculture development and bioenergy production: case study Covasna
    Pauna, Carmen Beatrice
    Iorgulescu, Raluca-Ioana
    Simionescu, Mihaela
    Diaconescu, Tiberiu
    [J]. HARNESSING TANGIBLE AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS IN THE CONTEXT OF EUROPEAN INTEGRATION AND GLOBALIZATION: CHALLENGES AHEAD, VOLS I-II, 2021, : 1039 - 1048
  • [40] How natural capital delivers ecosystem services: A typology derived from a systematic review
    Smith, A. C.
    Harrison, P. A.
    Soba, M. Perez
    Archaux, F.
    Blicharska, M.
    Egoh, B. N.
    Eros, T.
    Domenech, N. Fabrega
    Gyorgy, A. I.
    Haines-Young, R.
    Li, S.
    Lommelen, E.
    Meiresonne, L.
    Ayala, L. Miguel
    Mononen, L.
    Simpson, G.
    Stange, E.
    Turkelboom, F.
    Uiterwijk, M.
    Veerkamp, C. J.
    de Echeverria, V. Wyllie
    [J]. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES, 2017, 26 : 111 - 126