No abstract

Bioenergy is the single largest source of renewable energy in the European Union (EU-28); of this, 14% was produced from agricultural feedstocks in 2012. This chapter provides an overview of the current use (for bioenergy) and future potential of agricultural feedstocks for (amongst others) biorefinery purposes in the European Union. The main application of these feedstocks is currently the production of biofuels for road transport. Biodiesel makes up 80% of the European biofuel production, mainly from rapeseed oil, and the remaining part is bioethanol from wheat and sugar beet. Dedicated woody and grassy crops (mainly miscanthus and switchgrass) are currently only used in very small quantities for heat and electricity generation. There is great potential for primary agricultural residues (mainly straw) but currently only part of this is for heat and electricity generation. Agricultural land currently in use for energy crop cultivation in the EU-28 is 4.4 Mio ha, although the land area technically available in 2030 is estimated to be 16-43 Mio ha, or 15-40% of the current arable land in the EU-28. There is, however, great uncertainty on the location and quality of that land. It is expected that woody and grassy crops together with primary agricultural residues should become more important as agricultural feedstocks.

Energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with life cycle stages of road infrastructure are currently rarely assessed during road infrastructure planning. This study examines the road infrastructure planning process, with emphasis on its use of Environmental Assessments (EA), and identifies when and how Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) can be integrated in the early planning stages for supporting decisions such as choice of road corridor. Road infrastructure planning processes are compared for four European countries (Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and the Netherlands). The results show that only Norway has a formalised way of using LCA during choice of road corridor. Only the Netherlands has a requirement for using LCA in the later procurement stage. It is concluded that during the early stages of planning, LCA could be integrated as part of an EA, as a separate process or as part of a Cost-Benefit Analysis.

Vietnam is the largest producer for the export of striped catfish. Traditionally striped catfish production in the Mekong Delta took place in integrated agriculture–aquaculture systems, but has shifted recently to intensive systems to meet increasing export demands. A recent study quantified the environmental impact of intensive striped catfish production in Vietnam. Another did the same for integrated systems. Both studies used life cycle assessment, covered similar environmental impact categories, and were roughly matched in the production stages included. However, an environmental comparison of both systems has not been made so far. The objective of this paper is to make a comparative life cycle assessment of striped catfish production in intensive and integrated systems. The comparison was based on existing life cycle assessments on these systems, but their methodological choices and data had to be aligned. The results show that striped catfish production in intensive systems contributes considerably more to seven of the nine assessed impact categories (global warming, ozone depletion, acidification, eutrophication, photochemical oxidation, human toxicity, freshwater ecotoxicity, marine aquatic ecotoxicity, fossil depletion). Only contributions to eutrophication and freshwater ecotoxicity were higher for the integrated systems than for the intensive systems. In both systems, grow‐out fish farming contributes most to eutrophication and freshwater ecotoxicity, whereas feed production contributes most to all other impact categories. The environmental performance of integrated striped catfish production is convincingly better in most impact categories. This raises questions about whether (elements of) these systems can be used to mitigate the environmental impact of intensive striped catfish production.

Agricultural intensification is considered essential for meeting growing demand for food and biomass for energy purposes. Intensifying grasslands is under-represented, although it is a promising option given their large land area and relatively low management levels. This study quantifies the bioenergy potential from intensifying temporary grasslands in Europe and the integral greenhouse gas emission effects in 2030. We first conducted a literature review of intensification options for European grasslands and then applied the environmental impact assessment model MITERRA-Europe to implement the key intensification option of using multi-species grass mixtures. The results showed that 853 kha (or 8%) of temporary grassland could be made sustainably available for additional biomass production. This can be translated into a bioethanol potential of 23 PJ yr−1 and an emission mitigation potential of 5.8 Mt CO2-eq yr−1 (if conventional grass mixture from surplus temporary grassland is used for energy) or 72 PJ yr−1 and 4.0 Mt CO2-eq yr−1 (if surplus temporary grassland is used for grassy energy crops). Although the bioenergy potential is limited, the key advantage of intensification measure is that it results in a better environmental performance of temporary grasslands. This makes it a key option for sustainably producing bioenergy in areas with high shares of temporary grasslands.