Future energy potential of Miscanthus in Europe

Abstract

European field experiments have demonstrated Miscanthus can produce some of the highest energy yields per hectare of all potential energy crops. Previous modelling studies using MISCANMOD have calculated the potential energy yield for the EU27 from mean historical climate data . In this paper, we have built on the previous studies by further developing a new Miscanthus crop growth model MIS-CANFOR in order to analyse (i) interannual variation in yields for past and future climates, (ii) genotype-specific parameters on yield in Europe. Under recent climatic conditions we show that 10% of arable land could produce 1709 PJ and mitigate 30 Tg of carbon dioxide-carbon (CO 2 -C) equivalent greenhouse gasses (GHGs) compared with EU27 primary energy consumption of 65 598 PJ, emitting 1048 Tg of CO 2 -C equivalent GHGs in 2005. If we continue to use the clone Miscanthus  giganteus, MISCANFOR shows that, as climate change reduces in-season water availability, energy production and carbon mitigation could fall 80% by 2080 for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change A2 scenario. However, because Miscanthus is found in a huge range of climates in Asia, we propose that new hybrids will incorporate genes conferring superior drought and frost tolerance. Using parameters from characterized germplasm, we calculate energy production could increase from present levels by 88% (to 2360 PJ) and mitigate 42 Tg of CO 2 -C equivalent using 10% arable land for the 2080 mid-range A2 scenario. This is equivalent to 3.6% of 2005 EU27 primary energy consumption and 4.0% of total CO 2 equivalent C GHG emissions.

Miscanthus biomass quality composition and methods of feedstock preparation for conversion into synthetic diesel fuel

“…2004; Hastings et al, 2009;Anderson et al, 2011;Zub et al, 2011). Despite poor overwintering in the first year, Miscanthus has been indicated as an energy crop, which can be grown almost in all Europe (Clifton-Brown, Lewandowski, 2002;Clifton-Brown et al, 2004) and some experiments conducted in more northern countries concluded the same (Jezowski et al, 2011;Kryževičienė et al, 2011).…”

Annually repeated traffic in delayed Miscanthus×giganteus harvests; effects on crop response and mitigation measures

“…Soil temperature data for 10 years (2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013) were collected from locations in northern Europe (Ireland, UK, Germany and Denmark) in order to determine the date each year that soil temperature reached an average daily value of 10 C -the soil temperature required for the initiation of new growth in Miscanthus (El Bassam and Huisman, 2007;Hastings et al, 2009). Temperature data (10 cm depth) were used to estimate the latest annual date, at the different locations, that harvest traffic would be likely to have: (a) a low risk of damage to the crop, (b) a risk of damage to the crop and (c) a high risk of damage to the crop.…”

“…New growth begins in Miscanthus when the soil temperature reaches 10 C (El Bassam and Huisman, 2007;Hastings et al, 2009). O'Flynn et al (2014) found that damage to newly emerged Miscanthus sprouts by harvest traffic resulted in an average yield loss of 13.86% in the three years following a single traffic event.…”

Bioenergy from “surplus” land: environmental and socio-economic implications

“…Those issues are already discussed by other authors elsewhere (e.g. Spangenberg and Settele 2009a) The spectrum of dedicated energy crop feedstock suggested to be grown on such surplus land is wide, including prairie grasses (McLaughlin et al 2002), perennial grasses such as Miscanthus, short-rotation coppice (SRC) of willow or poplar (Christersson and Sennerby-Forsse 1994;Hastings et al 2009), multipurpose trees such as Mulberry (Tang et al 2010), Jatropha (Sieg 2006) and CAM (Crassulacean acid metabolism) plants (Borland et al 2009). Given the ambiguity surrounding the question of which type of feedstock to grow on which type of surplus land, it doesn't come as a surprise that both national and global assessments of the availability of surplus land and of its potentials for bioenergy production vary considerably (Graham 2007;Marland and Obersteiner 2008).…”