http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/20153042847.html;jsessionid=98784A3E9418959E14AF74D12DBC5800;jsessionid=9850C5C2B9FC1B55523494ADD208A91F;jsessionid=72E3FEA9E91CF43404C62E18C2B19237
Good intentions vs good ideas: evaluating bioenergy projects that utilize invasive plant feedstocks. Authors Nackley, L. L. Editors Quinn, L. D.;Matlaga, D. P.;Barney, J. N. Book Bioenergy and biological invasions: ecological, agronomic and policy perspectives on minimising risk 2015 pp. 134-153 ISBN 978-1-78064-330-4 DOI 10.1079/9781780643304.0134 http://www.cabi.org/cabebooks/ebook/20153042847 Abstract This chapter evaluates the sustainability of using naturalized or cultivated invasive plant species as feedstocks for bioenergy, including electrical power, liquid biofuels, and chemical substitutes. The evaluations apply a sustainability framework that recognizes economic and social development, as well as environmental protection. The necessity of using a sustainability framework is illustrated by revealing how historical bioenergy developments, which did not consider multiple aspects of sustainability (e.g., only economics), fell short of providing socially acceptable and environmentally neutral/beneficial bioenergy. There are two divergent issues regarding the use of invasive plants in bioenergy: (i) dedicated energy feedstocks that may foster biological invasions; and (ii) harvesting existing invasive plant biomass for bioenergy conversion. Fertile dedicated feedstocks are shown to be a less sustainable option than sterile species with no history of invasion. No species with a history of invasion should be used as a dedicated energy feedstock. Harvesting existing invasive populations is shown to be economically unsustainable if the bioenergy conversion process is dependent on the invasive plant population. When invasive plant populations represent a small portion of the overall energy supply (<10%) there are possible synergies available for thermal energy conversion processes (e.g., bioelectricity, or syngas production), but not for liquid biofuels, which currently cannot tolerate a heterogeneous feedstock mix. Lastly, invasive plant-based biochar is deemed the most suitable option, because it meets all sustainability criteria. The value generated in improved ecosystem services (e.g., carbon sequestration, improved soil fertility, improved crop production, substitute for fossil fertilizers) would greatly outweigh the costs of a simple biochar oven. This report is important because it provides a useful tool for policy makers who are challenged with decisions regarding which bioenergy technology to support. Additionally, by using the sustainable development framework, this is the first work to highlight the potential for invasive plant-based biochar. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
