1 / 34

TSEC- Biosys : Yield and spatial supply of bioenergy poplar and willow short rotation coppice in the UK

TSEC- Biosys : Yield and spatial supply of bioenergy poplar and willow short rotation coppice in the UK. M.J. Aylott , G. Taylor University of Southampton, UK E. Casella Forest Research, UK P. Smith University of Aberdeen, UK. Biomass role in the UK energy futures

drea
Télécharger la présentation

TSEC- Biosys : Yield and spatial supply of bioenergy poplar and willow short rotation coppice in the UK

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TSEC-Biosys: Yield and spatial supply of bioenergy poplar and willow short rotation coppice in the UK M.J. Aylott, G. Taylor University of Southampton, UK E. Casella Forest Research, UK P. Smith University of Aberdeen, UK Biomass role in the UK energy futures The Royal Society, London: 28th & 29th July 2009

  2. Contents • Introduction • Aims • Empirical Modelling • Method • Results • Process Modelling • Method • Results • General Conclusions

  3. Introduction.

  4. Introduction • Short rotation coppice (SRC) poplar and willow are two widely planted bioenergy crops • Both species are fast growing and found across a wide range of environments • Climate change presents challenges but also opportunities for bioenergy

  5. Howmuch bioenergy do we have? 18.5M hectares (ha) UK agric. land • 310,000 ha oilseed rape (biodiesel)1 • 125,000 ha sugar beet (bioethanol)1 • 9,800 ha Miscanthus1 • 5,700 ha poplar and willow1 Renewable energy production in 20072 1. (NNFCC, 2008), 2. (BERR, 2008)

  6. How much bioenergy do we need? UK Renewable Energy Strategy = 15% renewable (2020) = 200,000 ha dedicated energy crops1 Renew. Transport Fuel Obligation = 2.5-5% biofuel (2014) = 215,0002-870,0003 ha oilseed rape (biodiesel) = 500,0003-525,0002 ha wheat (bioethanol) Up to 5% of agric. land may be needed 6 1. (Britt et al. 2002), 2. (DTI & DEFRA, 2007), 3. (NFFCC, 2009)

  7. Aims.

  8. Aims • Predict current spatial productivity of SRC poplar and willow using measured data from UK field trials (empirical) • Predict future spatial productivity of SRC poplar and willow by adapting the ForestGrowth model for a coppice system in the UK (process)

  9. Empirical Modelling.

  10. Empirical modelling: Method • Measurements taken from national SRC field trials network • Largest field trial network in the UK (49 sites) • 16 poplar and 16 willow varieties grown (6 yrs) • Extensive measurements taken at each site including plant productivity, soil profiles and daily climatic records

  11. Plot data for each genotype was modelled using Partial Least Squares regression (Simca-P) • Existing spatial data was used to upscale model outputs • Climate • Topography • Soil

  12. Empirical modelling: Results • The model describes 51-75% of the variation in yield • Willow yields were higher than poplar, esp. in the 2nd rotation * standard error in brackets

  13. Empirical modelling: Results • Mean poplar yield = 7.3 odt ha-1 yr-1 • Mean willow yield = 8.7 odt ha-1 yr-1 • Potential to supply >28 TW h-1 of electricity (a) Poplar var. Trichobel (b) Willow var. Jorunn (c) Willow var. Q83

  14. Willow var. Jorunn • Spring/summer precipitation highly correlates to yield, indicating both species were limited by water availability • Other factors (i.e. soil pH) gave localised yield disparity

  15. Excluded areas: • Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty • National Park • Forest Park • Planted Ancient Woodland Site • RSPB Reserve • Inland water, town and road • National Trust land • Lowland Heath/Bogs/Fens/Mire • Ancient woodland • Coastal sand dune • RAMSAR site • SSSI • Special Protected Area • Local or National Nature Reserve • Countryside Right of Way • Registered Common Land • Country Park • Listed building, World Heritage Site or Monument Yield in millions of odt/yr

  16. Greenhouse Gas Emission Modelling • Yield data used to produce greenhouse gas maps • 20-year average using RothC • Replacing arable or grassland with SRC reduces GHG emissions Gross CO2 emissions (tonnes/ha/yr)

  17. Process Modelling.

  18. Process modelling: Method • Process-based models help us explore interactions between yield and climate • ForestGrowth1,2 is a yield model for mature forest species, which has been parameterised for SRC3,4,5 • The model uses UKCIP climate change predictions 1. (Evans et al., 2004), 2. (Deckmyn et al., 2004) 3. (Casella & Sinoquet, 2003), 4. (Gielen et al., 2003), 5. (Casella & Aylott, unpublished)

  19. SRC-MOD: Method • Phase 1: Root carbon used to grow leaves on existing stem • Phase 2: If layer doesn’t have enough light, stems grow and new leaves are added • Phase 3: Carbon stored for the next years growth • Phase 4: Leaves fall • Phase 5: Dormancy

  20. Process modelling: Current Climate • Parameterised for Populus trichocarpa(black cottonwood) • Yields predicted by the model are within ± 20% of measured yields (seven sites) • Average annual yield = 9.4 odt ha-1 yr-1 Productivity map of P. trichocarpa, second rotation

  21. Process modelling: Future Climate • Currently, SRC-MOD uses arbitrary increases in CO2, temperature and precipitation • UKCIP02 2050 medium emission scenario • One site (Alice Holt, clay loam soil) • One species (P. trichocarpa) • In future, SRC-MOD will use complete UKCIP09 weather datasets • Different emission scenarios for 2020’s, 2050’s & 2080’s • UK wide • Multiple species

  22. Carbon Dioxide Effect on Yield • CO2 set to increase to 550 ppm by 2050 • Leads to increase in photosynthetic activity • Ten years of CO2 experiments on poplar found: • 500-700 ppm leads to mean increase in above ground productivity of +34 % Source: NOAA, 2008

  23. Carbon Dioxide Effect on Yield • Atmospheric CO2 predicted to increase from 370 to 550 ppm • Increased photosynthesis • UK yields +29% • Parts of S. England & N. Scotland +50% • Calfapietraet al. (2003), found an increase of up to 27% in poplar yields Carbon Dioxide vs. Yield map for P. trichocarpa, second rotation

  24. Temperature Effect on Yield • Futures temperatures are likely to rise • Summer temperatures increasing faster than those in winter • Higher temperatures • Advance budburst • Increase photosynthesis • But increase transpiration and respiration rates Source: UKCIP02 Climate Change Scenarios

  25. Temperature Effect on Yield • Temperature increase of +2.5oC (Summer) and +0.5oC (Autumn to Spring) • Yield increased by 0.5 odt/ha/yr (+4%) by end of second rotation at Alice Holt site  respiration costs also increase over time

  26. Precipitation Effect on Yield • Future climate predictions (Hulmeet al., 2002) • Decreased summer precipitation  increased soil moisture deficit • Increased winter precipitation  higher risk of flooding • Souch & Stephens (1998) showed poplar yield decreased 60-75% in drought conditions • Water used in many leaf biochemical processes, by decreasing its availability photosynthesis will decrease Source: UKCIP02 Climate Change Scenarios

  27. Precipitation Effect on Yield • Precipitation decreased by 10% • Yield decreased by 1.3 odt/ha/yr (-12%) by end of second rotation at Alice Holt site  increased soil moisture deficit

  28. Predicted Yield in 2050 • CO2 x temperature x water • Yield increasedby 2.1 odt/ha/yr (+19%) by end of second rotation at the Alice Holt site

  29. General Conclusions.

  30. General Conclusions • Empirical model • Current yields of the three extensively grown poplar varieties was 7.3, and for willow was 8.7 odt ha-1 yr-1 • Water availability was largest limiting factor • Process model • By 2050, SRC-MOD predicts P. trichocarpa will be 19% more productive (Alice Holt site) • Longer growing season and more photosynthesis BUT plants respire and loose water more quickly

  31. 2007: 12,000 tonnes = >0.01% of electricity • Current potential = 13 Modt (6.7% electricity) • 2014: 2.5-5% fuel from biofuel • 2020: 15% electricity from renewables • 2050: +19% yield (med. emissions) = 8.0% electricity • Less agricultural land needed • Breeding/technology expand potential

  32. This research was funded by NERC as part of the Towards a Sustainable Energy Economy (TSEC) initiative and through a PhD studentship to Matthew Aylott (NER/S/J/2005/13986). Thanks to Forest Research for the provision of the site data.Contact M Aylott for more information: mja13@soton.ac.uk

  33. Thank you for your attention! www.tsec-biosys.ac.uk

  34. BERR (2008) The Digest of UK Energy Statistics 2008. London, UK: The Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform. • BRITT C., BULLARD M., HICKMAN G., JOHNSON P., KING J., NICHOLSON F., NIXON P. and SMITH N. (2002) Bioenergy Crops and Bioremediation - A Review (Final Report). In: Britt C. and Garstang J. (eds.). A Contract Report by ADAS for DEFRA. • CALFAPIETRA C., GIELEN B., GALEMA A.N.J., LUKAC M., DEANGELIS P., MOSCATELLI M.C., CEULEMANS R. & G.SCARASCIA-MUGNOZZA (2003) Free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE) enhances biomass production in a short-rotation poplar plantation. Tree Physiology 23: 805-814. • CASELLA E. & SINOQUET H. (2003) A method for describing the canopy architecture of coppice poplar with allometric relationships. Tree Physiology, 23:1153-1169. • DECKMYN G., EVANS S.P. & RANDLE T.J. (2004) . Refined pipe theory for mechanistic modelling of wood development. Tree Physiology, 26:703–717. • DTI and DEFRA (2007) UK Biomass Strategy. London, UK: Department for Trade and Industry. • EVANS S.P., RANDLE T., HENSHALL P., ARCANGELI C., PELLENQ J., LAFONT S. & VIALS C. (2004). Recent advances in mechanistic modelling of forest stands and catchments, FR Annual Report 2003-2004. • GIELEN B., CALFAPIETRA C., LUKAC M., WITTIG V.E., DE ANGELIS P., JANSSENS I.A., MOSCATELLI M.C., GREGO S., COTRUFO M.F., GODBOLD D.L., HOOSBEEK M.R., LONG S.P., MIGLIETTA F., POLLE A., BERNACCHI C.J., DAVEY P.A., CEULEMANS R. & SCARASCIA-MUGNOZZA G.E. (2005) Net carbon storage in a poplar plantation (POPFACE) after three years of free-air CO2 enrichment. 25: 1399-1408. • HULME M., JENKINS G.J., LU X., TURNPENNY J.R., MITCHELL T.D., JONES R.G., LOWE J., MURPHY J.M., HASSELL D., BOORMAN P., MCDONALD R. & HILL S. (2002) Climate Change Scenarios for the United Kingdom: The UKCIP02 Scientific Report. Norwich, UK: Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. • NNFCC. 2008. Area statistics for nonfood crops (Online database). The National Non-Food Crops Centre. [http://www.nnfcc.co.uk/metadot/index.pl?id=2179;isa=Category;op=show] (accessed 1 July 2009) • SOUCH C. & STEPHENS W. (1998) Growth, productivity and water use in three hybrid poplar clones. Tree Physiology 18(12): 829-835. References

More Related