Prospects for arable farm uptake of Short Rotation Coppice willow and miscanthus in England

Feasibility of mitigation measures for agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in the UK. A systematic review

The UK Government has set an ambitious target of achieving a national "net-zero" greenhouse gas economy by 2050. Agriculture is arguably placed at the heart of achieving net zero, as it plays a unique role as both a producer of GHG emissions and a sector that has the capacity via land use to capture carbon (C) when managed appropriately, thus reducing the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. Agriculture's importance, particularly in a UK-specific perspective, which is also applicable to many other temperate climate nations globally, is that the majority of land use nationwide is allocated to farming. Here, we present a systematic review based on peer-reviewed literature and relevant "grey" reports to address the question "how can the agricultural sector in the UK reduce, or offset, its direct agricultural emissions at the farm level?" We considered the implications of mitigation measures in terms of food security and import reliance, energy, environmental degradation, and value for money. We identified 52 relevant studies covering major foods produced and consumed in the UK. Our findings indicate that many mitigation measures can indeed contribute to net zero through GHG emissions reduction, offsetting, and bioenergy production, pending their uptake by farmers. While the environmental impacts of mitigation measures were covered well within the reviewed literature, corresponding implications regarding energy, food security, and farmer attitudes towards adoption received scant attention. We also provide an open-access, informative, and comprehensive dataset for agri-environment stakeholders and policymakers to identify the most promising mitigation measures. This research is of critical value to researchers, land managers, and policymakers as an interim guideline resource while more quantitative evidence becomes available through the ongoing lab-, field-, and farm-scale trials which will improve the reliability of agricultural sustainability modelling in the future.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13593-023-00938-0.

Bioenergy crop production and carbon sequestration potential under changing climate and land use: A case study in the upper River Taw catchment in southwest England

Reductions in CO2 emissions are essential to support the UK in achieving its net zero policy objective by around mid-century. Both changing climate and land use change (LUC) offer an opportunity to deploy suitable bioenergy crops strategically to enhance energy production and C sequestration to help deliver net zero through capturing atmospheric CO2. Against this background, we applied process-based models to evaluate the extent of net primary productivity (NPP) losses/gains associated with perennial bioenergy crops and to assess their C sequestration potential under changing climate in the upper River Taw observatory catchment in southwest England. In so doing, we also determined whether LUC from permanent grassland to perennial bioenergy crops, considered in this study, can increase the production and C sequestration potential in the study area. The results show that a warming climate positively impacts the production of all crops considered (permanent grassland, Miscanthus and two cultivars of short rotation coppice (SRC) willow). Overall, Miscanthus provides higher aboveground biomass for energy compared to willow and grassland whereas the broadleaf willow cultivar 'Endurance' is best suited, among all crops considered, for C sequestration in this environment, and more so in the changing climate. In warmer lowlands, LUC from permanent grassland to Miscanthus and in cooler uplands from permanent grassland to 'Endurance', enhances NPP. Colder areas are predicted to benefit more from changing climate in terms of above and belowground biomass for both Miscanthus and willow. The study shows that the above LUC can help augment non-fossil energy production and increase C sequestration potential if C losses from land conversion do not exceed the benefits from LUC. In the wake of a changing climate, aboveground biomass for bioenergy and belowground biomass to enhance carbon sequestration can be managed by the careful selection of bioenergy crops and targeted deployment within certain climatic zones.

Expanding the Miscanthus market in the UK: Growers in profile and experience, benefits and drawbacks of the bioenergy crop

To achieve net zero greenhouse gas emission by 2050 as set out by the 2019 amendment to the 2008 UK Climate Change Act, a major shift towards renewable energy is needed. This includes the development of new methods along with improving and upscaling existing technologies. One example of new methods in bioenergy is developing new Miscanthus cultivars for electricity generation via thermal power station furnaces. Miscanthus is still relatively new compared with other agriculture practices, so market assessments and improvements are needed to reduce the barriers to entry for prospective growers. This publication provides a profile of UK Miscanthus growers and their businesses, their experiences of benefits and drawbacks of the crop, and what they see as potential barriers to entry for prospective farmers. A survey of current Miscanthus growers in England and Wales was conducted and indicated that most farmers were content with the crop and that its environmental and economic benefits were noted. However, it was evident that with a geographically limited UK market, growers wanted to see a better distribution of biomass processing stations to reduce the ongoing costs of transport. With growing demand for renewables, including bio-energy sources, it was determined important to provide information and support for stable farming operations and to incentivise the adoption of Miscanthus. Such incentives include ongoing development of new cultivars, focussing on traits such as production potential and stressor resilience, and growers indicated preference for an annual planting grant. These developments are predicted to further improve the crop's profit margin, making it a more cost-effective crop for farmers. Sensitively managed Miscanthus also has the potential to contribute to carbon sequestration, soil health, and aspects of farmland biodiversity. Incentivising such management in government land-based environmental schemes would offer additional income streams and help to promote environmental positive crop planting.

‘We’re Farmers Not Foresters’: Farmers’ Decision-Making and Behaviours towards Managing Trees for Pests and Diseases

Policy makers are challenged to find ways of influencing and supporting land manager behaviours and actions to deal with the impacts of increasing pressure from tree pests and diseases. This paper investigates attitudes and behaviours of farmers towards managing trees on farmland for pests and diseases. Data collection with farmers included deliberative workshops and semi-structured interviews. Data were thematically analyzed using the COM-B (Capacity/Opportunity/Motivation-Behaviour) model to understand the drivers of farmer behaviour for tree health. Results suggested farmers had some knowledge, experience and skills managing trees, but they did not recognize this capacity. Social norms and networks impacted the context of opportunity to act for tree health, along with access to trusted advice and labour, and the costs associated with management action. Motivational factors such as self-efficacy, perceived benefits of acting, personal interest and sense of agency were impacted by farmers’ self-identity as food producers. The COM-B model also provides a framework for identifying intervention design through a Behaviour Change Wheel. This suggests that enhancing self-efficacy supported by the right kind of advice and guidance, framed and communicated in farmers’ terms and brokered by appropriate knowledge intermediaries, seems critical to building action amongst different farmer types and attitudinal groups.

Costs and Profitability of Crops for Bioeconomy in the EU

The bioeconomy is the cornerstone of the EU’s policy for shifting economic and societal trends towards circularity and low carbon arrangements. Europe has several crops that can be used as raw materials for this purpose, however pressure on land which might displace other activities and industrial competition for cost efficient raw materials remains a challenge. Hence, ensuring good yielding capacity and examining the likelihood to produce more by exploiting low quality, unused land can present significant opportunities to increase sustainable, locally sourced supply and at the same time offer profitable solutions to both industry and the farmers. This paper estimates the production costs of fourteen crops (oil, sugar, starch and lignocellulosic) and analyses how their profitability can be influenced by yield increases and cultivation in low quality land. Results show that there are profitable options for all crops under current market prices and land types except for cases in countries where crop productivity is rather low to sustain farm incomes. The analysis confirms that Europe has plenty crop options as raw materials for bioeconomy. Decision makers however must ensure future research and policy support are oriented towards sustainable yield increases and accelerate rehabilitation of land that is unused and of low quality.

Environmental costs and benefits of growing Miscanthus for bioenergy in the UK

Planting the perennial biomass crop Miscanthus in the UK could offset 2-13 Mt oil eq. yr-1, contributing up to 10% of current energy use. Policymakers need assurance that upscaling Miscanthus production can be performed sustainably without negatively impacting essential food production or the wider environment. This study reviews a large body of Miscanthus relevant literature into concise summary statements. Perennial Miscanthus has energy output/input ratios 10 times higher (47.3 ± 2.2) than annual crops used for energy (4.7 ± 0.2 to 5.5 ± 0.2), and the total carbon cost of energy production (1.12 g CO2-C eq. MJ-1) is 20-30 times lower than fossil fuels. Planting on former arable land generally increases soil organic carbon (SOC) with Miscanthus sequestering 0.7-2.2 Mg C4-C ha-1 yr-1. Cultivation on grassland can cause a disturbance loss of SOC which is likely to be recovered during the lifetime of the crop and is potentially mitigated by fossil fuel offset. N2O emissions can be five times lower under unfertilized Miscanthus than annual crops and up to 100 times lower than intensive pasture. Nitrogen fertilizer is generally unnecessary except in low fertility soils. Herbicide is essential during the establishment years after which natural weed suppression by shading is sufficient. Pesticides are unnecessary. Water-use efficiency is high (e.g. 5.5-9.2 g aerial DM (kg H2O)-1, but high biomass productivity means increased water demand compared to cereal crops. The perennial nature and belowground biomass improves soil structure, increases water-holding capacity (up by 100-150 mm), and reduces run-off and erosion. Overwinter ripening increases landscape structural resources for wildlife. Reduced management intensity promotes earthworm diversity and abundance although poor litter palatability may reduce individual biomass. Chemical leaching into field boundaries is lower than comparable agriculture, improving soil and water habitat quality.

Assessing Regional-Scale Impacts of Short Rotation Coppices on Ecosystem Services by Modeling Land-Use Decisions

Meeting the world’s growing energy demand through bioenergy production involves extensive land-use change which could have severe environmental and social impacts. Second generation bioenergy feedstocks offer a possible solution to this problem. They have the potential to reduce land-use conflicts between food and bioenergy production as they can be grown on low quality land not suitable for food production. However, a comprehensive impact assessment that considers multiple ecosystem services (ESS) and biodiversity is needed to identify the environmentally best feedstock option, as trade-offs are inherent. In this study, we simulate the spatial distribution of short rotation coppices (SRCs) in the landscape of the Mulde watershed in Central Germany by modeling profit-maximizing farmers under different economic and policy-driven scenarios using a spatially explicit economic simulation model. This allows to derive general insights and a mechanistic understanding of regional-scale impacts on multiple ESS in the absence of large-scale implementation. The modeled distribution of SRCs, required to meet the regional demand of combined heat and power (CHP) plants for solid biomass, had little or no effect on the provided ESS. In the policy-driven scenario, placing SRCs on low or high quality soils to provide ecological focus areas, as required within the Common Agricultural Policy in the EU, had little effect on ESS. Only a substantial increase in the SRC production area, beyond the regional demand of CHP plants, had a relevant effect, namely a negative impact on food production as well as a positive impact on biodiversity and regulating ESS. Beneficial impacts occurred for single ESS. However, the number of sites with balanced ESS supply hardly increased due to larger shares of SRCs in the landscape. Regression analyses showed that the occurrence of sites with balanced ESS supply was more strongly driven by biophysical factors than by the SRC share in the landscape. This indicates that SRCs negligibly affect trade-offs between individual ESS. Coupling spatially explicit economic simulation models with environmental and ESS assessment models can contribute to a comprehensive impact assessment of bioenergy feedstocks that have not yet been planted.

How do we cultivate in England? Tillage practices in crop production systems

Reducing tillage intensity offers the possibility of moving towards sustainable intensification objectives. Reduced tillage (RT) practices, where the plough is not used, can provide a number of environmental and financial benefits, particularly for soil erosion control. Based on 2010 harvest year data from the nationally stratified Farm Business Survey and drawing on a sub-sample of 249 English arable farmers, we estimate that approximately 32% of arable land was established under RT, with 46% of farms using some form of RT. Farms more likely to use some form of RT were larger, located in the East Midlands and South East of England and classified as 'Cereals' farms. Application of RT techniques was not determined by the age or education level of the farmer. Individual crops impacted the choice of land preparation, with wheat and oilseed rape being more frequently planted after RT than field beans and root crops, which were almost always planted after ploughing. This result suggests there can be limitations to the applicability of RT. Average tillage depth was only slightly shallower for RT practices than ploughing, suggesting that the predominant RT practices are quite demanding in their energy use. Policy makers seeking to increase sustainable RT uptake will need to address farm-level capital investment constraints and target policies on farms growing crops, such as wheat and oilseed rape, that are better suited to RT practices.

Integrating social and value dimensions into sustainability assessment of lignocellulosic biofuels

The paper clarifies the social and value dimensions for integrated sustainability assessments of lignocellulosic biofuels. We develop a responsible innovation approach, looking at technology impacts and implementation challenges, assumptions and value conflicts influencing how impacts are identified and assessed, and different visions for future development. We identify three distinct value-based visions. From a techno-economic perspective, lignocellulosic biofuels can contribute to energy security with improved GHG implications and fewer sustainability problems than fossil fuels and first-generation biofuels, especially when biomass is domestically sourced. From socio-economic and cultural-economic perspectives, there are concerns about the capacity to support UK-sourced feedstocks in a global agri-economy, difficulties monitoring large-scale supply chains and their potential for distributing impacts unfairly, and tensions between domestic sourcing and established legacies of farming. To respond to these concerns, we identify the potential for moving away from a one-size-fits-all biofuel/biorefinery model to regionally-tailored bioenergy configurations that might lower large-scale uses of land for meat, reduce monocultures and fossil-energy needs of farming and diversify business models. These configurations could explore ways of reconciling some conflicts between food, fuel and feed (by mixing feed crops with lignocellulosic material for fuel, combining livestock grazing with energy crops, or using crops such as miscanthus to manage land that is no longer arable); different bioenergy applications (with on-farm use of feedstocks for heat and power and for commercial biofuel production); and climate change objectives and pressures on farming. Findings are based on stakeholder interviews, literature synthesis and discussions with an expert advisory group.

Prospects for dedicated energy crop production and attitudes towards agricultural straw use: The case of livestock farmers

Second generation biofuels utilising agricultural by-products (e.g. straw), or dedicated energy crops (DECs) produced on 'marginal' land, have been called for. A structured telephone survey of 263 livestock farmers, predominantly located in the west or 'marginal' upland areas of England captured data on attitudes towards straw use and DECs. Combined with farm physical and business data, the survey results show that 7.2% and 6.3% of farmers would respectively consider growing SRC and miscanthus, producing respective maximum potential English crop areas of 54,603 ha and 43,859 ha. If higher market prices for straw occurred, most livestock farmers would continue to buy straw. Reasons for not being willing to consider growing DECs include concerns over land quality, committing land for a long time period, lack of appropriate machinery, profitability, and time to financial return; a range of moral, land quality, production conflict and lack of crop knowledge factors were also cited. Results demonstrate limited potential for the production of DECs on livestock farms in England. Changes in policy support to address farmer concerns with respect to DECs will be required to incentivise farmers to increase energy crop production. Policy support for DEC production must be cognisant of farm-level economic, tenancy and personal objectives.