Photo Credit: Cedar Creek LTER Site
article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (6) View image gallery Image Gallery (1) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
December 13, 2006

Study Finds Mixed Prairie Grasses Better Source of Biofuel

University of Minnesota research shows mixed grasses produce 238% more bioenergy than single plant species, including switchgrass.
St. Paul, Minnesota [RenewableEnergyAccess.com]

Over the past year, a number of diverse plant species have emerged as strong competitors in the quest to identify the best source of biomass for producing sustainable biofuel. A new study led by David Tilman, an ecologist at the University of Minnesota, shows that mixtures of native perennial grasses and other flowering plants provide more usable energy per acre than corn grain ethanol or soybean biodiesel -- and is far better for the environment.

"Switchgrass is very productive when it's grown like corn in fertile soil with lots of fertilizer, pesticide and energy inputs, but this approach doesn't yield as much energy gain as mixed species in poor soil nor does it have the same environmental benefits."

-- Jason Hill, University of Minnesota, researcher

The study is based on 10 years of research at Minnesota's Cedar Creek Natural History Area, one of 26 National Science Foundation (NSF) long-term ecological research (LTER) sites. It shows that degraded agricultural land planted with diverse mixtures of prairie grasses and other flowering plants produces 238 percent more bioenergy on average than the same land planted with various single prairie plant species, including switchgrass.

"This study highlights very clearly the additional benefits of taking a less-intensive management approach and maintaining higher biodiversity in the process," said Henry Gholz, NSF LTER program director. "It establishes a new baseline for evaluating the use of land for biofuel production."

Tilman and his colleagues estimate that fuel made from the diverse mixture of prairie biomass would yield 51 percent more energy per acre than ethanol from corn grown on fertile land.

Switchgrass, which is being developed as a perennial bioenergy crop, was one of 16 species in the study. When grown by itself in poor soil, it did not perform better than other single species and gave less than a third of the bioenergy of high-diversity plots.

"Switchgrass is very productive when it's grown like corn in fertile soil with lots of fertilizer, pesticide and energy inputs, but this approach doesn't yield as much energy gain as mixed species in poor soil nor does it have the same environmental benefits," said Jason Hill, co-author of the paper and researcher at the University of Minnesota.

To date, all biofuels, including cutting-edge nonfood energy crops such as switchgrass, elephant grass, hybrid poplar and hybrid willow, are produced as monocultures grown primarily in fertile soils.

The researchers estimate that growing mixed prairie grasses on all of the world's degraded land could produce enough bioenergy to replace 13 percent of global petroleum consumption and 19 percent of global electricity consumption.

According to the study, the practice of using degraded land to grow mixed prairie grasses for biofuels could provide stable production of energy and have additional benefits, such as renewed soil fertility, cleaner ground and surface waters, preservation of wildlife habitats, and recreational opportunities.

In addition, fuels made from prairie biomass are "carbon negative," which means that producing and using them actually reduces the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. In contrast, corn ethanol and soybean biodiesel are "carbon positive," meaning they add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, although less than fossil fuels.

"Biofuels made from high-diversity mixtures of prairie plants can reduce global warming by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Even when grown on infertile soils, they can provide a substantial portion of global energy needs, and leave fertile land for food production," Tilman said.

The research was supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the University of Minnesota Initiative for Renewable Energy and the Environment.
Image Gallery (1)
 
For Further Information
Please Note: RenewableEnergyWorld.com does not endorse the sites behind these links. We offer them for your additional research. Following these links will open a new browser window.
Reader Comments (6)
 
No image available
December 13, 2006
This article does not stress the fact that prairie is natures way of sinking carbon into soil. the perennial grasses sink carbon into the soil y/y, no matter what one does with the top part. i wish ppl would see that this is the answer to global warming AND our energy issues.
Comment 1 of 6
No image available
December 15, 2006
I was going to say that this is some of the best news I've heard in years, but now I'm a bit confused.

I would find it helpful, if Roger Samson could clarify the points he was trying to make about his own studies and the study mentioned in this article.

Re. it would also be helpful if Janaka Ratnasiri could cite the study that supports his claims, as it seems a bit surprising that these reseachers could have missed a full 75% of the energy potential of corn biomass.

The part that matters most to me is not how much energy it creates per acre, but how much carbon does it displaces and how sustainable it is, i.e., mixed prairie grass can grow forever with no fertilizer and it will just keep improving the soil. Monocultures exhaust the soil and require more pesticide.
Comment 2 of 6
No image available
December 15, 2006
In natural tallgrass praries, big bluestem is largely a monoculture on the best prairie soils while on marginal soils you find more species diversity. The researchers picked highly degraded soils and presumably didn't fertilize with N. I am no fan of monocultures but think the scientists went too far in their conclusions. We have been doing biofuels research on prairie grasses for 16 years and never have sprayed pesticides after the first year of establishment or apply P and K fertilizer.

Nonetheless, we are concerned disease pressure will hit switchgrass monocultures if we scale them up on large areas. We likely should be using at least two grass species in bioenergy field plantings. Legumes and forbs are heavy water users and that is detrimental for biomass productivity if water is the limiting resource (which usually is the case). It doesn't seem they published their yield data likely it was very low.
Comment 3 of 6
No image available
December 15, 2006
This article also fails to mention the reasons for this conclusion. It seems semi-obvious that this might have something to do with the fact that mixed prairie grasses are probably the most efficient "solar collectors" to use on prairie lands with poor soil because they've adapted to these conditions after tens of thousands of years of growing in these conditions. It only seems logical that they would do better than solo, non-native species grown in the same soils, species which then require more maintenance and energy input than native species.
Comment 4 of 6
No image available
December 15, 2006
Energy is extracted from biomass in a variety of ways: gasification of woody biomass for combustion in IC engines, anaerobic digestion to produce biogas, fermentation of starchy material to produce ethanol or extraction of oil to produce biodiesel etc. In what way is 238% energy extracted from grass? The article does not give any hint on this.
Comment 5 of 6
No image available
December 16, 2006
I imagine the yield they get, as a result of plant diversity, is due concurrently with the micro flora and fauna diversity.

I've posted them about doing a Terra Preta soil plot.

This new, some what orphaned, soil technology speaks to so many different interests and disciplines that it has not been embraced fully by any. I'm sure you will see both the potential of this system and the convergence needed for it's implementation.

The integrated energy strategy offered by Terra Preta Soil technology may
provide the only path to sustain our agricultural and fossil fueled power
structure without climate degradation, other than nuclear power.

These are processes where you can have your Bio-fuels, CO2 sequestration and fertility too.

The May Nature had a great article , "Putting the carbon backBlack is the new green"

This Earth Science Forum thread on these soil contains further links, at forums hypography.com earth-science
Comment 6 of 6
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
Suntech Power Holdings ATAS International, Inc. bees - bioenergy events & services ULVAC Technologies, Inc. Garrad Hassan America Inc. Solectria Renewables LLC
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo