Consequences of field N2O emissions for the environmental sustainability of plant-based biofuels produced within an organic farming system
One way of reducing the emissions of fossil fuel‐derived carbon dioxide (CO2) is to replace fossil fuels with biofuels produced from agricultural biomasses or residuals. However, cultivation of soils results in emission of other greenhouse gases (GHGs), especially nitrous oxide (N2O). Previous studi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Global change biology. Bioenergy 2012-07, Vol.4 (4), p.435-452 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 452 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 435 |
container_title | Global change biology. Bioenergy |
container_volume | 4 |
creator | Carter, Mette S. Hauggaard-Nielsen, Henrik Heiske, Stefan Jensen, Morten Thomsen, Sune T. Schmidt, Jens E. Johansen, Anders Ambus, Per |
description | One way of reducing the emissions of fossil fuel‐derived carbon dioxide (CO2) is to replace fossil fuels with biofuels produced from agricultural biomasses or residuals. However, cultivation of soils results in emission of other greenhouse gases (GHGs), especially nitrous oxide (N2O). Previous studies on biofuel production systems showed that emissions of N2O may counterbalance a substantial part of the global warming reduction, which is achieved by fossil fuel displacement. In this study, we related measured field emissions of N2O to the reduction in fossil fuel‐derived CO2, which was obtained when agricultural biomasses were used for biofuel production. The analysis included five organically managed feedstocks (viz. dried straw of sole cropped rye, sole cropped vetch and intercropped rye–vetch, as well as fresh grass–clover and whole crop maize) and three scenarios for conversion of biomass into biofuel. The scenarios were (i) bioethanol, (ii) biogas and (iii) coproduction of bioethanol and biogas. In the last scenario, the biomass was first used for bioethanol fermentation and subsequently the effluent from this process was utilized for biogas production. The net GHG reduction was calculated as the avoided fossil fuel‐derived CO2, where the N2O emission was subtracted. This value did not account for fossil fuel‐derived CO2 emissions from farm machinery and during conversion processes that turn biomass into biofuel. The greatest net GHG reduction, corresponding to 700–800 g CO2 m−2, was obtained by biogas production or coproduction of bioethanol and biogas on either fresh grass–clover or whole crop maize. In contrast, biofuel production based on lignocellulosic crop residues (i.e. rye and vetch straw) provided considerably lower net GHG reductions (≤215 g CO2 m−2), and even negative numbers sometimes. No GHG benefit was achieved by fertilizing the maize crop because the extra crop yield, and thereby increased biofuel production, was offset by enhanced N2O emissions. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01132.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_24P</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2299178695</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2299178695</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-i3262-66ba00c091bb4676eeef080a3ef227e7f2dcdf0a150ce5a950548b7e8f49d1643</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kF1LwzAUhosoOKf_IeB1a5IuyXojuKFTGAp-gjchbU80s01n0rrtL_irTZ0ucMjL-XiT80QRIjgh4ZwtEiKYiInAIqGYkCRESpP1XjTYFfb_Nc_Sw-jI-wXGnHGSDaLvaWM9fHZgC_Co0UgbqEp0S-8Q1MZ7E8pINw6174DAfhnX2BpsqyrkO98qY1VuKtNu-tllpWwb58pDiXLT6A4qj5auKbsiZFamfTcWKYsa96asKZBWrjb2DfmNb6E-jg60qjyc_N3D6Onq8nF6Hc_vZjfTi3lsUsppzHmuMC5wRvJ8xAUHAI3HWKWgKRUgNC2LUmNFGC6AqYxhNhrnAsZ6lJWEj9JhdLr1DT8Li_tWLprO2fCkpDTLiBjzjIWu823XylSwkUtnauU2kmDZY5cL2ROVPV3ZY5e_2OVazqaTSS-DQbw1MGG59c5AuQ_JRSqYfLmdSUbvH9LXybO8Sn8AwSOK5w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2299178695</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Consequences of field N2O emissions for the environmental sustainability of plant-based biofuels produced within an organic farming system</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</source><creator>Carter, Mette S. ; Hauggaard-Nielsen, Henrik ; Heiske, Stefan ; Jensen, Morten ; Thomsen, Sune T. ; Schmidt, Jens E. ; Johansen, Anders ; Ambus, Per</creator><creatorcontrib>Carter, Mette S. ; Hauggaard-Nielsen, Henrik ; Heiske, Stefan ; Jensen, Morten ; Thomsen, Sune T. ; Schmidt, Jens E. ; Johansen, Anders ; Ambus, Per</creatorcontrib><description>One way of reducing the emissions of fossil fuel‐derived carbon dioxide (CO2) is to replace fossil fuels with biofuels produced from agricultural biomasses or residuals. However, cultivation of soils results in emission of other greenhouse gases (GHGs), especially nitrous oxide (N2O). Previous studies on biofuel production systems showed that emissions of N2O may counterbalance a substantial part of the global warming reduction, which is achieved by fossil fuel displacement. In this study, we related measured field emissions of N2O to the reduction in fossil fuel‐derived CO2, which was obtained when agricultural biomasses were used for biofuel production. The analysis included five organically managed feedstocks (viz. dried straw of sole cropped rye, sole cropped vetch and intercropped rye–vetch, as well as fresh grass–clover and whole crop maize) and three scenarios for conversion of biomass into biofuel. The scenarios were (i) bioethanol, (ii) biogas and (iii) coproduction of bioethanol and biogas. In the last scenario, the biomass was first used for bioethanol fermentation and subsequently the effluent from this process was utilized for biogas production. The net GHG reduction was calculated as the avoided fossil fuel‐derived CO2, where the N2O emission was subtracted. This value did not account for fossil fuel‐derived CO2 emissions from farm machinery and during conversion processes that turn biomass into biofuel. The greatest net GHG reduction, corresponding to 700–800 g CO2 m−2, was obtained by biogas production or coproduction of bioethanol and biogas on either fresh grass–clover or whole crop maize. In contrast, biofuel production based on lignocellulosic crop residues (i.e. rye and vetch straw) provided considerably lower net GHG reductions (≤215 g CO2 m−2), and even negative numbers sometimes. No GHG benefit was achieved by fertilizing the maize crop because the extra crop yield, and thereby increased biofuel production, was offset by enhanced N2O emissions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1757-1693</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1757-1707</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01132.x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Agricultural equipment ; Agricultural management ; Agricultural production ; Biodiesel fuels ; bioethanol and/or biogas ; Biofuels ; Biogas ; Biomass ; Carbon dioxide ; Carbon dioxide emissions ; carbon sequestration ; Cereal crops ; Climate change ; Clover ; Conversion ; Corn ; Crop residues ; Crop yield ; Crops ; Cultivation ; digestate recycled as fertilizer ; Emission analysis ; emission factor ; Emission measurements ; Emissions ; Ethanol ; Farming systems ; Fermentation ; Fertilizers ; fossil fuel displacement ; Fossil fuels ; Global warming ; grass-clover ; Grasses ; Greenhouse effect ; Greenhouse gases ; Lignocellulose ; methane ; Nitrous oxide ; Organic farming ; Reduction ; Rye ; rye and vetch straw ; Sole cropping ; Straw ; Sustainability ; Sustainable agriculture ; whole crop maize</subject><ispartof>Global change biology. Bioenergy, 2012-07, Vol.4 (4), p.435-452</ispartof><rights>2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd</rights><rights>2012. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1757-1707.2011.01132.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1757-1707.2011.01132.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,11562,27924,27925,45574,45575,46052,46476</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fj.1757-1707.2011.01132.x$$EView_record_in_Wiley-Blackwell$$FView_record_in_$$GWiley-Blackwell</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Carter, Mette S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hauggaard-Nielsen, Henrik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heiske, Stefan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jensen, Morten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomsen, Sune T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmidt, Jens E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansen, Anders</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ambus, Per</creatorcontrib><title>Consequences of field N2O emissions for the environmental sustainability of plant-based biofuels produced within an organic farming system</title><title>Global change biology. Bioenergy</title><addtitle>Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy</addtitle><description>One way of reducing the emissions of fossil fuel‐derived carbon dioxide (CO2) is to replace fossil fuels with biofuels produced from agricultural biomasses or residuals. However, cultivation of soils results in emission of other greenhouse gases (GHGs), especially nitrous oxide (N2O). Previous studies on biofuel production systems showed that emissions of N2O may counterbalance a substantial part of the global warming reduction, which is achieved by fossil fuel displacement. In this study, we related measured field emissions of N2O to the reduction in fossil fuel‐derived CO2, which was obtained when agricultural biomasses were used for biofuel production. The analysis included five organically managed feedstocks (viz. dried straw of sole cropped rye, sole cropped vetch and intercropped rye–vetch, as well as fresh grass–clover and whole crop maize) and three scenarios for conversion of biomass into biofuel. The scenarios were (i) bioethanol, (ii) biogas and (iii) coproduction of bioethanol and biogas. In the last scenario, the biomass was first used for bioethanol fermentation and subsequently the effluent from this process was utilized for biogas production. The net GHG reduction was calculated as the avoided fossil fuel‐derived CO2, where the N2O emission was subtracted. This value did not account for fossil fuel‐derived CO2 emissions from farm machinery and during conversion processes that turn biomass into biofuel. The greatest net GHG reduction, corresponding to 700–800 g CO2 m−2, was obtained by biogas production or coproduction of bioethanol and biogas on either fresh grass–clover or whole crop maize. In contrast, biofuel production based on lignocellulosic crop residues (i.e. rye and vetch straw) provided considerably lower net GHG reductions (≤215 g CO2 m−2), and even negative numbers sometimes. No GHG benefit was achieved by fertilizing the maize crop because the extra crop yield, and thereby increased biofuel production, was offset by enhanced N2O emissions.</description><subject>Agricultural equipment</subject><subject>Agricultural management</subject><subject>Agricultural production</subject><subject>Biodiesel fuels</subject><subject>bioethanol and/or biogas</subject><subject>Biofuels</subject><subject>Biogas</subject><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Carbon dioxide</subject><subject>Carbon dioxide emissions</subject><subject>carbon sequestration</subject><subject>Cereal crops</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Clover</subject><subject>Conversion</subject><subject>Corn</subject><subject>Crop residues</subject><subject>Crop yield</subject><subject>Crops</subject><subject>Cultivation</subject><subject>digestate recycled as fertilizer</subject><subject>Emission analysis</subject><subject>emission factor</subject><subject>Emission measurements</subject><subject>Emissions</subject><subject>Ethanol</subject><subject>Farming systems</subject><subject>Fermentation</subject><subject>Fertilizers</subject><subject>fossil fuel displacement</subject><subject>Fossil fuels</subject><subject>Global warming</subject><subject>grass-clover</subject><subject>Grasses</subject><subject>Greenhouse effect</subject><subject>Greenhouse gases</subject><subject>Lignocellulose</subject><subject>methane</subject><subject>Nitrous oxide</subject><subject>Organic farming</subject><subject>Reduction</subject><subject>Rye</subject><subject>rye and vetch straw</subject><subject>Sole cropping</subject><subject>Straw</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable agriculture</subject><subject>whole crop maize</subject><issn>1757-1693</issn><issn>1757-1707</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kF1LwzAUhosoOKf_IeB1a5IuyXojuKFTGAp-gjchbU80s01n0rrtL_irTZ0ucMjL-XiT80QRIjgh4ZwtEiKYiInAIqGYkCRESpP1XjTYFfb_Nc_Sw-jI-wXGnHGSDaLvaWM9fHZgC_Co0UgbqEp0S-8Q1MZ7E8pINw6174DAfhnX2BpsqyrkO98qY1VuKtNu-tllpWwb58pDiXLT6A4qj5auKbsiZFamfTcWKYsa96asKZBWrjb2DfmNb6E-jg60qjyc_N3D6Onq8nF6Hc_vZjfTi3lsUsppzHmuMC5wRvJ8xAUHAI3HWKWgKRUgNC2LUmNFGC6AqYxhNhrnAsZ6lJWEj9JhdLr1DT8Li_tWLprO2fCkpDTLiBjzjIWu823XylSwkUtnauU2kmDZY5cL2ROVPV3ZY5e_2OVazqaTSS-DQbw1MGG59c5AuQ_JRSqYfLmdSUbvH9LXybO8Sn8AwSOK5w</recordid><startdate>201207</startdate><enddate>201207</enddate><creator>Carter, Mette S.</creator><creator>Hauggaard-Nielsen, Henrik</creator><creator>Heiske, Stefan</creator><creator>Jensen, Morten</creator><creator>Thomsen, Sune T.</creator><creator>Schmidt, Jens E.</creator><creator>Johansen, Anders</creator><creator>Ambus, Per</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201207</creationdate><title>Consequences of field N2O emissions for the environmental sustainability of plant-based biofuels produced within an organic farming system</title><author>Carter, Mette S. ; Hauggaard-Nielsen, Henrik ; Heiske, Stefan ; Jensen, Morten ; Thomsen, Sune T. ; Schmidt, Jens E. ; Johansen, Anders ; Ambus, Per</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-i3262-66ba00c091bb4676eeef080a3ef227e7f2dcdf0a150ce5a950548b7e8f49d1643</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Agricultural equipment</topic><topic>Agricultural management</topic><topic>Agricultural production</topic><topic>Biodiesel fuels</topic><topic>bioethanol and/or biogas</topic><topic>Biofuels</topic><topic>Biogas</topic><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Carbon dioxide</topic><topic>Carbon dioxide emissions</topic><topic>carbon sequestration</topic><topic>Cereal crops</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Clover</topic><topic>Conversion</topic><topic>Corn</topic><topic>Crop residues</topic><topic>Crop yield</topic><topic>Crops</topic><topic>Cultivation</topic><topic>digestate recycled as fertilizer</topic><topic>Emission analysis</topic><topic>emission factor</topic><topic>Emission measurements</topic><topic>Emissions</topic><topic>Ethanol</topic><topic>Farming systems</topic><topic>Fermentation</topic><topic>Fertilizers</topic><topic>fossil fuel displacement</topic><topic>Fossil fuels</topic><topic>Global warming</topic><topic>grass-clover</topic><topic>Grasses</topic><topic>Greenhouse effect</topic><topic>Greenhouse gases</topic><topic>Lignocellulose</topic><topic>methane</topic><topic>Nitrous oxide</topic><topic>Organic farming</topic><topic>Reduction</topic><topic>Rye</topic><topic>rye and vetch straw</topic><topic>Sole cropping</topic><topic>Straw</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable agriculture</topic><topic>whole crop maize</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carter, Mette S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hauggaard-Nielsen, Henrik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heiske, Stefan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jensen, Morten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomsen, Sune T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmidt, Jens E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansen, Anders</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ambus, Per</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Global change biology. Bioenergy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carter, Mette S.</au><au>Hauggaard-Nielsen, Henrik</au><au>Heiske, Stefan</au><au>Jensen, Morten</au><au>Thomsen, Sune T.</au><au>Schmidt, Jens E.</au><au>Johansen, Anders</au><au>Ambus, Per</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Consequences of field N2O emissions for the environmental sustainability of plant-based biofuels produced within an organic farming system</atitle><jtitle>Global change biology. Bioenergy</jtitle><addtitle>Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy</addtitle><date>2012-07</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>4</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>435</spage><epage>452</epage><pages>435-452</pages><issn>1757-1693</issn><eissn>1757-1707</eissn><abstract>One way of reducing the emissions of fossil fuel‐derived carbon dioxide (CO2) is to replace fossil fuels with biofuels produced from agricultural biomasses or residuals. However, cultivation of soils results in emission of other greenhouse gases (GHGs), especially nitrous oxide (N2O). Previous studies on biofuel production systems showed that emissions of N2O may counterbalance a substantial part of the global warming reduction, which is achieved by fossil fuel displacement. In this study, we related measured field emissions of N2O to the reduction in fossil fuel‐derived CO2, which was obtained when agricultural biomasses were used for biofuel production. The analysis included five organically managed feedstocks (viz. dried straw of sole cropped rye, sole cropped vetch and intercropped rye–vetch, as well as fresh grass–clover and whole crop maize) and three scenarios for conversion of biomass into biofuel. The scenarios were (i) bioethanol, (ii) biogas and (iii) coproduction of bioethanol and biogas. In the last scenario, the biomass was first used for bioethanol fermentation and subsequently the effluent from this process was utilized for biogas production. The net GHG reduction was calculated as the avoided fossil fuel‐derived CO2, where the N2O emission was subtracted. This value did not account for fossil fuel‐derived CO2 emissions from farm machinery and during conversion processes that turn biomass into biofuel. The greatest net GHG reduction, corresponding to 700–800 g CO2 m−2, was obtained by biogas production or coproduction of bioethanol and biogas on either fresh grass–clover or whole crop maize. In contrast, biofuel production based on lignocellulosic crop residues (i.e. rye and vetch straw) provided considerably lower net GHG reductions (≤215 g CO2 m−2), and even negative numbers sometimes. No GHG benefit was achieved by fertilizing the maize crop because the extra crop yield, and thereby increased biofuel production, was offset by enhanced N2O emissions.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01132.x</doi><tpages>18</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
identifier | ISSN: 1757-1693 |
ispartof | Global change biology. Bioenergy, 2012-07, Vol.4 (4), p.435-452 |
issn | 1757-1693 1757-1707 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2299178695 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles |
subjects | Agricultural equipment Agricultural management Agricultural production Biodiesel fuels bioethanol and/or biogas Biofuels Biogas Biomass Carbon dioxide Carbon dioxide emissions carbon sequestration Cereal crops Climate change Clover Conversion Corn Crop residues Crop yield Crops Cultivation digestate recycled as fertilizer Emission analysis emission factor Emission measurements Emissions Ethanol Farming systems Fermentation Fertilizers fossil fuel displacement Fossil fuels Global warming grass-clover Grasses Greenhouse effect Greenhouse gases Lignocellulose methane Nitrous oxide Organic farming Reduction Rye rye and vetch straw Sole cropping Straw Sustainability Sustainable agriculture whole crop maize |
title | Consequences of field N2O emissions for the environmental sustainability of plant-based biofuels produced within an organic farming system |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T11%3A01%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_24P&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Consequences%20of%20field%20N2O%20emissions%20for%20the%20environmental%20sustainability%20of%20plant-based%20biofuels%20produced%20within%20an%20organic%20farming%20system&rft.jtitle=Global%20change%20biology.%20Bioenergy&rft.au=Carter,%20Mette%20S.&rft.date=2012-07&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=435&rft.epage=452&rft.pages=435-452&rft.issn=1757-1693&rft.eissn=1757-1707&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01132.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_24P%3E2299178695%3C/proquest_24P%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2299178695&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |