CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 131Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsBioenergy crop production and managementCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 181 of the 182 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Potential Soil Carbon Sequestration and CO 2 Offset by Dedicated Energy Crops in the USA

Sartori, Fabio, Lal, Rattan, Ebinger, Michael H., Parrish, David J.·2006·Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences
DOI 10.1080/07352680600961021
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Energy crops are fast-growing species whose biomass yields are dedicated to the production of more immediately usable energy forms, such as liquid fuels or electricity. Biomass-based energy sources can offset, or displace, some amount of fossil-fuel use. Energy derived from biomass provides 2 to 3% of the energy used in the U.S.A.; but, with the exception of corn-(Zea mays L.)-to-ethanol, very little energy is currently derived from dedicated energy crops. In addition to the fossil-fuel offset, energy cropping might also mitigate an accentuated greenhouse gas effect by causing a net sequestration of atmospheric C into soil organic C (SOC). Energy plantations of short-rotation woody crops (SRWC) or herbaceous crops (HC) can potentially be managed to favor SOC sequestration. This review is focused primarily on the potential to mitigate atmospheric CO2 emissions by fostering SOC sequestration in energy cropping systems deployed across the landscape in the United States. We know that land use affects the dynamics of the SOC pool, but data about spatial and temporal variability in the SOC pool under SRWC and HC are scanty due to lack of well-designed, long-term studies. The conventional methods of studying SOC fluxes involve paired-plot designs and chronosequences, but isotopic techniques may also be feasible in understanding temporal changes in SOC. The rate of accumulation of SOC depends on land-use history, soil type, vegetation type, harvesting cycle, and other management practices. The SOC pool tends to be enhanced more under deep-rooted grasses, N-fixers, and deciduous species. Carbon sequestration into recalcitrant forms in the SOC pool can be enhanced with some management practices (e.g., conservation tillage, fertilization, irrigation); but those practices can carry a fossil-C cost. Reported rates of SOC sequestration range from 0 to 1.6 Mg C ha−1 yr−1 under SRWC and 0 to 3 Mg C ha−1 yr−1 under HC. Production of 5 EJ of electricity from energy crops—a perhaps reasonable scenario for the U.S.A.—would require about 60 Mha. That amount of land is potentially available for conversion to energy plantations in the U.S.A. The land so managed could mitigate C emissions (through fossil C not emitted and SOC sequestered) by about 5.4 Mg C ha−1 yr−1. On 60 Mha, that would represent 324 Tg C yr−1—a 20% reduction from current fossil-fuel CO2 emissions. Advances in productivity of fast-growing SRWC and HC species suggest that deployment of energy cropping systems could be an effective strategy to reduce climate-altering effects of anthropogenic CO2 emissions and to meet global policy commitments.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07352680600961021

Cites

181 of 181 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 182 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Anonymous . 2005 . The Global Hub for Carbon Commerce Online, URL: http://www.co2e.com/, September, 2005
  2. Byers , S. , Snowe , O. J. , Carr , B. , Holdren , J. P. , Khor Kok-Peng , M. , Kosciusko-Morizet , N. , Martin , C. , McMichael , T. , Porritt , J. , Turner , A. , Von Weizsacker , E. U. , Weidou , N. , Wirth , T. E. and Zoi , C. . Meeting the Climate Challenge: Recommendations of the International Climate Change Taskforce . Washington, DC, , USA : The Center for American Progress . Online, URL: http://www.whrc.org/resources/published_literature/index.htm, January, 2005
  3. CCX (Chicago Climate Exchange) . 2005 . Chicago Climate Exchange, Overview and Benefits , Chicago Climate Exchange . Online, URL: http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/about/pdf/CCX_Corp_Overview_2005.pdf, July, 2005
  4. Eaton , J. 2003 . “ Utilization of short rotation woody crops in the western USA ” . In Short Rotation Crops for Bioenergy: New Zealand, 2003 191 – 198 . Tauranga, , New Zealand Task meeting report. IEA Bioenergy Task 30, Online, URL: http://www.shortrotationcrops.com/PDFs/2003Mtg/23-Eaton.pdf, May 2006
  5. 10.2136/sssaj2004.0950 · DOI
  6. Jenkinson , D. S. , Hart , P. B. S. , Rayner , J. H. and Parry , L. C. 1987 . Modeling the turnover of organic matter in long-term experiments at Rothamsted . INTECOL Bull. , 15 : 1 – 8 . [CSA]
  7. Laux , S. , Grusha , J. and Tillman , D. 1999 . “ Co-firing of Biomass and Opportunity Fuels in Low NO x Burners ” . In Foster Wheeler review , Volume 1 , Foster Wheeler Corporation . no.1. [Online, URL: http://www.fwc.com/publications/heat/heat_html/spr99/confiring.cfm, March, 2006].
  8. ODOE (Oregon Department of Energy) . 2005 . State of Oregon-Energy Plan 2005-2007 , Salem, OR, , USA : Oregon Department of Energy .
  9. Reicher , D. . Keynote speech . Proceedings of the 1st World Conference on Biomass for Energy and Industry . Edited by: Kyritsis , S. pp. xxxvii – xl . London, UK : James and James .
  10. Ulzen-Appiah , F. , Briggs , R. D. , Abrahamson , L. P. and Bickelhaupt , D. H. . Soil carbon pools in short rotation willow (Salix Dasyclados) plantation four years after establishment . Bioenergy 2000 Moving Technology into the Marketplace: The Ninth Biennial Bioenergy Conference Proceedings . October 15–19 2000 , Buffalo, New York, USA. Madison, WI, , USA
  11. USDA-NRCS (United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service) . 2003 . Keys to Soil Taxonomy-Ninth Edition , Washington, DC, , USA : United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–131 of 131

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Sartori, F., Lal, R., Ebinger, M. H., & Parrish, D. J.
Affiliations
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • Los Alamos National Laboratory (US)
  • Virginia Tech (US)
ORCID
Lal, Rattan
Venue
Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2006-10
Volume
25
Issue
5
Pages
441-472
ISSN
  • 0735-2689 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-7836
DOI
10.1080/07352680600961021
OpenAlex
W1970050050
Cited by
131
References
182
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 8
FWCI
15.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Bioenergy crop production and management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › CO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Keywords
soil carbon sequestration, energy crops, short rotation woody crops, herbaceous energy crops, fossil fuel displacement, soil organic carbon, biomass energy, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, land use change, conservation tillage, nitrogen fixation, carbon sequestration rate, electricity generation from biomass

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review