The DOI matches its Crossref record; 151 of the 151 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 6 of the 64 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Land‐use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon
Open accessAbstract
Bioenergy from crops is expected to make a considerable contribution to climate change mitigation. However, bioenergy is not necessarily carbon neutral because emissions of CO 2 , N 2 O and CH 4 during crop production may reduce or completely counterbalance CO 2 savings of the substituted fossil fuels. These greenhouse gases ( GHG s) need to be included into the carbon footprint calculation of different bioenergy crops under a range of soil conditions and management practices. This review compiles existing knowledge on agronomic and environmental constraints and GHG balances of the major E uropean bioenergy crops, although it focuses on dedicated perennial crops such as M iscanthus and short rotation coppice species. Such second‐generation crops account for only 3% of the current E uropean bioenergy production, but field data suggest they emit 40% to >99% less N 2 O than conventional annual crops. This is a result of lower fertilizer requirements as well as a higher N‐use efficiency, due to effective N‐recycling. Perennial energy crops have the potential to sequester additional carbon in soil biomass if established on former cropland (0.44 Mg soil C ha −1 yr −1 for poplar and willow and 0.66 Mg soil C ha −1 yr −1 for M iscanthus ). However, there was no positive or even negative effects on the C balance if energy crops are established on former grassland. Increased bioenergy production may also result in direct and indirect land‐use changes with potential high C losses when native vegetation is converted to annual crops. Although dedicated perennial energy crops have a high potential to improve the GHG balance of bioenergy production, several agronomic and economic constraints still have to be overcome.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
30 No full text of the sources · 22 Own interpretation · 13 No basis given · 8 Own result · 6 Sources not found · 4 Partly supported · 2 Supported · 2 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, bioenergy is not necessarily carbon neutral because emissions of CO 2 , N 2 O and CH 4 during crop production may reduce or completely counterbalance CO 2 savings of the substituted fossil fuels.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Although carbon (C) emitted during combustion is balanced by C fixed by photosynthesis, bioenergy is not necessarily C neutral because of GHG emissions released during crop growth, field management, feedstock processing and transport.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Crutzen et al., 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Conclusions say that N₂O emissions from fertilized biofuel crops can counteract fossil-fuel CO₂ savings and even cause net warming. The paper does not establish the claim about crop-production CO₂ and CH₄ emissions; its Conclusions say the analysis concentrates on N₂O from nitrogen fertilization. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“On the other hand, perennial energy crops may help to recapture SOC that was previously lost by cultivation (Dondini et al., 2009).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Dondini et al., 2009 source
The conclusion (p. 421) says that growing perennial grasses on carbon-depleted agricultural land provides an immediate soil-organic-carbon sequestration benefit. The Abstract also reports increased soil organic carbon when Miscanthus is grown on previously arable land. These passages support the citing sentence's qualified claim that perennial energy crops may help restore soil carbon. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In a nine year study in Michigan, United States, five to six times smaller N 2 O emissions were measured for a poplar plantation compared with conventional cropland systems (Robertson et al., 2000).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Robertson et al., 2000 source
Table 2 reports N₂O contributions of 10 for poplar, versus 52 and 56 for conventional-tillage and no-till cropland—5.2 and 5.6 times as large, respectively. The paper states that fluxes were measured from 1991 to 1999, and reference note 8 locates the sites in southwest Michigan. The indexed copy labels these passages Abstract and References, respectively; page numbers are unavailable. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Emissions of N 2 O from soils and adjacent water bodies are able to turn the life cycle GHG balance of energy crops from a net sink into a net source (Crutzen et al., 2008;Searchinger et al., 2008).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Crutzen et al., 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3 reports that N₂O emissions can exceed the cooling from displaced fossil fuels for some biofuels, and Appendix A includes emissions from nitrogen entering water systems. But Sections 3 and 4.2 explicitly say the analysis is not a full life-cycle assessment, so the paper does not establish a switch in the life-cycle GHG balance from net sink to net source. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Searchinger et al., 2008 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“On the other hand, on sandy soils direct N 2 O emissions may be shifted to indirect emissions from NO 3 À leached into adjacent water bodies (Crutzen et al., 2008;Well & Butterbach-Bahl, 2010).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Crutzen et al., 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Appendix A (page not available in our copy) identifies indirect N₂O emissions from leached nitrogen leaving fields and entering water systems. It does not specify sandy soils or say that direct emissions shift to indirect emissions under those conditions. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Well & Butterbach-Bahl, 2010 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perennial energy crops have the potential to sequester additional carbon in soil biomass if established on former cropland (0.44 Mg soil C ha À1 yr À1 for poplar and willow and 0.66 Mg soil C ha À1 yr À1 for Miscanthus).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such second-generation crops account for only 3% of the current European bioenergy production, but field data suggest they emit 40% to >99% less N 2 O than conventional annual crops.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, the average emissions factor for reed canary grass on Irish mineral soils was only 0.2% (±0.14) of applied N compared to 1.38% (±0.14) for Lolium pastures (see Fig. 2e).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Average European atmospheric N deposition rates of 9-12 kg N ha À1 yr À1 are sufficient to replace most of the N lost with the harvested biomass (Holland et al., 2005).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Fertilization
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Holland et al., 2005 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For all sites, N 2 O fluxes were high in comparison to CH 4 uptake (see Methane).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 34
- Probably not a substantial claim. 8
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In general, annual cropland conversion to perennial crops results in increased SOC stocks but SOC decreased if perennial crops or grasslands are converted to annual crops (Anderson-Teixeira et al., 2009;Poeplau et al., 2011).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Carbon balance
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Anderson-Teixeira et al., 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page not specified) says SOC accumulates when cultivated land becomes grassland, while conversion of native ecosystems to crops causes substantial SOC losses. The Discussion (page not specified) also reports SOC gains under perennial grasses and initial losses when native grassland or forest is converted to sugarcane. The paper does not establish the claimed general decrease specifically for conversion of perennial crops or grasslands to annual crops; its grassland-conversion example is sugarcane, a perennial crop. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Poeplau et al., 2011 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
In the paper
“Production costs per GJ of bioenergy from dedicated energy crops may be roughly one-third of that from conventional energy crops (de Wit & Faaij, 2010).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Bioenergy systems: definitions and current production status
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites de Wit & Faaij, 2010 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The only five European data sets known to us that compare fluxes from conventional crops and dedicated energy crops under same environmental conditions are displayed in Fig. 2 two of them are new unpublished data sets.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, N 2 O emissions from Miscanthus at the Wexford site, Ireland were lower than those for maize, due to drier soils that resulted from increased water use (Fig. 2e).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Productivity of SRC are similar or even higher than that of conventional energy crops and 20-50% less N fertilizer is needed due to efficient remobilization of reserves (Scholz & Ellerbrock, 2002;Karp & Shield, 2008; Table 1).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Bioenergy systems: definitions and current production status
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Scholz & Ellerbrock, 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Karp & Shield, 2008 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the loss of N fertilizer as N 2 O (emission factor) was reduced by 64% (95% confident interval: 25 to >99%, n = 7).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
plaindirectn = 7- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“Perennial dedicated energy crops showed significantly lower N 2 O emissions than conventional energy crops except for Hornum, the Danish site, which is characterized by a short measurement period that was restricted to one vegetation period (Jørgensen et al., 1997).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Jørgensen et al., 1997 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Miscanthus and SRC have deeper roots (>2 m), than agricultural crops that enables them to use and deplete deeper groundwater resources, although this could be a disadvantage by affecting the local hydrological balance (Neukirchen et al., 1999;Crow & Houston, 2004).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Agronomic and climate-related characteristics of bioenergy production
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SRC are intensive land-use systems with often double the yields when compared with conventional forest systems (Table 1).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Bioenergy systems: definitions and current production status
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this data set, no C saturation effect was detected in soils but SOC sequestration remained constant throughout the life cycle of Miscanthus and the SRC plantation lifetime (Fig. 3).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Carbon balance
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From the existing studies, we calculated an average (±SE) SOC accumulation of 1622 ± 1586 kg CO 2 equiv ha À1 yr À1 for SRC (0.44 Mg C ha À1 yr À1 ) and 2427 ± 3421 kg CO 2 equiv ha À1 yr À1 (0.66 Mg C ha À1 yr À1 ) for Miscanthus cultivated on former croplands (Fig. 3).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Carbon balance
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, there was no or even a negative SOC stock change, À4621 ± 2774 (À1.3 Mg C ha À1 yr À1 ) and À316 ± 692 kg CO 2 equiv ha À1 yr À1 (À0.09Mg C ha À1 yr À1 ), if grassland was converted to SRC and Miscanthus respectively.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Carbon balance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The CO 2 balance of energy crops can be estimated by C stock changes in above and below ground biomass and in soils.This strongly depends on the previous land-use and former C stock levels, especially for the largest terrestrial C pool, the soil organic carbon (SOC) pool.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Poeplau et al., 2011 source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is a result of lower fertilizer requirements as well as a higher N-use efficiency, due to effective N-recycling.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Deforestation of tropical primary forests can be a direct or indirect land-use change and causes very large C stock changes with a major impact on the GHG balance of bioenergy production (Palm et al., 1999;Don et al., 2011).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Palm et al., 1999
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Don et al., 2011 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The GHG footprint related to the production of modern bioenergy feedstock can be improved by applying existing knowledge and ecological principles, even though fully quantitative recommendations for site-specific optimal choices at farm level are not yet possible.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, many LCA are inconclusive and inconsistent because of different system boundaries that determine which energy and GHG fluxes are attributed to bioenergy as a product, and because calculations of GHG emissions during crop production are crude (Schlamadinger et al., 1997).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schlamadinger et al., 1997 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Thus, IPCC default values only provide a very general estimate of N 2 O emissions and cannot assess regionalized or sitespecific effects of crop species on GHG fluxes.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites IPCC, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The GHG balance of energy crops depends not only on the crop type but also on climate, soil and management, especially fertilization and tillage practices, as well as previous land-use.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fertilizer application rates are directly linked to GHG emissions for both conventional and energy cropping systems via concomitant N 2 O emissions from soils and additional GHG emissions associated with fertilizer production and transport.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Fertilization
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, such land may harbour a high biodiversity or contain significant C stocks that will be lost upon cultivation (Eggers et al., 2009).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Use of marginal land vs. fertile land for energy crop production
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Eggers et al., 2009 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If SRC is established on sites under permanent vegetation, i.e., grasslands or woodland, partial or complete ploughing is required.Such management practices would have a negative effect on SOC stocks (see Carbon balance).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Fertilization
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Expansion of bioenergy production to marginal land is further constrained by the high establishment costs of perennial energy crops and the often relatively low yields.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Use of marginal land vs. fertile land for energy crop production
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The emission of N 2 O and also the emission factor (N 2 O emission per applied N fertil-izer) are crop-specific with up to a 700% difference between different crop types for the same site, fertilization rate and measurement period (Kaiser & Ruser, 2000).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kaiser & Ruser, 2000 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Winter harvesting also allows to keep the water table close to the surface in summer, which helps to conserve soil C in organic soils, e.g., under reed canary grass production.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Similarly, the N 2 O emission factor was reduced by 39% during the winter when compared with a 65% reduction during the vegetation period (Flessa et al., 1998).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Flessa et al., 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perennial bioenergy crops do not require annual tillage so that tillage-induced N mineralization and the possibility of increased N 2 O production as a loss of mineral N is minimized.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“There may also be lag effects of crop residues ploughed under in the previous autumn, with residues from oilseed rape causing especially high N 2 O emissions, due to their high N content (Hadas et al., 2004).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hadas et al., 2004 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At present there is no clear explanation for these observed reductions in expected yield, but it is possibly due to the increasing physical space occupied by old non-vigorous rhizomes that reduce the productivity per unit area.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Lifetime and site preparation for perennial energy crops
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A main uncertainty in predicting future potential bioenergy production is the available land that could be converted to energy crops (Berndes et al., 2003).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Use of marginal land vs. fertile land for energy crop production
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Berndes et al., 2003 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, large scale establishment of dedicated energy crops is hampered by high establishment costs and investment in new machinery, as well as the absence of a yearly income with SRC and the lack of expertise or experience.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Bioenergy systems: definitions and current production status
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although dedicated perennial energy crops have a high potential to improve the GHG balance of bioenergy production, several agronomic and economic constraints still have to be overcome.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Abstract
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, many perennial energy crops are harvested in winter (often in wetter conditions), which could, on the one hand, foster soil compaction and the production of N 2 O.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Marginal land is often poorly drained, but could support perennial energy crop production due to a sufficient water supply.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This underlines the importance of choosing crops with a high N-use efficiency, such as Miscanthus and SRC, as they reduce the N fertilization demand and subsequently the direct and indirect N 2 O emissions, regardless of the soil type they are cultivated on.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, the reconversion of abandoned land to cropland causes SOC losses, as most abandoned land accumulated SOC through natural succession to grassland or woodland that would in turn be reduced upon re-cultivation.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Carbon balance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the Hornum, Denmark site winter fluxes were not measured thus it is likely that the emission factors (Fig. 2a) are an underestimate.”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Nitrous oxide
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, any changes in SOC stocks depend critically on the former land-use history and may dominate the total bioenergy feedstock GHG balance (Table 3).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Carbon balance
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Bioenergy from crops is expected to make a considerable contribution to climate change mitigation.
“Bioenergy from crops is expected to make a considerable contribution to climate change mitigation.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Current bioenergy production takes place mainly on fertile cropland in direct competition with food production.
“Contrary to the political aim to open up marginal land for bioenergy crops current production takes place mainly on fertile cropland in direct competition with food production.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The GHG budget of bioenergy feedstock production depends on the net balance of CO2, CH4 and N2O emissions during crop production and associated land-use changes and fossil fuel use during fertilizer and pesticide manufacture, transport and fuel for field machinery.
“The GHG budget of bioenergy feedstock production depends on the net balance of CO 2 , CH 4 and N 2 O emissions during crop production and associated land-use changes and fossil fuel use during fertilizer and pesticide manufacture, transport and fuel for field machinery.”
The paper relies on this without support.
N2O production is a result of the microbial processes of nitrification and denitrification.
“The production of N 2 O is a result of the microbial processes of nitrification and denitrification.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Mineral fertilizers for agricultural production are the largest single global N2O source.
“Mineral fertilizers for agricultural production are the largest single global N 2 O source.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Machinery required to harvest perennial crops is similar to those currently used for arable crops, but with less frequent traffic.
“Machinery required to harvest perennial crops is similar to those currently used for arable crops, but with less frequent traffic.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Paludiculture uses that part of the net primary production (NPP) that is not necessary for peat formation, which may amount to 80-90% of NPP.
“Paludiculture uses that part of the net primary production (NPP) that is not necessary for peat formation (which may amount to 80-90% of NPP).”
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?
In the citing paper
“Although there have been previous reviews on C sequestration under PECs [8–11], some of these were either unrelated to SOC [12, 13], or did not report any experimental evidence [1, 14, 15], or focused on specific geographical regions [16].”
From Carbon Sequestration by Perennial Energy Crops: Is the Jury Still Out? (2015) · cites this paper as [12]
In the citing paper
“The mean dry mass yield was 8 Mg ha À1 for the two-year rotation, which was lower than the average values reported for SRWCs under European conditions [30].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Carbon balance
“In established willow SRC plantations 2-9 Mg C ha À1 has been measured as below ground biomass, which is 1100-2100 kg CO 2 equiv ha À1 yr À1 (Matthews, 2001).”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Conclusions and critical knowledge gaps
“| Willow | Medium (12) | Low (0.2-1.5, n = 6) | Low (0.2-1.5, n = 6) | Gain (mean: 1600) | Medium (200-890) |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“In 2008, bioenergy accounted for 10% [50 exajoule (EJ), which is 10 À18 J] of the global primary energy consumption, but energy crops only contribute to 0.3% of the total energy, which is 6% of the total bioenergy produced”
§ Land-use change to bioenergy production in Europe: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon > Bioenergy systems: definitions and current production status
Reported 6 · recomputed 3
Citations
Cites
2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Paustian, K. H., Ravindranath, N. H., & van Amstel, A. R. (2006) · Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling · Cited by 6,706
Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change
Searchinger, T., Heimlich, R., Houghton, R. A., Dong, F., Elobeid, A., Fabiosa, J., Tokgoz, S., Hayes, D., & Yu, T.-H. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1151861 · Cited by 4,888 · cited 4×
“Increased bioenergy production in industrialized countries may trigger land-use changes in other countries (Fargione et al., 2008; Searchinger et al., 2008, 2009; Fritsche et al., 2010).”
InfluentialChanges in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing
Forster, P. M. D. F., Ramaswamy, V., Artaxo, P. E., Berntsen, T. K., Betts, R., Fahey, D. W., Haywood, J., Lean, J. L., Lowe, D. C., Myhre, G., et al. (2007) · elib (German Aerospace Center) · Cited by 4,638
Soil carbon stocks and land use change: a meta analysis
Guo, L. B., & Gifford, R. M. (2002) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1354-1013.2002.00486.x · Cited by 3,972
Land Clearing and the Biofuel Carbon Debt
Fargione, J., Hill, J., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., & Hawthorne, P. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1152747 · Cited by 3,902
Climate and the efficiency of crop production in Britain
Monteith, J. L. (1977) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1977.0140 · Cited by 3,484
Soil carbon sequestration and land‐use change: processes and potential
Post, W. M., & Kwon, K. C. (2000) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.00308.x · Cited by 2,602
Linn, D. M., & Doran, J. W. (1984) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj1984.03615995004800060013x · Cited by 2,346
Carbon-Negative Biofuels from Low-Input High-Diversity Grassland Biomass
Tilman, D., Hill, J., & Lehman, C. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1133306 · Cited by 1,813
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- AEBIOM, 2010, European Biomass Statistics, 75
- ArmstrongAP BaroJ DartoyJ GrovesAP NikkonenJ RickeardDJ(2002)CONCAWE Ad Hoc Group on Alternative Fuels Vol. 2/2002. CONCAWE. Available at: http://www.concawe.be (accessed 8 August 2011).
- Baitz M, 2004, Comparative Life‐Cycle Assessment for SunDiesel (Choren Process) and Conventional Diesel Fuel
- EU, 2007, The Impact of a Minimum 10% Obligation for Biofuel Use in the EU‐27 in 2020 on Agricultural Markets, 10
- EU, 2009, Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC. O. J. o. t. E. Union
- Eulenstein F, 2011, Potenzielle Klimawirkung des Anbaus von Pflanzen zur Erzeugung von Biomasse für, Biokraftstoffé Aufgrund Klimawirksamer Gasemissionen und Weitere Umweltwirkungen, 135
- EurObserv'ER(2010)Biogas Barometer. InSystem Solaires le journal des energies renouvelables Vol. 200 pp. 104–119. Available at:http://www.eurobserv-er.org/pdf/baro200b.pdf(accessed 8 August 2011).
- European Biodiesel Board, 2010, Production of Biodiesel in the EU
- Evans S, 2007, Report to DTI, 91
- FAO, 2008, The State of Food and Agriculture ‐ Biofuels Prospects, Risk and Opportunities
- Flessa H, 1998, Freisetzung und Verbrauch der Klimarelevanten Spurengase N2O und CH4 Beim Anbau Nachwachsender Rohstoffe, 133
- FNR, 2010, Annual Report 2009/2010,, 104
- Jones MB, 2001, Miscanthus for Energy and Fibre
- Neitsch SL, 2002, Soil and water assessment tool user's manual, Version 2000. TWRI Report TR‐192
- Quirin M, 2004, CO2 Mitigation Through Biofuels in the Transport Sector ‐ Status and Perspectives
- Scholz V, 2010, Umweltverträglichkeit von Pappen und Weiden im Vergelich mit anderen Energiepflanzen, Agrarholz, 15
- Wichtmann W, 2007, Wetlands: Monitoring, Modeling and Management, 273
- Woods J, 2008, Biofuels: Environmental Consequences and Interactions with Changing Land Use, 207
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bioenergy and climate change mitigation: an assessment
Creutzig, F., Ravindranath, N. H., Berndes, G., Bolwig, S., Bright, R., Cherubini, F., Chum, H., Corbera, E., Delucchi, M., Faaij, A., et al. (2015) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12205 · Cited by 752
“Emission rates can vary by as much as 700% between different crop types for the same site, fertilization rate and measurement period (Kaiser & Ruser, 2000; Don et al. , 2012; Yang et al. , 2012).”
Renewable energy and biodiversity: Implications for transitioning to a Green Economy
Gasparatos, A., Doll, C. N. H., Esteban, M., Ahmed, A., & Olang, T. A. (2016) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.08.030 · Cited by 618
The potential land requirements and related land use change emissions of solar energy
de Ven, D.-J. V., Capellán‐Pérez, I., Arto, I., Cazcarro, I., de Castro, C., Patel, P., & González‐Eguino, M. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-82042-5 · Cited by 378
Biomass for energy in the European Union - a review of bioenergy resource assessments
Bentsen, N. S., & Felby, C. (2012) · Biotechnology for Biofuels · doi:10.1186/1754-6834-5-25 · Cited by 288
“Models tend to be static and work on a national or regional geographical and not validated against local empirical data [84,91].”
BackgroundEnvironmental costs and benefits of growing Miscanthus for bioenergy in the UK
McCalmont, J. P., Hastings, A., McNamara, N. P., Richter, G. M., Robson, P., Donnison, I. S., & Clifton‐Brown, J. (2017) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12294 · Cited by 244
“Dedicated perennial energy crops, produced on existing, lower grade, agricultural land, offer a sustainable alternative with significant savings in greenhouse gas emissions and soil carbon sequestration when produced with appropriate management (Crutzen et al., 2008; Hastings et al., 2008, 2012; Cherubini et al., 2009…”
BackgroundSelf-citationPanoutsou, C., Germer, S., Karka, P., Papadokostantakis, S., Kroyan, Y., Wojcieszyk, M., Maniatis, K., Marchand, P., & Landalv, I. (2021) · Energy Strategy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.esr.2021.100633 · Cited by 233
“Direct & indirect land use change [187]: although the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/807 [188] encourages the production of biomass raw materials: ‘under circumstances that avoid ILUC effects, by virtue of having been cultivated on unused, abandoned or severely degraded land .”
BackgroundBioenergy from “surplus” land: environmental and socio-economic implications
Dauber, J., Brown, C., Fernando, A. L., Finnan, J., Krasuska, E., Ponitka, J., Styles, D., Thrän, D., Van Groenigen, K. J., Weih, M., et al. (2012) · BioRisk · doi:10.3897/biorisk.7.3036 · Cited by 206
Clifton‐Brown, J., Hastings, A., Mos, M., McCalmont, J. P., Ashman, C., Awty‐Carroll, D., Cerazy, J., Chiang, Y., Cosentino, S., Cracroft‐Eley, W., et al. (2017) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12357 · Cited by 192
“In 2009, the planted area of Miscanthus in the United Kingdom was estimated as 13.5 Kha (Don et al., 2012) and the 2015 estimate is about 8 kha, as less successful plantation areas have been reverted to conventional agricultural crops.”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationLow stabilization of aboveground crop residue carbon in sandy soils of Swedish long-term experiments
Poeplau, C., Kätterer, T., Bolinder, M. A., Börjesson, G., Berti, A., & Lugato, E. (2014) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2014.09.010 · Cited by 180
“Nevertheless, sustainable use of straw for bioenergy production could help to reduce the area needed to cultivate bioenergy crops and therefore prevent direct or indirect land use change, which can cause substantial SOC losses (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundEquity in allocating carbon dioxide removal quotas
Pozo, C., Galán‐Martín, Á., Reiner, D. M., Dowell, N. M., & Guillén‐Gosálbez, G. (2020) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/s41558-020-0802-4 · Cited by 186
Biodiversity impacts of bioenergy production: Microalgae vs. first generation biofuels
Correa, D. F., Beyer, H. L., Possingham, H. P., Thomas-Hall, S. R., & Schenk, P. M. (2017) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.068 · Cited by 161
Can biochar reduce soil greenhouse gas emissions from a M iscanthus bioenergy crop?
Case, S. D. C., McNamara, N. P., Reay, D., & Whitaker, J. (2013) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12052 · Cited by 167
“This crop is a perennial rhizomatous C4 grass that is planted on approximately 13 500 ha of UK cropland (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundCarbon Sequestration by Perennial Energy Crops: Is the Jury Still Out?
Agostini, F., Gregory, A. S., & Richter, G. M. (2015) · BioEnergy Research · doi:10.1007/s12155-014-9571-0 · Cited by 155
Investigating the BECCS resource nexus: delivering sustainable negative emissions
Fajardy, M., Chiquier, S., & Dowell, N. M. (2018) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c8ee01676c · Cited by 148
Bioenergy for climate change mitigation: Scale and sustainability
Calvin, K., Cowie, A., Berndes, G., Arneth, A., Cherubini, F., Portugal‐Pereira, J., Grassi, G., House, J. I., Johnson, F. X., Popp, A., et al. (2021) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12863 · Cited by 151
“…biomass feedstocks on degraded land can reduce or reverse land degradation by improving soil fertility, increasing soil organic carbon and removing contaminants such as heavy metals (Don et al., 2012; Flynn et al., 2012; Robertson, Zhang, et al., 2017; Wicke et al., 2008; Witters et al., 2009).”
BackgroundSykes, A. J., MacLeod, M. J., Eory, V., Rees, R. M., Payen, F. T., Myrgiotis, V., Williams, M., Sohi, S., Hillier, J., Moran, D., et al. (2019) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.14844 · Cited by 145
A review and meta-analysis of mitigation measures for nitrous oxide emissions from crop residues
Ábalos, D., Recous, S., Butterbach‐Bahl, K., Notaris, C. D., Rittl, T. F., Topp, K., Petersen, S. O., Hansen, S., Bleken, M. A., Rees, R. M., et al. (2022) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154388 · Cited by 138
“Heat and power generation from anaerobic digestion may partially substitute fossil fuels and thereby reduce radiative forcing from anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundConsensus, uncertainties and challenges for perennial bioenergy crops and land use
Whitaker, J., Field, J. L., Bernacchi, C. J., Cerri, C. E. P., Ceulemans, R., Davies, C. A., DeLucia, E. H., Donnison, I. S., McCalmont, J. P., Paustian, K., et al. (2018) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12488 · Cited by 131
“…land use has been widely proposed as a key predictor of ΔC, with transitions from grassland to perennial bioenergy crops purported to have more detrimental effects on soil carbon stocks than transitions from annual crops (Don et al., 2012; Walter et al., 2015; Qin et al., 2016; Rowe et al., 2016).”
BackgroundInfluentialOptimal energy use of agricultural crop residues preserving soil organic carbon stocks in Europe
Monforti-Ferrario, F., Lugato, E., Motola, V., Bódis, K., Scarlat, N., & Dallemand, J.-F. (2015) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.033 · Cited by 137
“Nevertheless, important concerns still exist on the potential depletion of soil organic carbon—SOC thereafter [3], that may partially offset the environmental suitability and convenience of a large-scale bioenergy production policy [19,5,9] involving agricultural residues.”
BackgroundKokkinos, K., Karayannis, V., & Moustakas, K. G. (2020) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137754 · Cited by 124
The contribution of switchgrass in reducing GHG emissions
Monti, A., Barbanti, L., Zatta, A., & Zegada‐Lizarazu, W. (2012) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01142.x · Cited by 119
Self-citationDjomo, S. N., Ač, A., Zenone, T., Groote, T. D., Bergante, S., Facciotto, G., Sixto, H., Ciria, P., Weger, J., & Ceulemans, R. (2014) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.08.058 · Cited by 119
“Currently there are about 50 kha of SWRCs established in the EU [7].”
BackgroundSelf-citationEconomic evaluation of short rotation coppice systems for energy from biomass—A review
Hauk, S., Knoke, T., & Wittkopf, S. (2013) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.103 · Cited by 121
Lignocellulosic biomass for bioenergy beyond intensive cropland and forests
Meerbeek, K. V., Muys, B., & Hermy, M. (2018) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2018.12.009 · Cited by 114
Changes in soil carbon stocks under perennial and annual bioenergy crops
Ferchaud, F., Vitte, G., & Mary, B. (2016) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12249 · Cited by 111
“Variation in SOC stock is a key term when calculating the GHG balance in bioenergy production (Don et al., 2011).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialBaral, K. R., Labouriau, R., Olesen, J. E., & Petersen, S. O. (2017) · Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2017.01.012 · Cited by 104
Manici, L. M., Caputo, F., Fornasier, F., Paletto, A., Ceotto, E., & MEO, I. D. (2024) · Ecological Indicators · doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.111796 · Cited by 107
Ábalos, D., Brown, S. E., VanderZaag, A., Gordon, R. J., Dunfield, K. E., & Wagner‐Riddle, C. (2015) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.13137 · Cited by 114
“Moreover, one of the mechanisms by which perennial crops may reduce N2O emissions compared to annuals is by diminishing the build-up of soil mineral N concentrations during the winter/fall months (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialNitrogen leaching losses after biogas residue application to maize
Svoboda, N., Taube, F., Wienforth, B., Kluß, C., Kage, H., & Herrmann, A. (2013) · Soil and Tillage Research · doi:10.1016/j.still.2013.02.006 · Cited by 101
A synthesis of the ecosystem services impact of second generation bioenergy crop production
Holland, R. A., Eigenbrod, F., Muggeridge, A. H., Brown, G., Clarke, D., & Taylor, G. (2015) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.003 · Cited by 109
Prospects for Improving Irrigated Agriculture in Southern Africa: Linking Water, Energy and Food
Mabhaudhi, T., Mpandeli, S., Nhamo, L., Chimonyo, V. G. P., Nhemachena, C., Senzanje, A., Naidoo, D., & Modi, A. T. (2018) · Water · doi:10.3390/w10121881 · Cited by 103
“However, the net emissions associated with biomass use for energy services can easily be negated because of the complexity of challenges emanating from potential changes in land use and land management, and its apparent demand on resources—energy, water and nitrogen [49].”
BackgroundWagner, M., Mangold, A., Lask, J., Petig, E., Kiesel, A., & Lewandowski, I. M. (2018) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12567 · Cited by 100
Zona, D., Janssens, I. A., Aubinet, M., Gioli, B., Vicca, S., Fichot, R., & Ceulemans, R. (2013) · Agricultural and Forest Meteorology · doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.10.008 · Cited by 93
Potential of land-based climate change mitigation strategies on abandoned cropland
Gvein, M. H., Hu, X., Næss, J. S., Watanabe, M. D. B., Cavalett, O., Malbranque, M., Kindermann, G., & Cherubini, F. (2023) · Communications Earth & Environment · doi:10.1038/s43247-023-00696-7 · Cited by 105
The effect of biomass harvesting on greenhouse gas emissions from a rewetted temperate fen
Günther, A. B., Huth, V., Jurasinski, G., et al. (2014) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12214 · Cited by 97
“To avoid conflicts with food security, energy crop production will likely be restricted to marginal or abandoned agricultural land (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialVentura, M., Alberti, G., Viger, M., Jenkins, J. R., Girardin, C., Baronti, S., Zaldei, A., Taylor, G., Rumpel, C., Miglietta, F., et al. (2014) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12219 · Cited by 102
“This choice was made because of the increasing importance of SRC as one of the most efficient agricultural systems to meet European greenhouse gas reduction targets (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundWinkler, B., Mangold, A., von Cossel, M., Clifton-Brown, J., Pogrzeba, M., Lewandowski, I., Iqbal, Y., & Kiesel, A. (2020) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2020.110053 · Cited by 94
“Combustion is currently the most common utilisation pathway in Europe [54–56].”
BackgroundInfluentialFerrarini, A., Serra, P., Almagro, M., Trevisan, M., & Amaducci, S. (2017) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.052 · Cited by 91
Gabrielle, B., Bamière, L., Caldés, N., de Cara, S., Decocq, G., Ferchaud, F., Loyce, C., Pelzer, E., Perez, Y., Wohlfahrt, J., et al. (2014) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.050 · Cited by 94
Ventura, M., Alberti, G., Panzacchi, P., Vedove, G. D., Miglietta, F., & Tonon, G. (2018) · Biology and Fertility of Soils · doi:10.1007/s00374-018-1329-y · Cited by 93
“The experiment was conducted on a SRC plantation because of the increasing importance of SRCs as bioenergy crops to meet European greenhouse gas reduction targets (Don et al. 2012).”
BackgroundMethodWater use efficiency of perennial and annual bioenergy crops in central Illinois
Zeri, M., Hussain, M. Z., Anderson‐Teixeira, K. J., DeLucia, E. H., & Bernacchi, C. J. (2013) · Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences · doi:10.1002/jgrg.20052 · Cited by 88
“…be considered in selecting economically and environmentally viable feedstocks for biofuel production from cellulosic material, including harvestable yield, net carbon balance, nitrogen pollution, and water use [Hill et al., 2006; Jordan et al., 2007; Searchinger et al., 2008; Don et al., 2012].”
BackgroundPoeplau, C., & Don, A. (2014) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12043 · Cited by 89
“Large attempts have been made to foster the use of biomass for fuels and as solid energy sources, leading to a doubling of the European bioenergy production during the last 15 years (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationPugesgaard, S., Schelde, K., Larsen, S. U., Lærke, P. E., & Jørgensen, U. (2014) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12215 · Cited by 85
“The values for willow corresponds well to the analysis of Don et al. (2012) who based on European studies concluded that willow or poplar established on former cropland are able to sequester 0.44 Mg ha 1 yr 1 C.”
BackgroundInfluentialMitigating N 2 O emissions from soil: from patching leaks to transformative action
Decock, C., Lee, J., Necpálová, M., Pereira, E. I. P., Tendall, D. M., & Six, J. (2015) · SOIL · doi:10.5194/soil-1-687-2015 · Cited by 84
On the Sustainability of Renewable Energy Sources
Edenhofer, O., Seyboth, K., Creutzig, F., & Schlömer, S. (2013) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-051012-145344 · Cited by 87
“At the same time, emission rates vary enormously between crops (49) and for different nitrogen fertilizer application rates (50).”
BackgroundA survey of carbon sequestration potential of orchards and vineyards in Italy
Scandellari, F., Caruso, G. M., Liguori, G., Meggio, F., Assunta, M. P., Zanotelli, D., Celano, G., Gucci, R., Inglese, P., Pitacco, A., et al. (2016) · European Journal of Horticultural Science · doi:10.17660/ejhs.2016/81.2.4 · Cited by 81
“In recent years, there has been an increasing interest on the C cycle in terrestrial ecosystems (Don et al., 2012; Eglin et al., 2010).”
BackgroundMirzabaev, A., Guta, D. D., Goedecke, J. F. M., et al. (2015) · Water International · doi:10.1080/02508060.2015.1048924 · Cited by 79
“industrial and municipal solid wastes and other biological resources (Don et al., 2012; Kaygusuz, 2010).”
BackgroundThe availability of land for perennial energy crops in Great Britain
Lovett, A., Sünnenberg, G., & Dockerty, T. (2014) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12147 · Cited by 78
“short rotation coppice (SRC) willow) with a restricted range of alternate uses but greater energy generation efficiency and higher greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation potential (Karp & Shield, 2008; Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundLiu, T., Huffman, T., Kulshreshtha, S., McConkey, B., Du, Y., Green, M., Liu, J., Shang, J., & Geng, X. (2017) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.07.126 · Cited by 77
UK emissions of the greenhouse gas nitrous oxide
Skiba, U., Jones, S. K., Dragosits, U., Drewer, J., Fowler, D., Rees, R. M., Pappa, V. A., Cardenas, L. M., Chadwick, D. R., Yamulki, S., et al. (2012) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2011.0356 · Cited by 74
Self-citationHastings, A., Tallis, M. J., Casella, E., Matthews, R., Henshall, P. A., Milner, S., Smith, P., & Taylor, G. (2013) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12103 · Cited by 77
“Within Europe, future scenarios suggest that 44–53 Mha of cultivated land could be used for bioenergy feedstock production by 2030 (i.e. more than a 1000% increase of land for this use) (Fischer et al., 2010; Don et al., 2011).”
BackgroundSelf-citationLamers, P., Thiffault, É., Paré, D., & Junginger, M. (2013) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2013.02.002 · Cited by 77
Sieling, K., Herrmann, A., Wienforth, B., Taube, F., Ohl, S., Hartung, E., & Kage, H. (2013) · European Journal of Agronomy · doi:10.1016/j.eja.2013.01.002 · Cited by 77
Knoblauch, C., Priyadarshani, S. H. R., Haefele, S. M., Schröder, N., & Pfeiffer, E. (2021) · European Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.1111/ejss.13088 · Cited by 79
“Furthermore, organic amendments may again increase SOC stocks if they have prolonged turnover times.”
BackgroundInfluentialLangeveld, H., Quist-Wessel, F. P. M., Dimitriou, I., Aronsson, P., Baum, C., Schulz, U., Bolte, A., Baum, S., Köhn, J., Weih, M., et al. (2012) · BioEnergy Research · doi:10.1007/s12155-012-9235-x · Cited by 69
Economic evaluation of introduction of poplar as biomass crop in Italy
Testa, R., Trapani, A. M. D., Foderà, M., Sgroi, F., & Tudisca, S. (2014) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.054 · Cited by 69
Miscanthus biomass productivity within US croplands and its potential impact on soil organic carbon
Mishra, U., Torn, M. S., & Fingerman, K. (2013) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2012.01201.x · Cited by 67
No general soil carbon sequestration under Central European short rotation coppices
Walter, K., Don, A., & Flessa, H. (2014) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12177 · Cited by 67
“Thus, management-induced GHG emissions are low and also the GHG balance of SRC wood is better than that of annual crops (Adler et al., 2007; Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationTallis, M. J., Casella, E., Henshall, P. A., Aylott, M. J., Randle, T. J., Morison, J. I. L., & Taylor, G. (2012) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2012.01191.x · Cited by 66
“, 2009, 2011a), increased soil organic carbon content (Baum et al., 2009; Don et al., 2011) and reduced nitrogen fertilization and greenhouse gas emissions through the life cycle of the plantation (Hillier et al.”
BackgroundBordonal, R. D. O., Lal, R., Ronquim, C. C., de Figueiredo, E. B., Carvalho, J. L. N., Maldonado, W., Milori, D. M. B. P., & Scala, N. L. (2017) · Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2017.02.016 · Cited by 68
Direct nitrous oxide emissions from oilseed rape cropping – a meta‐analysis
Walter, K., Don, A., Fuß, R., Kern, J., Drewer, J., & Flessa, H. (2014) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12223 · Cited by 65
“One of the most important contributions to the GHG balance of biofuels is N2O that is emitted from soils during biofuel feedstock production (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundSelf-citationMiscanthus × giganteus leaf senescence, decomposition and C and N inputs to soil
Amougou, N., Bertrand, I., Cadoux, S., & Recous, S. (2012) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2012.01192.x · Cited by 64
“+ 33 3 26 77 35 83, fax + 33 3 26 77 35 99, e-mail: sylvie.recous@reims.inra.fr 698 © 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd ecosystem services, but relevant data for perennial bioenergy crops are scarce (Beringer et al., 2011; Don et al., 2011).”
BackgroundInfluentialChen, J., Lærke, P. E., & Jørgensen, U. (2022) · Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2022.107907 · Cited by 64
Bais-Moleman, A. L., Schulp, C., & Verburg, P. (2019) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.11.042 · Cited by 51
Initial soil C and land‐use history determine soil C sequestration under perennial bioenergy crops
Rowe, R. L., Keith, A. M., Elias, D., Dondini, M., Smith, P., Oxley, J., & McNamara, N. P. (2016) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12311 · Cited by 59
“These sources of variability can help to improve understanding of the mechanisms underlying changes in soil C stock, but comparison of studies can also be confounded by differences in quantification methods (Don et al., 2012; B arcena et al., 2014).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialBerhongaray, G., El Kasmioui, O., & Ceulemans, R. (2013) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2013.07.003 · Cited by 61
“[30] Don A, Osborne B, Hastings A, Skiba U, Carter MS, Drewer J, et al.”
BackgroundDjomo, S. N., Kasmioui, O. E., Groote, T. D., Broeckx, L. S., Verlinden, M. S., Berhongaray, G., Fichot, R., Zona, D., Dillen, S. Y., King, J. S., et al. (2013) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.05.017 · Cited by 63
Self-citationSoil water uptake and root distribution of different perennial and annual bioenergy crops
Ferchaud, F., Vitte, G., Bornet, F., Strullu, L., & Mary, B. (2014) · Plant and Soil · doi:10.1007/s11104-014-2335-y · Cited by 60
“…referred to as miscanthus) or Panicum virgatum (hereafter referred to as switchgrass) are considered as promising energy crops because of their high biomass production, low nutrient requirements and low greenhouse gas emissions (Cadoux et al. 2014; Don et al. 2011; Somerville et al. 2010).”
BackgroundChange, I. P. O. C. (2022) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009157988.008 · Cited by 78
Wang, D., Shi, C., Khan, A., Kwon, S., Pan, L., Zhu, Y., & Yang, X. (2022) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153378 · Cited by 55
Morrison, E., Drewer, J., & Heal, M. R. (2015) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12257 · Cited by 55
“Ebel et al. (1995) observed a significant increase in several BVOC compounds in the emissions from droughtstressed apple leaves.”
Self-citationMachine Learning Approach to Simulate Soil CO2 Fluxes under Cropping Systems
Adjuik, T. A., & Davis, S. C. (2022) · Agronomy · doi:10.3390/agronomy12010197 · Cited by 56
“Although the study [28] was only conducted on one cropping system (a 6-year-old miscanthus stand), previous studies have shown that switching from conventional annual crops such as corn, to perennial bioenergy crops such as miscanthus, could significantly reduce GHG fluxes due to the limited fertilizer application nee…”
BackgroundRodríguez‐Soalleiro, R., Eimil‐Fraga, C., Gómez-García, E., García-Villabrille, J. D., Alboreca, A. R., Muñoz, F., Oliveira, N., Sixto, H., & Pérez‐Cruzado, C. (2018) · Forest Ecosystems · doi:10.1186/s40663-018-0154-y · Cited by 56
Schmidt‐Walter, P., & Lamersdorf, N. P. (2012) · BioEnergy Research · doi:10.1007/s12155-012-9237-8 · Cited by 55
Aust, C., Schweier, J., Brodbeck, F., Sauter, U. H., Becker, G., & Schnitzler, J. (2013) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12083 · Cited by 59
“…& Faaij, 2006; van Dam et al., 2008; Mola-Yudego & Pelkonen, 2008), biological constraints such as plant diseases and pests (Covarelli et al., 2013), as well as effects of direct land use changes (Fargione et al., 2008; Don et al., 2011), might also reduce the potential of land availability.”
BackgroundAccumulation of soil organic carbon after cropland conversion to short‐rotation willow and poplar
Georgiadis, P., Vesterdal, L., Stupak, I., & Raulund‐Rasmussen, K. (2017) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12416 · Cited by 57
“…of C as a result of intensive management (Davidson & Ackerman, 1993; Richter et al., 1999) and have been shown to have larger potential for soil C accumulation after conversion to SRWC compared to other land uses such as grasslands or other perennial crops (Poeplau et al., 2011; Don et al., 2012).”
ResultEickenscheidt, T., Freibauer, A., Heinichen, J., Augustin, J., & Drösler, M. (2014) · Biogeosciences · doi:10.5194/bg-11-6187-2014 · Cited by 55
“The strong increase in the number of biogas plants caused a land-use change towards agro-biomass production and additionally raised land-use in- tensity to satisfy the huge demand for fermentative substrates (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundSelf-citationMaleki, M., Arriga, N., Barrios, J. M., Wieneke, S., Liu, Q., Peñuelas, J., Janssens, I. A., & Balzarolo, M. (2020) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs12132104 · Cited by 49
“They enrich farm-scale biodiversity [4], increase soil organic carbon stock [5,6], improve groundwater quality [7] and help in preventing pests and diseases.”
BackgroundCarbon fluxes and budgets of intensive crop rotations in two regional climates of southwest Germany
Poyda, A., Wizemann, H., Ingwersen, J., Eshonkulov, R., Högy, P., Demyan, M. S., Kremer, P., Wulfmeyer, V., & Streck, T. (2019) · Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2019.02.011 · Cited by 53
Soil carbon stocks in different bioenergy cropping systems including subsoil
Gauder, M., Billen, N., Zikeli, S., Laub, M., Graeff-Hönninger, S., & Claupein, W. (2016) · Soil and Tillage Research · doi:10.1016/j.still.2015.09.005 · Cited by 51
Comparative Review on the Production and Purification of Bioethanol from Biomass: A Focus on Corn
Assaf, J. C., Mortada, Z., Rezzoug, S.-A., Maache-Rezzoug, Z., Debs, E., & Louka, N. (2024) · Processes · doi:10.3390/pr12051001 · Cited by 51
Global relative species loss due to first‐generation biofuel production for the transport sector
Elshout, P. M. F., van Zelm, R., van der Velde, M., Steinmann, Z. J. N., & Huijbregts, M. A. J. (2019) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12597 · Cited by 56
Nazlı, R. İ., Tansı, V., Öztürk, H. H., & Kuşvuran, A. (2018) · Industrial Crops and Products · doi:10.1016/j.indcrop.2018.08.090 · Cited by 51
Recent Genetic Gains in Nitrogen Use Efficiency in Oilseed Rape
Stahl, A., Pfeifer, M., Frisch, M., Wittkop, B., & Snowdon, R. J. (2017) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2017.00963 · Cited by 56
“Thus, increasing yields reduces indirect land-use change due to oilseed rape production (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundIntroducing Miscanthus to the greening measures of the EU Common Agricultural Policy
Emmerling, C., & Pude, R. (2017) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12409 · Cited by 44
Qin, Z., Zhuang, Q., & Cai, X. (2014) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12212 · Cited by 54
“A considerable amount of C is assimilated and stored in the belowground biomass and soils, which fosters benefits for carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration (Don et al., 2012; Monti et al., 2012).”
BackgroundPerrin, A., Wohlfahrt, J., Morandi, F., Østergård, H., Flatberg, T., de la Rúa, C., Bjørkvoll, T., & Gabrielle, B. (2017) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.06.093 · Cited by 52
Solinas, S., Tiloca, M. T., Deligios, P. A., Cossu, M., & Ledda, L. (2020) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102989 · Cited by 49
Chariton, A. A., Sun, M., Gibson, J. F., Webb, J. A., Leung, K., Hickey, C. W., & Hose, G. C. (2015) · Marine and Freshwater Research · doi:10.1071/mf15190 · Cited by 47
Murphy, F., Devlin, G. J., & McDonnell, K. P. (2013) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12111 · Cited by 49
“The magnitude of any greenhouse gas mitigation benefit depends strongly on the previous land use and former carbon stock levels (Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundPoplar Short Rotation Coppice Plantations under Mediterranean Conditions: The Case of Spain
Oliveira, N., Pérez‐Cruzado, C., Cañellas, I., Rodríguez‐Soalleiro, R., & Sixto, H. (2020) · Forests · doi:10.3390/f11121352 · Cited by 63
The Potential of the Bioenergy Market in the European Union—An Overview of Energy Biomass Resources
Wieruszewski, M., & Mydlarz, K. (2022) · Energies · doi:10.3390/en15249601 · Cited by 51
Greenhouse gas balance of cropland conversion to bioenergy poplar short-rotation coppice
Sabbatini, S., Arriga, N., Bertolini, T., Castaldi, S., Chiti, T., Consalvo, C. D., Djomo, S. N., Gioli, B., Matteucci, G., & Papale, D. (2016) · Biogeosciences · doi:10.5194/bg-13-95-2016 · Cited by 42
“The estimated annual SOC accumulation rate was in the range of that reported by Don et al. (2012) for SRCs (0.44± 0.43 Mg C ha−1 y−1), which explained how the frequent harvest of above-ground biomass was likely to facilitate the die-off of the roots that contributes to SOC accumulation.”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationKhan, U., Janjuhah, H. T., Kontakiotis, G., Rehman, A., & Zarkogiannis, S. D. (2021) · Journal of Marine Science and Engineering · doi:10.3390/jmse9101109 · Cited by 42
Albanito, F., Hastings, A., Fitton, N., Richards, M., Martin, M., Dowell, N. M., Bell, D. A., Taylor, S. C., Butnar, I., Li, P., et al. (2019) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12630 · Cited by 42
“Previous research has shown that the LUC effects on SOC stocks vary with quality of the soil being converted, with degraded soil offering more LUC benefits than rich soils (Cherubini et al., 2009; Crutzen, Mosier, Smith, & Winiwarter, 2008; Don et al., 2012; Gregory et al., 2018; Hastings et al., 2008, Hastings, Yelur…”
BackgroundSelf-citationA flexible parametric model for a balanced account of forest carbon fluxes in LCA
Rosa, M. D., Schmidt, J. H., Brandão, M., & Pizzol, M. (2016) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-016-1148-z · Cited by 48
“The calculation of soil organic carbon is complex and requires specific on site observation to be accurate (Anderson-Teixeira et al. 2009, Don et al. 2012).”
BackgroundMaenhout, P., Bene, C. D., Cayuela, M. L., Díaz‐Pinés, E., Govednik, A., Keuper, F., Mavsar, S., Mihelič, R., O’Toole, A., Schwarzmann, A., et al. (2024) · European Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.1111/ejss.13515 · Cited by 42
“Permanent cropping reduces soil NO 3 (cid:1) leaching compared to arable crops (Don et al., 2012; Novak & Fiorelli, 2010).”
BackgroundEvaluating ecosystem processes in willow short rotation coppice bioenergy plantations
Rowe, R. L., Goulson, D., Doncaster, C. P., Clarke, D. J., Taylor, G., & Hanley, M. E. (2013) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12040 · Cited by 42
“Willow (Salix spp) short rotation coppice (SRC) is one of the most widely planted second generation bioenergy crop in Europe, with the area cultivated expected to increase greatly by 2050 (Rowe et al., 2009; Don et al., 2012).”
BackgroundBosco, S., Nasso, N. N. O. D., Roncucci, N., Mazzoncini, M., & Bonari, E. (2016) · European Journal of Agronomy · doi:10.1016/j.eja.2016.04.006 · Cited by 40
“…nitrous oxide and nitrate losses could be attributed to PRGs compared to 416 conventional cropping systems owing to their higher nitrogen use efficiency (Lewandowski and 417 Schmidt, 2006; Lemus et al., 2008; Nassi o di Nasso et al., 2011, 2013; Don et al., 2012; Roncucci 418 et al., 2014).”
BackgroundHarris, Z. M., Alberti, G., Viger, M., Jenkins, J. R., Rowe, R., McNamara, N. P., & Taylor, G. (2017) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12347 · Cited by 40
“A number of studies and meta-analyses have suggested that, although dependant on site, LUC from arable cropping to 2G bioenergy is most likely to result in neutral or net increases in soil carbon (Dimitriou et al., 2012; Don et al., 2012; Harris et al., 2015; Qin et al., 2015).”
BackgroundInfluential
Metadata
- Authors
- Don, A., Osborne, B., Hastings, A., Skiba, U., Carter, M. S., Drewer, J., Flessa, H., Freibauer, A., Hyvönen, N., Jones, M. B., Lanigan, G. J., Mander, Ü., Monti, A., Djomo, S. N., Valentine, J., Walter, K., Zegada‐Lizarazu, W., & Zenone, T.
- Affiliations
- Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (DE)
- University College Dublin (IE)
- University of Aberdeen (GB)
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (GB)
- Technical University of Denmark (DK)
- University of Eastern Finland (FI)
- Trinity College Dublin (IE)
- Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority (IE)
- University of Tartu (EE)
- University of Bologna (IT)
- University of Antwerp (BE)
- Aberystwyth University (GB)
- University of Toledo (US)
- Corresponding author
- Don, Axel
- ORCID
- Venue
- GCB Bioenergy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-09-04
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 372-391
- ISSN
- 1757-1693 (ISSN-L)
- 1757-1707
- OpenAlex
- W2157918818
- Cited by
- 363
- References
- 151
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 46.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- GCB Bioenergy (publishedVersion)
- Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- CNR ExploRA (submittedVersion)
- NERC Open Research Archive (Natural Environment Research Council) (submittedVersion)
- OpenAgrar (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- European Commission (244122)
- Natural Environment Research Council (NE/F014961/1)
- FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (233366)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Bioenergy crop production and management
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Biofuel production and bioconversion
- Keywords
- energy crops, land use change, greenhouse gas balance, soil carbon sequestration, nitrous oxide emissions, methane emissions, carbon footprint, perennial energy crops, short rotation coppice, Miscanthus, nitrogen use efficiency, climate change mitigation, Europe
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
