Assessment of Miscanthus Yield Potential from Strip-Mined Lands (SML) and Its Impacts on Stream Water Quality
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Strip-mined land (SML) disturbed by coal mining is a non-crop land resource that can be utilized to cultivate high-yielding energy crops such as miscanthus for bioenergy applications. However, the biomass yield potential, annual availability, and environmental impacts of growing energy crops in SML are less understood. In this study, we estimated the yield potential of miscanthus (Miscanthus sinensis) in SML and its environmental impacts on local streams using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT). After calibration and validation of the SWAT model, the results demonstrated that miscanthus yield potentials were 2.6 (0.8−5.53), 10.0 (1.3−16.0), and 16.0 (1.34−26.0) Mg ha−1 with fertilizer application rates of 0, 100, and 200 kg-N ha−1, respectively. Furthermore, cultivation of miscanthus in SML has the potential to reduce sediment (~20%) and nitrate (2.5−10.0%) loads reaching water streams, with a marginal increase in phosphorus load. The available SML in the United States could produce about 10 to 16 dry Tg of biomass per year without negatively impacting the water quality. In conclusion, SML can provide a unique opportunity to produce biomass for bioenergy applications, while improving stream water quality in a highly dense mining area (the Appalachian region) in the United States.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Cellulosic biofuel contributions to a sustainable energy future: Choices and outcomes
Robertson, G. P., Hamilton, S. K., Barham, B. L., Dale, B. E., Izaurralde, R. C., Jackson, R. D., Landis, D. A., Swinton, S. M., Thelen, K. D., & Tiedje, J. M. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aal2324 · Cited by 440 · see citing works
Costs of producing miscanthus and switchgrass for bioenergy in Illinois
Khanna, M., Dhungana, B., & Clifton-Brown, J. (2008) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.11.003 · Cited by 425 · see citing works
Arundale, R. A., Dohleman, F. G., Voigt, T. B., & Long, S. P. (2014) · BioEnergy Research · doi:10.1007/s12155-013-9385-5 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Nitrogen fertilization challenges the climate benefit of cellulosic biofuels
Ruan, L., Bhardwaj, A. K., Hamilton, S. K., & Robertson, G. P. (2016) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/6/064007 · Cited by 85 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The various nitrogen application rates to cultivate 346 miscanthus simulate the biomass yield potential [44,45].”
BackgroundMiscanthus 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 · see citing works
Carbon Life Cycle Assessment for Prairie as a Crop in Reclaimed Mine Land
Guzman, J. G., Lal, R., Byrd, S., Apfelbaum, S. I., & Thompson, R. L. (2016) · Land Degradation & Development · doi:10.1002/ldr.2291 · Cited by 38 · cited 1× · see citing works
“SMLs are naturally very low in nutrients and are more susceptible 70 to poor soil and water quality, if they are targetted for higher biomass yield for bioenergy 71 applications [22,23].”
BackgroundSwitchgrass Biofuel Production on Reclaimed Surface Mines: I. Soil Quality and Dry Matter Yield
Brown, C., Griggs, T., Keene, T., Marra, M., & Skousen, J. (2016) · BioEnergy Research · doi:10.1007/s12155-015-9658-2 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Miscanthus agronomy and bioenergy feedstock potential on minesoils.
Ussiri, D. A. N., & Lal, R. (2014) · Biofuels · doi:10.1080/17597269.2015.1024388 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
RECLAMATION OF MINED LAND WITH SWITCHGRASS, MISCANTHUS, AND ARUNDO FOR BIOFUEL PRODUCTION
West Virginia University, M. W. 2., Skousen, J., Keene, T., Marra, M., & Gutta, B. (2013) · Journal American Society of Mining and Reclamation · doi:10.21000/jasmr13010177 · Cited by 20 · cited 2× · see citing works
“9 to 21 dry Mg ha−1 due to the variations in the management/agronomic practices, climate, and soil based on the recently established (3-4 years) miscanthus stands [16].”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Sahoo, K., Milewski, A. M., Mani, S., Hoghooghi, N., & Panda, S. S.
- Affiliations
- University of Georgia (US)
- University of North Georgia (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sahoo, Kamalakanta
- Venue
- Water
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2019-03-16
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 546
- ISSN
- 2073-4441 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2910441032
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5
- FWCI
- 3.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- dx.doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Water (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Preprints.org (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Agriculture (Grant # 2012-1008-2032)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Bioenergy crop production and management
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Soil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
- Keywords
- Miscanthus sinensis, coal mining, energy crops, stream water quality, sediment load, nitrate loading, phosphorus loading, fertilizer use, bioenergy, Appalachia, SWAT model
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
