To avoid carbon debt, CRP beats fields of corn, soybeans

August 9, 2011

Farmers and policymakers should wait before converting Conservation Reserve Program land to corn and soybean production, according to a Michigan State University study.

The study, which appears in the current issue of the , focuses on CRP land, a federal program encouraging farmers to grow natural vegetative cover rather than , and its role in the production of biofuels. A team of MSU researchers shows directly for the first time that the carbon costs of converting these lands to corn and soybeans is high – even when care is taken to protect soil carbon from loss by using no-till cultivation practices.

Carbon debt results from carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases released when land is converted from natural vegetation to agriculture. It's called debt because until a new biofuel crop creates enough renewable fuel to offset the lost CO2, the new biofuel crop has no climate benefit. In fact, it's the same as burning fossil fuel as far as the atmosphere is concerned, said Ilya Gelfand, MSU postdoctoral researcher who worked with the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center.

"Conversion creates carbon debt, which must be paid off before the biofuel crop can provide climate mitigation benefits," he said. "No-till practices (planting without plowing) reduced by two-thirds the amount of debt created by the conversion, but still it would take 29 to 40 years for it to be repaid by growing corn and for biofuel."

Alternatively, growing CRP grasses harvested for cellulosic ethanol would create no debt and provide immediate energy and climate mitigation benefits, he added.

"The conversion of CRP lands to corn and has a larger climate consequence than has been previously estimated," Gelfand said. "And much of the comes from the loss of soil that would have been stored in CRP land in the future had it not been converted."

Nationally, more than 30 million acres are set aside as CRP land, and they provide significant climate, wildlife and other conservation benefits, said Phil Robertson, a co-author and MSU professor of crop and soil sciences.

"Growing CRP grasses rather than using the land for corn or corn-soybean production could maintain these benefits indefinitely while providing a valuable bioenergy feedstock," he said. "It could be a win-win for and the environment once a market for cellulosic biofuel develops."

The GLBRC team also included MSU researchers Poonam Jasrotia and Stephen Hamilton as well as scientists from the University of Toledo. The study was performed at Michigan State's Kellogg Biological Station in partnership with MSU's Long-term Ecological Research program funded by the National Science Foundation.

Explore further: Diverse landscapes are better: Policymakers urged to think broadly about biofuel crops

Related Stories

Biofuel carbon footprint not as big as feared, research says

January 15, 2009

Publications ranging from the journal Science to Time magazine have blasted biofuels for significantly contributing to greenhouse gas emissions, calling into question the environmental benefits of making fuel from plant material. ...

Study critiques corn-for-ethanol's carbon footprint

March 2, 2009

To avoid creating greenhouse gases, it makes more sense using today's technology to leave land unfarmed in conservation reserves than to plow it up for corn to make biofuel, according to a comprehensive Duke University-led ...

In search of wildlife-friendly biofuels

October 1, 2009

When society jumps on a bandwagon, even for a good cause, there may be unintended consequences. The unintended consequence of crop-based biofuels may be the loss of wildlife habitat, particularly that of the birds who call ...

Recommended for you

Playing 'tag' with pollution lets scientists see who's 'it'

July 29, 2015

Using a climate model that can tag sources of soot from different global regions and can track where it lands on the Tibetan Plateau, researchers have determined which areas around the plateau contribute the most soot—and ...

2 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

omatumr
1 / 5 (4) Aug 09, 2011
Post-modern consensus science, personal attacks, and smear tactics have been used as propaganda tools to promote the global climate scam since 1971 .

The decision was apparently made during Kissingers secret visit to China in 1971 [1] to use Anthropologic Global Climate Change as the common enemy to:

a.) Unite Nations;
b.) End the Cold War, the Space Race; and
c.) The threat of Mutual Nuclear Annihilation.

In an attempt to negate the Suns obvious control over Earths climate, the model [2] of a homogeneous Sun in hydrostatic equilibrium became official government dogma.

1. The Bilderberg Sun, Climategate & Economic Crisis
http://dl.dropbox...oots.pdf

2. The Bilderberg Model of the Photosphere and Low Chromosphere
http://adsabs.har...oPh.3.5G

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
omatumr
1 / 5 (3) Aug 09, 2011
Former President Eisenhower warned us of this dangerous misuse of government science in 1961 - a decade before Henry Kissinger visited China:

President Eisenhower, "Science vs. Propaganda" (17 Jan 1961)

www.youtube.com/w...ld5PR4ts

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.