Soil Health and Water Quality Impacts of Growing Energy Beets for

Advanced Biofuel Production in North-Central United States

Zhulu LinAgricultural & Biosystems Engineering Department

North Dakota State University at Fargo

USDA-NIFA Project Director’s Meeting, Washington DCOctober 12-13, 2016

Co-PIs• Carrington Research and Extension Center

(CREC), NDSU– Mr. Blaine Schatz, director and agronomist– Dr. Michael Ostlie, agronomist– Dr. Jasper Teboh, soil scientist

• Dept. of Agribusiness & Applied Economics, NDSU– Dr. David Ripplinger, bioenergy economist

• School of Natural Resource Sciences, NDSU– Dr. Caley Gasch (?), microbial biologist

Other Team Members

• Dept. of Ag & Biosystems Engineering, NDSU– Mr. Mohammad Anar, Ph.D. candidate– Ms. Mengqi (Ivy) Xiong, M.S., graduated in May 2016

• CREC, NDSU– Ms. Szilvia Yuja, research specialist– Undergraduate summer interns

• Dept. of Agribusiness & Applied Economics– Dr. Aaron De Laporte, postdoc research associate– Mr. Asanka Wijesinghe, M.S. graduated in May 2016

Background

• EISA of 2007 or the revised Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS2) mandates the use of 36 BGY of renewable fuels of 2022:– 15 BGY of conventional biofuels– 4 BGY of advanced biofuels

• Sugarcane and sugarbeet– 16 BGY of cellulosic biofuels – 1 BGY of biomass-based biodiesel

Global Biofuel Production by Feedstock

Source: www.agri-outlook.org

Corn (US)

Sugarcane (Brazil)

Sugarbeet Production in US

Red River Valley (RRV)

Energy Beets and the RRV

Project Objectives• Field scale

1. Conduct field experiment to assess the impacts of energy beet production on soil properties and rotation crops;

2. Improve and apply the DSSAT and RZWQM models to simulate crop yields, water flow, and nutrient transport processes in energy beet fields;

• Watershed scale3. Develop a spatial econometric model to simulate land use

changes surrounding potential beet-biorefinery sites in the RRV; and

4. Apply SWAT to simulate downstream water quality impact caused by energy beet biofuel production.

Research Methods

Field Experiment

Field Measurements• Assessing impacts on soil properties and rotation

crops– Soil: texture, aggregate stability, bulk density,

hydraulic conductivity, and microbial enzyme activities (phosphatase, urease, NO3-reductase, NH4-oxidase)

– Crop: yield, plant height, grain quality, nutrient content, residue C/N

• Collecting data for sugarbeet model development– Plant growth: Leaf number, LAI, top and root mass– Soil water (4 depths): SWC, nitrate

Model Development

RZWQM

SugarbeetModels

Impr

ovem

ent &

pr

ogra

mm

ing DSSAT

Cal

ibra

tion

&

valid

atio

nAnalysis &Applications

Calibration/validation

Land Use Change and Water Quality Impact Simulations

Yields & costs (production,

transportation, opportunity)

Economic Model

Land use distribution surrounding

beet- biorefineries

SWATBeet & ethanol

prices, plant capacity

Downstream water quality

impacts

Results & Discussion

O1. Field Study Preliminary Results

Corn following soybeanCorn following energy beets

Effect of Preceding Crops on Corn

Height and Yield Starch and Protein

Soil Enzyme Assays (2nd Yr)

Phosphatase Urease0

75

150

225

300

375

Beet Corn Soybean Wheat

ug/g

Soil Enzyme Assays (2nd Yr)

NO3 Reductase NH4 Oxidase0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

Beet Corn Soybean Wheat

ug/g

O2. Model Development

• CERES-Beet improved and incorporated into DSSAT and RZWQM

• Both models calibrated and validated against 2014 and 2015 field data

• Model calibration and parameter sensitivity analysis done with PEST software

DSSAT Calibration (2014)

DSSAT Validation (2015)

Parameter Sensitivity AnalysisTotal Observations LAI Observations

Top Observations Root Observations

RZWQM Calibration (2014)

Plant growth Soil water content

Days after Planting

20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Soil

Prof

ile N

O3-

N (k

g/ha

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

SimulatedObserved

RZWQM Validation (2015)

Plant growth Soil water content

Days after Planting

20 40 60 80 100 120

Soil

Prof

ile N

O3-

N (

g/ha

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

SimulatedObserved

O3. Land Use Changes @ Five Potential Beet-Biorefinery Sites

Current Scenario (Bt: $30/ton; El: $1.5/gal)

Capacity Scenario (Bt: $35/ton; El: $1.7/gal)

¼ Transportation Scenario (Bt: $30/ton; El: $1.5/gal)

1.5 Transportation Scenario (Bt: $40/ton; El: $1.9/gal)

O4. Downstream WQ ImpactMarginal land

8.7%

Cropping Scenarios

• Sugarbeet Scenario– All arable marginal lands (8.7%) are planted with

sugarbeets (4%+8.7% = 12.7%)– Environmentally bad scenario

• Alfalfa Scenario– All currently cultivated marginal lands (2.5%) are

converted back to grassland planted with alfalfa (1.5%+2.5% = 4%)

– Environmentally good scenario

Downstream WQ Loads

Sediment Total P

Downstream WQ Loads

Nitrate Total N

Output & Impact

Output• Model/software

– Sugarbeet module added to DSSAT & RZWQM

• Thesis/dissertations (2 M.S. & 1 Ph.D.)– 2 M.S. graduated in May 2016

• Journal article (1)• Conference papers/presentations (18)

– ASABE (5), AGU (1), AWRA (1), AAEA (1), EWRC (2), Others (8)

Impact

• Regional sugarbeet producers through various extension activities

• DSSAT and RZWQM developers and users

• Regional energy beet biofuel industry• Policymakers and natural resources

managers

Acknowledgements

• USDA-NIFA Foundational Program (2013-67020-21366)

• North Dakota Renewable Energy Council• DSSAT: Dr. Gerrit Hoongenboom• RZWQM: Drs Liwang Ma & Patricia

Bartling

Thank you!