Loading…

Combining process-based models for future biomass assessment at landscape scale

We need an integrated assessment of the bioenergy production at landscape scale for at least three main reasons: (1) it is predictable that we will soon have landscapes dedicated to bioenergy productions; (2) a number of “win-win” solutions combining several dedicated energy crops have been suggeste...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Landscape ecology 2010-02, Vol.25 (2), p.201-215
Main Authors: Gaucherel, C, Griffon, S, Misson, L, Houet, T
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-570f645833adaf6d5828765bfc489ad10df45c0877523a3dbafb8672255914bc3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-570f645833adaf6d5828765bfc489ad10df45c0877523a3dbafb8672255914bc3
container_end_page 215
container_issue 2
container_start_page 201
container_title Landscape ecology
container_volume 25
creator Gaucherel, C
Griffon, S
Misson, L
Houet, T
description We need an integrated assessment of the bioenergy production at landscape scale for at least three main reasons: (1) it is predictable that we will soon have landscapes dedicated to bioenergy productions; (2) a number of “win-win” solutions combining several dedicated energy crops have been suggested for a better use of local climate, soil mosaic and production systems and (3) “well-to-wheels” analyses for the entire bioenergy production chain urge us to optimize the life cycle of bioenergies at large scales. In this context, we argue that the new generation of landscape models allows in silico experiments to estimate bioenergy distributions (in space and time) that are helpful for this integrated assessment of the bioenergy production. The main objective of this paper was to develop a detailed modeling methodology for this purpose. We aimed at illustrating and discussing the use of mechanistic models and their possible association to simulate future distributions of fuel biomass. We applied two separated landscape models dedicated to human-driven agricultural and climate-driven forested neighboring patches. These models were combined in the same theoretical (i.e. virtual) landscape for present as well as future scenarios by associating realistic agricultural production scenarios and B2-IPCC climate scenarios depending on the bioenergy type (crop or forest) concerned in each landscape patch. We then estimated esthetical impacts of our simulations by using 3D visualizations and a quantitative “depth” index to rank them. Results first showed that the transport cost at landscape scale was not correlated to the total biomass production, mainly due to landscape configuration constraints. Secondly, averaged index values of the four simulations were conditioned by agricultural practices, while temporal trends were conditioned by gradual climate changes. Thirdly, the most realistic simulated landscape combining intensive agricultural practices and climate change with atmospheric CO₂ concentration increase corresponded to the lowest and unwanted bioenergy conversion inefficiency (the biomass production ratio over 100 years divided by the averaged transport cost) and to the most open landscape. Managing land use and land cover changes at landscape scale is probably one of the most powerful ways to mitigate negative (or magnify positive) effects of climate and human decisions on overall biomass productions.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10980-009-9400-6
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_00424093v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>744586292</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-570f645833adaf6d5828765bfc489ad10df45c0877523a3dbafb8672255914bc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU-LFDEQxYMoOK77ATzZeJE9ZK38T47LoLsLA3tw9xzS3cnYS3dnTHULfnsztCh48FApCL9X9YpHyDsG1wzAfEIGzgIFcNRJAKpfkB1ThlNnNHtJduA4o9wZ8Zq8QXwGACEAduRhn6d2mIf52JxK7iIibQPGvplyH0dsUi5NWpe1xKYd8hQQm1oVm-K8NGFpxjD32IVTbOo7xrfkVQojxsvf_YI8ffn8uL-jh4fb-_3NgXZS2oUqA0lLZYUIfUi6V5Zbo1WbOmld6Bn0SaoOrDGKiyD6NqTWasO5Uo7JthMX5Gqb-y2M_lSGKZSfPofB390c_PkPQHIJTvxglf24sfXC72vExU8DdnGs1mNe0RtZnWjueCU__EM-57XM9RDPmTbMgXIVYhvUlYxYYvqzn4E_h-G3MKoF589heF01fNNgZedjLH8H_0_0fhOlkH04lgH901cOTACzIJRT4hc6s5QH</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>216719059</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Combining process-based models for future biomass assessment at landscape scale</title><source>Springer Link</source><creator>Gaucherel, C ; Griffon, S ; Misson, L ; Houet, T</creator><creatorcontrib>Gaucherel, C ; Griffon, S ; Misson, L ; Houet, T</creatorcontrib><description>We need an integrated assessment of the bioenergy production at landscape scale for at least three main reasons: (1) it is predictable that we will soon have landscapes dedicated to bioenergy productions; (2) a number of “win-win” solutions combining several dedicated energy crops have been suggested for a better use of local climate, soil mosaic and production systems and (3) “well-to-wheels” analyses for the entire bioenergy production chain urge us to optimize the life cycle of bioenergies at large scales. In this context, we argue that the new generation of landscape models allows in silico experiments to estimate bioenergy distributions (in space and time) that are helpful for this integrated assessment of the bioenergy production. The main objective of this paper was to develop a detailed modeling methodology for this purpose. We aimed at illustrating and discussing the use of mechanistic models and their possible association to simulate future distributions of fuel biomass. We applied two separated landscape models dedicated to human-driven agricultural and climate-driven forested neighboring patches. These models were combined in the same theoretical (i.e. virtual) landscape for present as well as future scenarios by associating realistic agricultural production scenarios and B2-IPCC climate scenarios depending on the bioenergy type (crop or forest) concerned in each landscape patch. We then estimated esthetical impacts of our simulations by using 3D visualizations and a quantitative “depth” index to rank them. Results first showed that the transport cost at landscape scale was not correlated to the total biomass production, mainly due to landscape configuration constraints. Secondly, averaged index values of the four simulations were conditioned by agricultural practices, while temporal trends were conditioned by gradual climate changes. Thirdly, the most realistic simulated landscape combining intensive agricultural practices and climate change with atmospheric CO₂ concentration increase corresponded to the lowest and unwanted bioenergy conversion inefficiency (the biomass production ratio over 100 years divided by the averaged transport cost) and to the most open landscape. Managing land use and land cover changes at landscape scale is probably one of the most powerful ways to mitigate negative (or magnify positive) effects of climate and human decisions on overall biomass productions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0921-2973</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1572-9761</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10980-009-9400-6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Agricultural practices ; Agricultural production ; Biomass ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Climate change ; Climate effects ; Computer Science ; Ecology ; Ecology, environment ; Energy crops ; Environment and Society ; Environmental Management ; Environmental Sciences ; Geography ; Humanities and Social Sciences ; Intensive farming ; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ; Land use ; Landscape ; Landscape Ecology ; Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning ; Life cycles ; Life Sciences ; Modeling and Simulation ; Nature Conservation ; Research Article ; Research methodology ; Sustainable Development</subject><ispartof>Landscape ecology, 2010-02, Vol.25 (2), p.201-215</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-570f645833adaf6d5828765bfc489ad10df45c0877523a3dbafb8672255914bc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-570f645833adaf6d5828765bfc489ad10df45c0877523a3dbafb8672255914bc3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5890-6145 ; 0000-0002-4521-8914</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-00424093$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gaucherel, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Griffon, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Misson, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Houet, T</creatorcontrib><title>Combining process-based models for future biomass assessment at landscape scale</title><title>Landscape ecology</title><addtitle>Landscape Ecol</addtitle><description>We need an integrated assessment of the bioenergy production at landscape scale for at least three main reasons: (1) it is predictable that we will soon have landscapes dedicated to bioenergy productions; (2) a number of “win-win” solutions combining several dedicated energy crops have been suggested for a better use of local climate, soil mosaic and production systems and (3) “well-to-wheels” analyses for the entire bioenergy production chain urge us to optimize the life cycle of bioenergies at large scales. In this context, we argue that the new generation of landscape models allows in silico experiments to estimate bioenergy distributions (in space and time) that are helpful for this integrated assessment of the bioenergy production. The main objective of this paper was to develop a detailed modeling methodology for this purpose. We aimed at illustrating and discussing the use of mechanistic models and their possible association to simulate future distributions of fuel biomass. We applied two separated landscape models dedicated to human-driven agricultural and climate-driven forested neighboring patches. These models were combined in the same theoretical (i.e. virtual) landscape for present as well as future scenarios by associating realistic agricultural production scenarios and B2-IPCC climate scenarios depending on the bioenergy type (crop or forest) concerned in each landscape patch. We then estimated esthetical impacts of our simulations by using 3D visualizations and a quantitative “depth” index to rank them. Results first showed that the transport cost at landscape scale was not correlated to the total biomass production, mainly due to landscape configuration constraints. Secondly, averaged index values of the four simulations were conditioned by agricultural practices, while temporal trends were conditioned by gradual climate changes. Thirdly, the most realistic simulated landscape combining intensive agricultural practices and climate change with atmospheric CO₂ concentration increase corresponded to the lowest and unwanted bioenergy conversion inefficiency (the biomass production ratio over 100 years divided by the averaged transport cost) and to the most open landscape. Managing land use and land cover changes at landscape scale is probably one of the most powerful ways to mitigate negative (or magnify positive) effects of climate and human decisions on overall biomass productions.</description><subject>Agricultural practices</subject><subject>Agricultural production</subject><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Climate effects</subject><subject>Computer Science</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Ecology, environment</subject><subject>Energy crops</subject><subject>Environment and Society</subject><subject>Environmental Management</subject><subject>Environmental Sciences</subject><subject>Geography</subject><subject>Humanities and Social Sciences</subject><subject>Intensive farming</subject><subject>Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>Landscape</subject><subject>Landscape Ecology</subject><subject>Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning</subject><subject>Life cycles</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Modeling and Simulation</subject><subject>Nature Conservation</subject><subject>Research Article</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>Sustainable Development</subject><issn>0921-2973</issn><issn>1572-9761</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kU-LFDEQxYMoOK77ATzZeJE9ZK38T47LoLsLA3tw9xzS3cnYS3dnTHULfnsztCh48FApCL9X9YpHyDsG1wzAfEIGzgIFcNRJAKpfkB1ThlNnNHtJduA4o9wZ8Zq8QXwGACEAduRhn6d2mIf52JxK7iIibQPGvplyH0dsUi5NWpe1xKYd8hQQm1oVm-K8NGFpxjD32IVTbOo7xrfkVQojxsvf_YI8ffn8uL-jh4fb-_3NgXZS2oUqA0lLZYUIfUi6V5Zbo1WbOmld6Bn0SaoOrDGKiyD6NqTWasO5Uo7JthMX5Gqb-y2M_lSGKZSfPofB390c_PkPQHIJTvxglf24sfXC72vExU8DdnGs1mNe0RtZnWjueCU__EM-57XM9RDPmTbMgXIVYhvUlYxYYvqzn4E_h-G3MKoF589heF01fNNgZedjLH8H_0_0fhOlkH04lgH901cOTACzIJRT4hc6s5QH</recordid><startdate>20100201</startdate><enddate>20100201</enddate><creator>Gaucherel, C</creator><creator>Griffon, S</creator><creator>Misson, L</creator><creator>Houet, T</creator><general>Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><general>Springer Verlag</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>BXJBU</scope><scope>IHQJB</scope><scope>VOOES</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5890-6145</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4521-8914</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20100201</creationdate><title>Combining process-based models for future biomass assessment at landscape scale</title><author>Gaucherel, C ; Griffon, S ; Misson, L ; Houet, T</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-570f645833adaf6d5828765bfc489ad10df45c0877523a3dbafb8672255914bc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Agricultural practices</topic><topic>Agricultural production</topic><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Climate effects</topic><topic>Computer Science</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Ecology, environment</topic><topic>Energy crops</topic><topic>Environment and Society</topic><topic>Environmental Management</topic><topic>Environmental Sciences</topic><topic>Geography</topic><topic>Humanities and Social Sciences</topic><topic>Intensive farming</topic><topic>Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>Landscape</topic><topic>Landscape Ecology</topic><topic>Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning</topic><topic>Life cycles</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Modeling and Simulation</topic><topic>Nature Conservation</topic><topic>Research Article</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>Sustainable Development</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gaucherel, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Griffon, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Misson, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Houet, T</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Science Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société (Open Access)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL) (Open Access)</collection><jtitle>Landscape ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gaucherel, C</au><au>Griffon, S</au><au>Misson, L</au><au>Houet, T</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Combining process-based models for future biomass assessment at landscape scale</atitle><jtitle>Landscape ecology</jtitle><stitle>Landscape Ecol</stitle><date>2010-02-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>201</spage><epage>215</epage><pages>201-215</pages><issn>0921-2973</issn><eissn>1572-9761</eissn><abstract>We need an integrated assessment of the bioenergy production at landscape scale for at least three main reasons: (1) it is predictable that we will soon have landscapes dedicated to bioenergy productions; (2) a number of “win-win” solutions combining several dedicated energy crops have been suggested for a better use of local climate, soil mosaic and production systems and (3) “well-to-wheels” analyses for the entire bioenergy production chain urge us to optimize the life cycle of bioenergies at large scales. In this context, we argue that the new generation of landscape models allows in silico experiments to estimate bioenergy distributions (in space and time) that are helpful for this integrated assessment of the bioenergy production. The main objective of this paper was to develop a detailed modeling methodology for this purpose. We aimed at illustrating and discussing the use of mechanistic models and their possible association to simulate future distributions of fuel biomass. We applied two separated landscape models dedicated to human-driven agricultural and climate-driven forested neighboring patches. These models were combined in the same theoretical (i.e. virtual) landscape for present as well as future scenarios by associating realistic agricultural production scenarios and B2-IPCC climate scenarios depending on the bioenergy type (crop or forest) concerned in each landscape patch. We then estimated esthetical impacts of our simulations by using 3D visualizations and a quantitative “depth” index to rank them. Results first showed that the transport cost at landscape scale was not correlated to the total biomass production, mainly due to landscape configuration constraints. Secondly, averaged index values of the four simulations were conditioned by agricultural practices, while temporal trends were conditioned by gradual climate changes. Thirdly, the most realistic simulated landscape combining intensive agricultural practices and climate change with atmospheric CO₂ concentration increase corresponded to the lowest and unwanted bioenergy conversion inefficiency (the biomass production ratio over 100 years divided by the averaged transport cost) and to the most open landscape. Managing land use and land cover changes at landscape scale is probably one of the most powerful ways to mitigate negative (or magnify positive) effects of climate and human decisions on overall biomass productions.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s10980-009-9400-6</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5890-6145</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4521-8914</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0921-2973
ispartof Landscape ecology, 2010-02, Vol.25 (2), p.201-215
issn 0921-2973
1572-9761
language eng
recordid cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_00424093v1
source Springer Link
subjects Agricultural practices
Agricultural production
Biomass
Biomedical and Life Sciences
Climate change
Climate effects
Computer Science
Ecology
Ecology, environment
Energy crops
Environment and Society
Environmental Management
Environmental Sciences
Geography
Humanities and Social Sciences
Intensive farming
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Land use
Landscape
Landscape Ecology
Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning
Life cycles
Life Sciences
Modeling and Simulation
Nature Conservation
Research Article
Research methodology
Sustainable Development
title Combining process-based models for future biomass assessment at landscape scale
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T06%3A34%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Combining%20process-based%20models%20for%20future%20biomass%20assessment%20at%20landscape%20scale&rft.jtitle=Landscape%20ecology&rft.au=Gaucherel,%20C&rft.date=2010-02-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=201&rft.epage=215&rft.pages=201-215&rft.issn=0921-2973&rft.eissn=1572-9761&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10980-009-9400-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_hal_p%3E744586292%3C/proquest_hal_p%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-570f645833adaf6d5828765bfc489ad10df45c0877523a3dbafb8672255914bc3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=216719059&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true