Environmental and economic assessment of biomass sourcing from extensively cultivated buffer strips along water bodies

Buffer strips represent oblong land elements along water bodies playing an important role for the water quality management of the surface water. In the policy context buffer strips are referred to as land with defined farming restrictions aiming at protecting the water course. In the current EU agricultural policy framework the majority of the decisions regarding subsidy schemes for buffer strips is taken on the member country level, which results in great differences between the EU members with regard to this water protection measure. If incentives for farmers for establishing and maintaining buffer strips are in place, they are usually linked to the harvest ban on the buffer strip. Such protection model can be endangered by volatile and rising prices for agricultural products. However, buffer strip can represent a valuable source of different ecosystem services, including biomass provision. If harvesting under certain restrictions would be allowed, the biomass could generate additional revenue that might contribute to securing buffer strips existence and consequently maintaining their protection function. This study aimed at assessing the costs and environmental consequences of biomass mobilizing from buffer strips. It dealt with different scenarios of biomass sourcing from extensively cultivated buffer strips in the Netherlands. In 12 scenarios, the cultivation of grass or cereal mixes (including multiple harvesting or perennial cultivation) for different valorisation chains (ensiling or fodder & bedding) was assessed. Both total net cultivation costs as well as the hectare based environmental performance (using the Life Cycle Assessment methodology) were evaluated. Additionally, the environmental impact of electricity production through anaerobic digestion of biomass from buffer strips was compared with the impact from digestion of classic grass silage and the impact profile of Dutch electricity mix. The results indicate ensiling as the scenario generating more net costs and higher environmental impacts as compared to fodder & bedding. In the latter, the cereal cultivation represents a better solution from economic perspective, while grass shows lower environmental impacts. Moreover, optimizing grass cultivation through switching to perennial mode contributes to strong improvements of the economic performance and contributes to additional reduction of environmental impacts, and consequently delivers the best environmental and economic solution. Moreover, the comparison with the Dutch electricity mix shows that biomass from buffer strips, if used in anaerobic digestion, can, in terms of environmental performance, compete with classic silages and contribute to reduced environmental damage. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.