Environmental Assessment of Biomass Energy Crops

  • Susumu UchidaEmail author
Part of the New Frontiers in Regional Science: Asian Perspectives book series (NFRSASIPER, volume 34)


Biomass energy has an advantage among renewable energy technologies because it is storable potential energy. A variety of biomass energy technologies have been subjects of research on their environmental burdens. Because these technologies are strongly related to agricultural production, their evaluation has faced the issue of uncertainty that is inherent in agriculture. Methodologies in assessing the environmental impact of biomass energy technologies, including how that uncertainty should be treated in the assessment, are introduced in this chapter. This is followed by some case studies, including those of the life cycle assessment of energy crop cultivation and evaluation of the effect of economic promotion policies on greenhouse gas reduction.


Biomass Energy crop cultivation Life cycle assessment Promotion policy Model simulation 


  1. Bradley MD (1975) Future opportunities for open space. Landsc Plann 2:13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Federal Office for the Environment FOEN (2009) The ecological scarcity method – eco-factors 2006. FOEN, BernGoogle Scholar
  3. Gleeson T, Wada Y, Bierkens MFP, van Beek LPH (2012) Water balance of global aquifers revealed by groundwater footprint. Nature 488:197–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ho DP, Ngo HH, Guo W (2014) A mini review on renewable sources for biofuel. Bioresour Technol 169:742–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Li C, Frolking S, Frolking TA (1992) A model of nitrous oxide evolution from soil driven by rainfall events: 1. Model structure and sensitivity. J Geophys Res 97:9759–9776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Maeda M (2008) Model ni yoru dojou, noukouchi, ryu-iki ni okeru chisso doutai no rikai: 2. hatake hojo ni okeru houkatsuteki chisso doutai model no kaihatsuto riyou no tameno kiso.n. Dojo Hiryogaku Zasshi 79:89–99. in JapaneseGoogle Scholar
  7. Matsubae-Yokoyama K, Kubo H, Nakajima K, Nagasaka T (2009) J Ind Ecol 13:687–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Morimoto S, Miyamoto K (2009) A current review of social impact assessment on sustainable biomass/biofuel development. J Jpn Inst Energy 88:133–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Oki T, Kanae S (2007) Current situation and future perspectives on global hydrologic cycles, water balances, and world freshwater resources. J Geogr 116:31–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Pfister S, Koehler A, Hellweg S (2009) Assessing the environmental impacts of freshwater consumption in LCA. Environ Sci Technol 43:4098–4104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rehl T, Lansche J, Müller J (2012) Life cycle assessment of energy generation from biogas—attributional vs. consequential approach. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16:3766–3775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ridoutt BG, Sanguansri P, Nolan M, Marks NJ (2012) Meat consumption and water scarcity: beware of generalizations. Cleaner Prod 28:127–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Shirato Y, Hakamata T, Taniyama I (2004) Modified rothamsted carbon model for andosols and its validation: changing humus decomposition rate constant with pyrophosphate-extractable Al. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 50:149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Stoeglehner G, Edwards P, Daniels P, Narodoslawsky M (2011) The water supply footprint (WSF): a strategic planning tool for sustainable regional and local water supplies. J Cleaner Prod 19:1677–1686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Therivel R (1993) Systems of strategic environmental assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 13:145–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. U.S. Department of the Interior (2013) U.S. geological survey: mineral commodity summaries 2013. US Geol Surv, Reston: 119Google Scholar
  17. Uchida S (2018) Regional analyses of water use in Japanese paddy rice cultivation using modified water footprint indexes. Asia-Pac J Reg Sci. (online first)Google Scholar
  18. Uchida S, Hayashi K (2012) Comparative life cycle assessment of improved and conventional cultivation practices for energy crops in Japan. Biomass Bioenergy 36:302–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Uchida S, Mizunoya T, Higano Y (2008) A dynamic evaluation of policies to promote the use of the potential energy in wastes. Stud Reg Sci 38:339–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Uchida S, Hayashi K, Sato M, Hokazono S (2010a) Construction of agri-environmental data using computational methods: the case of life cycle inventories for agricultural production systems. In: Prado HAD, Luiz AJB, Filho HC (eds) Computational methods applied to agricultural research: techniques and advances. IGI Global, Hershey, pp 412–433Google Scholar
  21. Uchida S, Hayashi K, Watanabe T, Sugiura R (2010b) Evaluating the regional biomass utilization model by scenario-based comparative life cycle assessment. In: Proceedings of the workshop of research results in rural biomass research project supported by Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan: III–10Google Scholar
  22. Vanham D, Bidoglio G (2013) A review on the indicator water footprint for the EU28. Ecol Indic 26:61–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Whitaker J, Ludley KE, Rowe R, Taylor G, Howard DC (2010) Sources of variability in greenhouse gas and energy balances for biofuel production: a systematic review. Glob Change Biol Bioenergy 2:99–112Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AgricultureIbaraki UniversityMitoJapan

Personalised recommendations