New research has highlighted the importance of strategic landuse planning for achieving goals in bioenergy, climate change mitigation, and biodiversity restoration. While restoration is still the best approach to biodiversity, the study suggests that planting lowcost and lowmaintenance crops grown solely for renewable bioenergy production, also known as energy crops, on existing agricultural land can reduce biodiversity losses when compared to converting natural habitats. The study, published inJournal of Applied Ecology on June 30, 2024, emphasised that prioritising degraded or abandoned agricultural land for energy crops offers the greatest benefit. Planting energy crops in areas with high natural vegetation cover significantly reduces biodiversity, particularly in tropical regions, it said. However, the study also found that energy crop plantations can, in some cases, be more beneficial for biodiversity than current agricultural practices. This is especially true for plantations with diverse plant mixes and in areas dominated by existing agriculture. This suggests that increasing landscape complexity can have ecological advantages. The most significant positive impact on biodiversity would come from restoring priority areas for natural vegetation, rather than expanding energy crops. However, the study acknowledges that strategically planting energy crops on existing agricultural land presents a less harmful alternative compared to converting natural habitats. The study looked at Biodiversity Intactness Index BII to determine this. BII are estimates how the average abundance of native terrestrial species in a region compares with their abundances before pronounced human impacts. Contrasting the spatial effects on BII of planting energy crops compared with restoring natural vegetation highlights places where energy crops could be the least detrimental to BII, such as Central Europe and the east coasts of the USA and China, said the study. It was also found that plantations that replace existing agricultural land in West Africa could bring some benefits to BII levels, albeit small. Replacing agricultural land with energy crops in optimal locations can minimize negative impacts on biodiversity, especially in regions like the United States and Europe. This approach could even lead to neutral or slightly positive changes in BII, as it provides additional perennial habitats for various species groups, including invertebrates and birds. Therefore, focusing on converting existing agricultural land rather than natural vegetation in these areas would be beneficial for biodiversity conservation, the research said. Study suggests that, as far as biodiversity is concerned, it is always best to restore farmland to nature rather than replant it with energy crops. Yet, we are realists. In the future, more fuel will come from crops, and it is far better to plant them on existing farms than destroy remaining natural habitats. We have shown that where you plant those crops makes a huge difference to how many species continue to thrive. Sophie Tudge, postgraduate research student, University of Surrey and the lead author. As energy crop plantations increase to support greener energy goals, decisions on their location and the restoration of degraded land must carefully weigh ecological impacts alongside environmental and social considerations. Copyright Down To Earth 2024. All rights reserved. Powered byQuintype
Strategic landuse planning is crucial for achieving bioenergy, climate change mitigation, and biodiversity restoration goals. Planting energy crops on existing farmland can reduce biodiversity loss, especially in degraded areas. While restoring natural habitats is best for biodiversity, planting energy crops in optimal locations, particularly in Europe and the USA, can have positive effects on biodiversity. Prioritizing degraded land for energy crops is beneficial, offering additional habitats for various species groups. Careful consideration is needed when expanding energy crop plantations to balance ecological impacts with environmental and social factors.