Author Correction: Trade-offs in using European forests to meet climate objectives.

In this Letter, in "About 75% of this reduction is expected to come from emission reductions and the remaining 25% from land use, land-use change and forestry", '25%' should read '1%' and '75%' should read '99%'. In the sentence "The carbon-sink-maximizing portfolio has a small negative effect on annual precipitation (-2 mm) and no effect on air temperature (Table 1)" the word 'precipitation' was omitted. Denmark was accidentally deleted during the conversion of Fig. 1. The original Letter has been corrected online.

Biochar potentially mitigates greenhouse gas emissions from cultivation of oilseed rape for biodiesel.

Winter oilseed rape (WOSR) is the main crop for biodiesel in the EU, where legislation demands at least 50% savings in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as compared to fossil diesel. Thus industrial sectors search for optimized management systems to lower GHG emissions from oilseed rape cultivation. Recently, pyrolysis of biomass with subsequent soil amendment of biochar has shown potentials for GHG mitigation in terms of carbon (C) sequestration, avoidance of fossil based electricity, and mitigation of soil nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions. Here we analyzed three WOSR scenarios in terms of their global warming impact using a life cycle assessment approach. The first was a reference scenario with average Danish WOSR cultivation where straw residues were incorporated to the soil. The others were biochar scenarios in which the oilseed rape straw was pyrolysed to biochar at two process temperatures (400 and 800 °C) and returned to the field. The concept of avoided atmospheric CO2 load was applied for calculation of C sequestration factors for biochar, which resulted in larger mitigation effects than derived from calculations of just the remaining C in soil. In total, GHG emissions were reduced by 73 to 83% in the two biochar scenarios as compared to the reference scenario, mainly due to increased C sequestration. The climate benefits were higher for pyrolysis of oilseed rape straw at 800 than at 400 °C. The results demonstrated that biochar has a potential to improve the life cycle GHG emissions of oilseed rape biodiesel, and highlighted the importance of consolidated key assumptions, such as biochar stability in soil and the CO2 load of marginal grid electricity.

Environmental life cycle assessment of producing willow, alfalfa and straw from spring barley as feedstocks for bioenergy or biorefinery systems.

The current study aimed at evaluating potential environmental impacts for the production of willow, alfalfa and straw from spring barley as feedstocks for bioenergy or biorefinery systems. A method of Life Cycle Assessment was used to evaluate based on the following impact categories: Global Warming Potential (GWP100), Eutrophication Potential (EP), Non-Renewable Energy (NRE) use, Agricultural Land Occupation (ALO), Potential Freshwater Ecotoxicity (PFWTox) and Soil quality. With regard to the methods, soil organic carbon (SOC) change related to the land occupation was calculated based on the net carbon input to the soil. Freshwater ecotoxicity was calculated using the comparative toxicity units of the active ingredients and their average emission distribution fractions to air and freshwater. Soil quality was based on the change in the SOC stock estimated during the land use transformation and land occupation. Environmental impacts for straw were economically allocated from the impacts obtained for spring barley. The results obtained per ton dry matter showed a lower carbon footprint for willow and alfalfa compared to straw. It was due to higher soil carbon sequestration and lower N2O emissions. Likewise, willow and alfalfa had lower EP than straw. Straw had lowest NRE use compared to other biomasses. PFWTox was lower in willow and alfalfa compared to straw. A critical negative effect on soil quality was found with the spring barley production and hence for straw. Based on the energy output to input ratio, willow performed better than other biomasses. On the basis of carbohydrate content of straw, the equivalent dry matter of alfalfa and willow would be requiring higher. The environmental impacts of the selected biomasses in biorefinery therefore would differ based on the conversion efficiency, e.g. of the carbohydrates in the related biorefinery processes.

Environmental impacts of producing bioethanol and biobased lactic acid from standalone and integrated biorefineries using a consequential and an attributional life cycle assessment approach.

This study evaluates the environmental impacts of biorefinery products using consequential (CLCA) and attributional (ALCA) life cycle assessment (LCA) approaches. Within ALCA, economic allocation method was used to distribute impacts among the main products and the coproducts, whereas within the CLCA system expansion was adopted to avoid allocation. The study seeks to answer the questions (i) what is the environmental impacts of process integration?, and (ii) do CLCA and ALCA lead to different conclusions when applied to biorefinery?. Three biorefinery systems were evaluated and compared: a standalone system producing bioethanol from winter wheat-straw (system A), a standalone system producing biobased lactic acid from alfalfa (system B), and an integrated biorefinery system (system C) combining the two standalone systems and producing both bioethanol and lactic acid. The synergy of the integration was the exchange of useful energy necessary for biomass processing in the two standalone systems. The systems were compared against a common reference flow: "1MJEtOH+1kgLA", which was set on the basis of products delivered by the system C. Function of the reference flow was to provide service of both fuel (bioethanol) at 99.9% concentration (wt. basis) and biochemical (biobased lactic acid) in food industries at 90% purity; both products delivered at biorefinery gate. The environmental impacts of interest were global warming potential (GWP100), eutrophication potential (EP), non-renewable energy (NRE) use and the agricultural land occupation (ALO). Regardless of the LCA approach adopted, system C performed better in most of the impact categories than both standalone systems. The process wise contribution to the obtained environmental impacts also showed similar impact pattern in both approaches. The study also highlighted that the recirculation of intermediate materials, e.g. C5 sugar to boost bioethanol yield and that the use of residual streams in the energy conversion were beneficial for optimizing the system performance.

Comparative life cycle assessment of three biohydrogen pathways.

A life cycle assessment was performed to quantify and compare the energetic and environmental performances of hydrogen from wheat straw (WS-H(2)), sweet sorghum stalk (SSS-H(2)), and steam potato peels (SPP-H(2)). Inventory data were derived from a pilot plant. Impacts were assessed using the impact 2002+ method. When co-product was not considered, the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were 5.60 kg CO(2eq) kg(-1) H(2) for WS-H(2), 5.32 kg CO(2eq) kg(-1) H(2) for SSS-H(2), and 5.18 kg CO(2eq) kg(-1) H(2) for SPP-H(2). BioH(2) pathways reduced GHG emissions by 52-56% compared to diesel and by 54-57% compared to steam methane reforming production of H(2). The energy ratios (ER) were also comparable: 1.08 for WS-H(2), 1.14 for SSS-H(2) and 1.17 for SPP-H(2). A shift from SPP-H(2) to WS-H(2) would therefore not affect the ER and GHG emissions of these BioH(2) pathways. When co-product was considered, a shift from SPP-H(2) to WS-H(2) or SSS-H(2) decreased the ER, while increasing the GHG emissions significantly. Co-product yield should be considered when selecting BioH(2) feedstocks.