Geospatial distribution of ecosystem services and biomass energy potential in eastern Japan

Geospatial distribution of ecosystem services and biomass energy potential in easternTo appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production Received Date: 1 April 2015 Revised Date: 20 January 2016

Geospatial distribution of ecosystem services and biomass energy potential in eastern

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 1 April 2015

Revised Date: 20 January 2016

Accepted Date: 24 January 2016

Please cite this article as: Ooba M, Fujii M, Hayashi K, Geospatial distribution of ecosystem services

and biomass energy potential in eastern Japan, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), doi: 10.1016/

j.jclepro.2016.01.065

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication As a service toour customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript The manuscript will undergocopyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form Pleasenote that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and alllegal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain

Ct Mean annual air temperature

FIT Feed-in tariff scheme for renewable energy

fw Food-processing waste

ma Manure slurry

PCA Principal component analysis

Pd Tourists in natural ecosystems

we Wood residual from other ecosystems

wf Wood residual from forest

Table 1 Biomass data set

Type and detail of biomass Parameters for biomass use Weight b

wf

Wood residual from forest

Combustion, Lower Heating Value(LHV): 18.1 GJ/t 0.202 (Harvest and thinning of plantation

Agricultural residual Combustion, LHV: 13.6-14.2

GJ/t (for crop straw), Methane fermentation a: VS/TS=0.75, GR=400 m3/t (for other agricultural residual)

0.121 (Rice husk and straw, and wheat husk )

ae

Grassland residual

Combustion, LHV: 13.6 GJ/t 0.121 (Bamboo grass and Japanese silver

grass)

ww

Wood waste Combustion, LHV: 18.1 GJ/t (for

construction waste) and 11.5 GJ/t (for pruned residual from park forest)

0.066 (Residual of lumber sawing,

demolition debris, construction debris,

and pruning branch from public parks)

ma

Livestock manure Methane fermentation a

VS/TS=0.8-0.83, VS=0.4, GR=500-650 m3/t

0.197 (Dairy cattle, beef cattle, swine, layer

chicken, and broiler chicken)

sl

Sludge Methane fermentation a

VS/TS=0.75-0.77, VS=0.46-0.52, GR=620-780 m3/t

0.086 (Two types of sewage sludge, and

human waste sludge)

fw

Food-processing waste Methane fermentation a

VS/TS=0.2, VS=0.80, GR=500 (for food processing waste), VS/TS=0.84, VS=0.84, GR=808 m3/t (for other)

0.086 (Waste from food-processing factory,

kitchen, food vendor waste)

Table 2 Data sources for assessment of biomass energy and ecosystem services

Vg Vegetation survey map a Plant community,

Degree of disturbance 1/50,000 map

b Annual precipitation and

mean air temperature 1 km mesh 1982

Ag Statistics of agricultural

production and income c

Gross agricultural production

Prefecture level table 2010

Po Population census d Population number and

density

Municipality level table 2010

Tp Consumption trend survey

for tourism e

Number of people and days for domestic tourism

Municipality level table 2010

a

Biodiversity Canter of Japan, 2014

b

Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, 2014

cMinistry of Internal Affairs and Communications, 2014

dStatistics Bureau, 2014

eJapan Tourism Agency, 2014

Table 3 Proxy variables for ecosystem services

Ap Economic gross agricultural production JPY/y Ag, Aa Regulation Sc Carbon sequestration rate Mg-C/(ha y) Vg, Ct Supporting Vc Index of continuity of natural ecosystem Vg

Cultural Pd Tourists in natural ecosystems person-day/y Vg, Tr, Tp

Figure 2 Potential supply distribution of biomass energy (TJ/y in 5-km grid squares)within eastern Japan: (a) wf: Wood residual from forest, (b) we: Wood residual from otherecosystems, (c) aa: Agricultural residual, (d) ae: Grassland residual, (e) ww: Wood waste,(f) ma: Livestock manure, (g) sl: Sludge, (h) fw: Food-processing waste.

Figure 3 Potential supply distribution of ecosystem services (relative values): (a) Wr:Effective precipitation, (b) Ap: Economic gross agricultural production, (c) Sc: Carbonsequestration rate, (d) Vc: Index of continuity of natural ecosystem, (e) Sp: Speciesnumber, (f) Pd: Tourists in natural ecosystems

Figure 4 Loading vectors and scatter plots of the principle component scores (2nd and 3rdprinciple components) from the principle component analysis (PCA) for 8 variables ofbiomass energy, (a) and (c), and 6 variables of ecosystem services, (b) and (d),respectively

Figure 5 Classification for (a) biomass energy and (b) ecosystem services (a) shows theclassification of urban (red), agricultural (green), and forest biomass (blue) Brightnessindicates the relative amount of the potential supply (1st principle component, PC, seetext) (b) shows the relative values of the second and third PCs in green (related toprovisioning services) and blue (related to other services) Grid cells in (a) white and (b)red represented high-ranking areas for both biomass and ecosystem services

Figure 6 Relative ranking of priority areas for biomass energy and ecosystem services (a) Rank ofbiomass energy with equal weighting, (b) Rank of ecosystem services, (c) Rank of biomassenergy with the FIT weighting (see Table 1), and (d) Difference between (a) and (c)

-1 0 1

-5 0 5

ae

ww

ma

sl uw

-1 0 1

Loading Vectors

PC2 (Agric.)