DISAMPING KANAN INI.............
PLEASE USE ........ "TRANSLATE MACHINE" .. GOOGLE TRANSLATE BESIDE RIGHT THIS
.................
Peraturan-peraturan
yang diperlukan untuk mengidentifikasi berpotensi tanaman
biofuel invasif
..........Jika tanaman
baru terpanas tumbuh sebagai tanaman biofuel yang disetujui semata-mata
berdasarkan profilnya yang emisi gas rumah kaca, potensinya sebagai
Spesies invasif berikutnya mungkin tidak ditemukan sampai semua terlambat. Dalam menanggapi hal ini perlu untuk
mencegah invasi tersebut, para peneliti telah mengembangkan seperangkat
ketentuan dan peraturan definisi dan daftar 49 tanaman biofuel dari mana petani dapat memilih.....................
Regulations needed to identify potentially invasive biofuel crops
Date:
August 7,
2014
Source:
University of Illinois College of
Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences (ACES)
Summary:
If the hottest new plant grown as a biofuel crop is
approved based solely on its greenhouse gas emission profile, its potential as
the next invasive species may not be discovered until it’s too late. In
response to this need to prevent such invasions, researchers have developed
both a set of regulatory definitions and provisions and a list of 49 low-risk
biofuel plants from which growers can choose.
..................
If the hottest new plant grown as a biofuel crop is approved
based solely on its greenhouse gas emission profile, its potential as the next
invasive species may not be discovered until it's too late. In response to this
need to prevent such invasions, researchers at the University of Illinois have
developed both a set of regulatory definitions and provisions and a list of 49
low-risk biofuel plants from which growers can choose.
Lauren
Quinn, an invasive plant ecologist at U of I's Energy Biosciences Institute,
recognized that most of the news about invasive biofuel crops was negative and
offered few low-risk alternatives to producers. She and her colleagues set out
to create a list of low-risk biofuel crops that can be safely grown for
conversion to ethanol but realized in the process that regulations were needed
to instill checks and balances in the system.
"There
are not a lot of existing regulations that would prevent the planting of
potentially invasive species at the state or federal levels. For example, there
are currently only four states (Florida, Mississippi, Oregon, and Maryland)
that have any laws relating to how bioenergy crops can be grown and that
include any language about invasive species -- and, for the most part, when
those words do appear, they are either not defined or poorly defined,"
said Quinn.
In approving
new biofuel products, Quinn said that the EPA doesn't formally consider invasiveness
at all -- just greenhouse gas emissions related to their production. "Last
summer, the EPA approved two known invaders, Arundo donax (giant reed)
and Pennisetum purpurem (napier grass), despite public criticism,"
added U of I professor of agricultural law A. Bryan Endres, who co-authored the
research to define legislative language for potentially invasive bioenergy
feedstocks.
Part of the
problem is that there is no clear scientific definition of what it means to be
invasive. The team of researchers used fundamental biological, ecological, and
management principles to develop definitions for terminology commonly used to
describe invasive species.
"Our
definition of invasive is 'a population exhibiting a net negative impact or
harm to the target ecosystem,' for example," Quinn said. "We want to
establish guidelines that will be simple for regulators and informed by the
ecological literature and our own knowledge. We also need to recognize that
some native plants can become weedy or invasive. It's complicated and requires
some understanding of the biology of these plants."
Quinn said
that ideally the definitions and suggested regulations could become part of a
revised Renewable Fuels Standard administered by EPA, which would require
Congress to make the changes. The proposed regulations could also be adopted at
the state level.
"Some
of the biofeedstocks currently being examined by the EPA for approval, like
pennycress, have a high risk for invasion," Quinn said. "Others have
vague names such as jatropha with no species name, which is problematic. For
example, there are three main Miscanthus species but only sterile hybrid Miscanthus
× giganteus types are considered low risk. However, the EPA has approved
"Miscanthus" as a feedstock without specifying a species or
genotype" Quinn said. "That's fine for the low-risk sterile types but
could mean higher-risk fertile types could be approved without additional
oversight."
According to
Quinn, the white list, which includes 49 low-risk feedstock plants, will serve
to clear up the confusion about plant names. The list was developed using an
existing weed risk assessment protocol, which includes 49 questions that must
be asked about a particular species based on its biology, ecology, and its
history of being invasive in other parts of the world.
"Those
questions are difficult to answer for new taxa, including plants that haven't
been around long or have just recently been developed by breeders," Quinn
said. "This will be the first time that they are out in the environment so
we don't know what their potential for invasiveness is. But the white list
offers plenty of choices of plants that are already commercially available, and
the feedstocks on the list have a number of different industrial uses."
Quinn
stressed that the native plants that are included in the white list are only
recommended as the native genotypes grown in their native region, because
although a plant may be native to a part of the United States, it could be
considered invasive if grown in a different region.
"For
example, Panicum virgatum is the variety of switchgrass that is low risk
everywhere except for the three coastal states of Washington, Oregon, and
California, but future genotypes that may be bred with more invasive
characteristics, such as rapid growth or prolific seed production, may have
higher risk."
The
researchers believe that the white list provides producers with clearly
identified low-invasion risk options and may reduce conflicts between
objectives for increasing renewable fuel production and reducing unintended
impacts and costs resulting from the propagation of invasive plants.
"Resolving
regulatory uncertainty: legislative language for potentially invasive bioenergy
feedstocks" was published in an issue of GCB Bioenergy. Co-authors
include Elise Scott and James McCubbins from the Energy Biosciences Institute,
A. Bryan Endres and Thomas Voigt from the University of Illinois, and Jacob
Barney from Virginia Tech.
"Bioenergy
feedstocks at low risk for invasion in the U.S.: A 'white list' approach"
was published in Bioenergy Research. Co-authors include Aviva Glaser
from the National Wildlife Federation, Doria Gordon from the Nature
Conservancy, and Deah Lieurance and Luke Flory from the University of Florida.
Story
Source:
The above
story is based on materials provided by University of Illinois College of Agricultural,
Consumer and Environmental Sciences (ACES). The original article was written
by Debra Levey Larson. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.
Journal
References:
- Lauren D. Quinn, Elise C. Scott, A. Bryan Endres, Jacob N. Barney, Thomas B. Voigt, James McCubbins. Resolving regulatory uncertainty: legislative language for potentially invasive bioenergy feedstocks. GCB Bioenergy, 2014; DOI: 10.1111/gcbb.12216
- Lauren D. Quinn, Doria R. Gordon, Aviva Glaser, Deah Lieurance, S. Luke Flory. Bioenergy Feedstocks at Low Risk for Invasion in the USA: a “White List” Approach. BioEnergy Research, 2014; DOI: 10.1007/s12155-014-9503-z