DOCSLIB.ORG

EPA Comments on Biofuels Pathways Feb 6 2012-Final

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EPA Comments on Biofuels Pathways Feb 6 2012-Final February 6, 2012 Air and Radiation Docket Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0542 Environmental Protection Agency Mailcode: 6406J 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW. Washington, DC 20460. Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0542 (RIN 2060-AR07) Re: Comments on Proposed and Direct Final Rules for “Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Identification of Additional Qualifying Renewable Fuel Pathways Under the Renewable Fuel Standard Program” To Whom It May Concern: Clean Air Task Force, Environmental Working Group, Friends of the Earth, National Wildlife Federation and the Natural Resources Defense Council appreciate the opportunity to submit comments on the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed and direct final rules entitled “Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Identification of Additional Qualifying Renewable Fuel Pathways Under the Renewable Fuel Standard Program.” We disagree with EPA’s view that these rules are noncontroversial actions and therefore request that the agency carries out a full rulemaking. Our comments address three main issues: (1) an assumption that production of camelina and other biofuels feedstocks would not result in any land use change; (2) the potential for some of the proposed feedstocks to become invasive; and (3) impacts of corn stover removal. Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Biofuels Produced from Camelina Oil and Other Feedstocks With the passage of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, EPA is required to include greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from direct and indirect land use change in its analysis of new biofuels pathways. While some biofuel feedstocks like camelina, napier grass, giant reed and others are not predicted to result in large land use changes, even small changes, once summed up, can have a detrimental impact on our climate, water, air, soil and wildlife resources. We understand the difficulty in calculating GHG emissions from biomass production but as history has shown, scaling up biofuels production may result in numerous unintended consequences that either may or may not have been predicted years ago. As EPA noted in the direct final rule, research on biomass production from sources like camelina and giant reed is still in its early stages. As the University of Florida’s Cooperative Extension Service noted, “research related to [camelina] production is limited and will develop as its value increases as a renewable energy crop.”1 Despite limited information, EPA made an assumption 1 Wright, D. and Jim Marois. “Camelina Production in Florida.” Feb. 2011. Florida Cooperative Extension Service. Accessed online 6 Feb. 2012 at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ag350. that all camelina used for biofuels production will be grown on fallow land and will thus result in no land use change from additional acres being brought into production.2 Unfortunately, the agency failed to cite adequate evidence to validate this assumption. By relying on one study that was co-authored by an industry official, EPA failed to explain how no land use change would occur if camelina production was significantly scaled up.3 Shonnard et al. (2010) state that, “Altogether more than 5 million U.S. acres have the potential to grow camelina in a sustainable manner with no impact on food supply.” 4 But, EPA assumes that almost twice that amount – 8 million acres – would be planted to camelina. With a near-record number of acres being planted to corn, primarily to produce ethanol to meet the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) mandate, increased pressure has been placed on the environment as more marginal and fallow land has been brought into production. EPA should analyze how many acres of marginal and fallow land are currently available for biofuels production and what impacts may occur at the margin after biofuels production from camelina or other feedstocks is scaled up. Additionally, EPA must provide a more robust and better-substantiated analysis of likely production practices. When analyzing the environmental consequences of increased production of camelina, giant reed, napier grass, and energy cane, it is not enough for the agency to describe the least damaging ways in which these crops might be grown.5 The fact that it may be physically possible to grow crops using a certain approach says nothing about whether that approach is the most economically efficient option available to farmers – particularly when production is scaled up to commercially relevant volumes. Growing practices will be determined largely according to a variety of economic factors, such as input costs and commodity prices. In its proposal, EPA failed to provide factual data that show how those economic factors will shape production practices, nor has it described the methodology it would use to analyze such data.6,7 Consequently, EPA has not provided an adequate basis for its assessment that an increase in biofuels-related production of camelina, giant reed, napiergrass and energy cane will not result in a significant increase in land use change-related GHG emissions. 2 “Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Identification of Additional Qualifying Renewable Fuel Pathways Under the Renewable Fuel Standard Program.” Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 3 (5 Jan. 2012): 700-727. Accessed online 6 Feb. 2012 at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-01-05/pdf/2011-31580.pdf. 3 Shonnard, D., L. Williams and T. Kalnes. “Camelina-Derived Jet Fuel and Diesel: Sustainable Advanced Biofuels.” Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy 29.3 (2010): 382-392. Accessed online 6 Feb. 2012 at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ep.10461/pdf. 4 Shonnard, D., L. Williams and T. Kalnes. “Camelina-Derived Jet Fuel and Diesel: Sustainable Advanced Biofuels.” Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy 29.3 (2010): 382-392. Accessed online 6 Feb. 2012 at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ep.10461/pdf. 5 See, e.g., 77 Fed. Reg. at 702, where EPA asserts that camelina “can be grown” during different growing seasons, “can also be used to break planting cycles,” and has certain attributes that “allow it to be grown” on marginal land – without indicating the economic likelihood that these options will be pursued. 6 Cf. CAA §307(d)(3), 42 U.S.C.A. § 7607(d)(3). 7 In fact, EPA acknowledged that it lacked key data concerning the impact that increased production of camelina would have on markets and market-mediated environmental effects. 77 Fed. Reg. at 702. The agency also states that, “The renewable biomass provisions under the Energy Independence and Security Act would prohibit direct land conversion into new agricultural land for camelina production for biofuel internationally.” But without proper monitoring and enforcement, this provision will not prevent farmers from converting new land to biomass production. By assuming no land use change, EPA may underestimate the increase in GHG emissions that could result from breaking new land. This assumption is not only an issue with camelina production but could also underestimate land use change emissions associated with biomass production from giant reed, napiergrass, energy cane and other feedstocks. EPA again assumes that these feedstocks will be grown on the least productive land without citing any specific models or studies that may have informed this decision. EPA also overestimated long-term camelina yields in the direct final rule. Its estimates are on the high end of the current yield range in states like Pennsylvania, Oregon and Montana.8 EPA assumes that U.S. yields will average 1650 pounds per acre and that investment in new seed technology could increase yields to 3000 pounds per acre.9 However, other researchers estimate that camelina’s yield potential ranges from 330 to 2400 pounds per acre without irrigation.10,11 Reaching yields of 3000 pounds per acre may be attainable in certain areas, but previous trials do not suggest that average yields could reach this level in just ten years. Even with nitrogen application rates at two to four times the EPA estimated rate of 40 pounds per acre in 2022, yields barely exceeded 2000 to 2200 pounds per acre in trials in Colorado.12 With the huge increase in corn ethanol production and corn acreage, new land has been brought into production with detrimental environmental consequences.13 As an example, in 2011, the 8 McKay, K.A. and P.F. Lamb. “Camelina Production in Montana.” March 2008. Montana State University Extension. Accessed online 6 Feb. 2012 at http://msuextension.org/publications/AgandNaturalResources/MT200701AG.pdf. 9 “Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Identification of Additional Qualifying Renewable Fuel Pathways Under the Renewable Fuel Standard Program.” Federal Register Vol. 77 No. 3 (5 Jan. 2012): 700-727. Accessed online 6 Feb. 2012 at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-01-05/pdf/2011-31580.pdf. 10 Ehrensing, D.T. and S.O. Guy. “Camelina.” Jan. 2008. Oregon State University Extension Service. Accessed online 6 Feb. 2012 at http://extension.oregonstate.edu/catalog/pdf/em/em8953-e.pdf. 11 McKay, K.A. and P.F. Lamb. “Camelina Production in Montana.” March 2008. Montana State University Extension. Accessed online 6 Feb. 2012 at http://msuextension.org/publications/AgandNaturalResources/MT200701AG.pdf. 12 Lafferty, R.M., C. Rife and G. Foster. “Spring Camelina Production Guide for the Central High Plains.” Dec. 2009. Blue Sun Agriculture Research and Development. Accessed online 6 Feb. 2012 at http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobkey =id&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1251616501820&ssbinary=true. 13 Wallander, S., R. Claassen and C. Nickerson. “The Ethanol Decade: An Expansion of U.S. Corn Production, 2000-09.” Aug. 2011. United States Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service. Accessed online 6 Feb. 2012 at http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/EIB79/. U.S. produced about 13 billion gallons of ethanol by utilizing 40 percent of domestic corn production; U.S. farmers responded to near-record corn prices by planting 92 million acres of corn, the second-highest level since 1944.14 The RFS2 final rulemaking predicted that the U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evaluation of the Combustion Characteristics of Four Perennial Energy Crops (Arundo Donax, Cynara Cardunculus, Miscanthus X Giganteus and Panicum Virgatum)
    2nd World Conference on Biomass for Energy, Industry and Climate Protection, 10-14 May 2004, Rome, Italy EVALUATION OF THE COMBUSTION CHARACTERISTICS OF FOUR PERENNIAL ENERGY CROPS (ARUNDO DONAX, CYNARA CARDUNCULUS, MISCANTHUS X GIGANTEUS AND PANICUM VIRGATUM) Jonas Dahl & Ingwald Obernberger Institute of Resource Efficient and Sustainable Systems, Graz University of Technology, Inffeldgasse 25, A - 8010 Graz, Austria, Tel.: +43 (0)316 481300, Fax: +43 (0)316 481300 4; E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT: The perennial crops giant reed, switchgrass, miscanthus and cardoon were investigated in laboratory- scale and pilot-scale combustion test runs. Laboratory-scale test runs were conducted in a fixed bed pot reactor monitoring the temperature in the fuel bed and the release of gaseous components while pilot-scale test runs where conducted in a 150 kWth rotating grate fired combustion plant measuring formed emissions of CO, NOX, SO2, HCl, and particulates as well as performing deposit probe measurements. The results revealed that the high concentration of ash and slag forming elements such as Si, K and Ca cause severe problems regarding slagging if not specially considered during combustion. Moreover, high concentrations of N are another challenge regarding measures in order to avoid high emissions of NOx. Moreover, also HCl and SO2 emissions are considerably higher compared to wood fuels due to the higher concentrations of Cl and S in these fuels. Keywords: biomass characteristics, biomass conversion, cynara cardonculus, giant reed, switchgrass, miscanthus 1 INTRODUCTION combustion unit (nominal boiler capacity 150 kWth) were carried out with larger amounts (2-4 tons) of Due to the limited availability of wood fuels, in pelletised switch grass and chopped giant reed and southern Europe, high yield energy crops could give an chopped miscanthus (MI).
    [Show full text]
  • Arundo Donax
    FLORIDA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY POLICY STATEMENT ON ARUNDO DONAX The Florida Native Plant Society opposes the agricultural production of Arundo donax (giant reed, e- grass, bamboo reed, arundo grass, giant bamboo reed, etc.) as a biofuel in Florida due to its invasive characteristics and empirical evidence of impact on native plant communities. The Society further encourages the eradication of existing stands of this species and the banning of its sale as an ornamental to prevent invasion of native plant habitats in Florida. ---Approved by the Board of Directors of the Florida Native Plant Society on October 28, 2006. BACKGROUND Arundo donax is a large, clumping grass species native to the Indian subcontinent and possibly to adjacent areas of Asia and eastern Europe. It has been spread across most tropical to warm-temperate regions of the globe for various reasons including but not limited to ornamental horticulture, erosion control, reed production for musical instruments, thatch, biomass production (biofuel), and building materials. Outside its native range, Arundo donax is believed to be sterile or nearly sterile and most if not all reproduction is by fragmentation of rhizomes and production of new roots from stems at nodes (Dudley, in press). It is found primarily in riverine habitats where it is broken up and spread during high water events (Else, 1996 as cited in Dudley, in press) and where, once introduced, it spreads vegetatively forming large, dense masses. A single clone can cover hundreds of acres (Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk, 2005). Spread between riverine systems is rarely addressed in the literature with 1) rare viable seed, 2) movement on equipment, 3) deliberate introduction by humans, 4) and occasional movement of plant fragments by animals or humans being known or hypothesized.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Identification of Commercialized Medicinal Plants in Southern Morocco
    Molecular Identification of Commercialized Medicinal Plants in Southern Morocco Anneleen Kool1*., Hugo J. de Boer1.,A˚ sa Kru¨ ger2, Anders Rydberg1, Abdelaziz Abbad3, Lars Bjo¨ rk1, Gary Martin4 1 Department of Systematic Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, 2 Department of Botany, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden, 3 Laboratory of Biotechnology, Protection and Valorisation of Plant Resources, Faculty of Science Semlalia, Cadi Ayyad University, Marrakech, Morocco, 4 Global Diversity Foundation, Dar Ylane, Marrakech, Morocco Abstract Background: Medicinal plant trade is important for local livelihoods. However, many medicinal plants are difficult to identify when they are sold as roots, powders or bark. DNA barcoding involves using a short, agreed-upon region of a genome as a unique identifier for species– ideally, as a global standard. Research Question: What is the functionality, efficacy and accuracy of the use of barcoding for identifying root material, using medicinal plant roots sold by herbalists in Marrakech, Morocco, as a test dataset. Methodology: In total, 111 root samples were sequenced for four proposed barcode regions rpoC1, psbA-trnH, matK and ITS. Sequences were searched against a tailored reference database of Moroccan medicinal plants and their closest relatives using BLAST and Blastclust, and through inference of RAxML phylograms of the aligned market and reference samples. Principal Findings: Sequencing success was high for rpoC1, psbA-trnH, and ITS, but low for matK. Searches using rpoC1 alone resulted in a number of ambiguous identifications, indicating insufficient DNA variation for accurate species-level identification. Combining rpoC1, psbA-trnH and ITS allowed the majority of the market samples to be identified to genus level.
    [Show full text]
  • Alhagi Maurorum
    Prepared By Jacob Higgs and Tim Higgs Class 1A EDRR- Early Detection Rapid Response Watch List Common crupina Crupina vulgaris African rue Peganum harmala Small bugloss Anchusa arvensis Mediterranean sage Salvia aethiopis Spring millet Milium vernale Syrian beancaper Zygophyllum fabago North Africa grass Ventenata dubia Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthiodes Malta thistle Centaurea melitensis Common Crupina Crupina vulgaris African rue Peganum harmala Small bugloss Anchusa arvensis Mediterranean sage Salvia aethiopis Spring millet Milium vernale Syrian beancaper Zygophyllum fabago North Africa grass Ventenata dubia Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthiodes Malta thistle Centaurea melitensis m Class 1B Early Detection Camelthorn Alhagi maurorum Garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata Purple starthistle Cantaurea calcitrapa Goatsrue Galega officinalis African mustard Brassica tournefortii Giant Reed Arundo donax Japanese Knotweed Polygonum cuspidatum Vipers bugloss Echium vulgare Elongated mustard Brassica elongate Common St. Johnswort Hypericum perforatum L. Oxeye daisy Leucanthemum vulgare Cutleaf vipergrass Scorzonera laciniata Camelthorn Alhagi maurorum Garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata Purple starthistle Cantaurea calcitrapa Goatsrue Galega officinalis African mustard Brassica tournefortii Giant Reed Arundo donax Japanese Knotweed Polygonum cuspidatum Vipers bugloss Echium vulgare Elongated mustard Brassica elongate Common St. Johnswort Hypericum perforatum L. Oxeye daisy Leucanthemum vulgare Cutleaf vipergrass Scorzonera laciniata Class 2 Control
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology and Management of Arundo Donax, and Approaches to Riparian Habitat Restoration in Southern California
    ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF ARUNDO DONAX, AND APPROACHES TO RIPARIAN HABITAT RESTORATION IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. Gary P. Bell The Nature Conservancy of New Mexico, 212 E. Marcy Street, Suite 200, Santa Fe, NM 87501 USA Abstract By far the greatest threat to the dwindling riparian resources of coastal southern California is the alien grass species known as Arundo donax. Over the last 25 years the riparian forests of coastal southern California have become infested with A. donax which has spread by flood-fragmentation and dispersal of vegetative propagules. Arundo donax dramatically alters the ecological/successional processes in riparian systems and ultimately moves most riparian habitats towards pure stands of this alien grass. By current estimates there are tens of thousands of acres of A. donax along the major coastal drainage systems of southern California, including the Santa Ana, Santa Margarita, Ventura, Santa Clara, San Diego, and San Luis Rey rivers. The removal of A. donax from these systems provides numerous downstream benefits in terms of native species habitat, wildfire protection, water quantity and water quality. Introduction Arundo L. is a genus of tall perennial reed-like grasses (Poaceae) with six species native to warmer parts of the Old World. Arundo donax L. (giant reed, bamboo reed, giant reed grass, arundo grass, donax cane, giant cane, river cane, bamboo cane, canne de Provence), is the largest member of the genus and is among the largest of the grasses, growing to a height of 8 m (Fig. 1). This species is believed to be native to freshwaters of eastern Asia (Polunin and Huxley 1987), but has been cultivated throughout Asia, southern Europe, north Africa, and the Middle East for thousands of years and has been planted widely in North and South America and Australasia in the past century (Perdue 1958, Zohary 1962).
    [Show full text]
  • An Armored Scale Released for Biological Control of Giant Reed, Arundo Donax
    112 Session 3 Non-Traditional Biological Control Agents Rhizaspidiotus donacis (Hemiptera: Diaspididae), an Armored Scale Released for Biological Control of Giant Reed, Arundo donax P. J. Moran1, J. A. Goolsby2, A. E. Racelis2, E. Cortés3, M. A. Marcos-García3, A. A. Kirk4 and J. J. Adamczyk5 1U. S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS), Exotic and Inva- sive Weeds Research Unit, 800 Buchanan St., Albany, CA 94710 USA Email: [email protected] 2USDA-ARS, Cattle Fever Tick Research Laboratory, Moore Air Base, 22675 N. Moorefield Rd., Edinburg, TX 78541 USA Email: [email protected] 3Instituto de Biodiversidad CIBIO. Universidad de Alicante, Campus Universitario San Vicente del Raspeig, 03080, Alicante, Spain Email: [email protected] 4USDA-ARS, European Biological Control Laboratory, CS 90023 Montferrier-sur-Lez, 34988 Sant Gely du Fesc (Montpelier), France Email: [email protected] 5USDA-ARS, Thad Cochran Southern Horticultural Laboratory, 810 Hwy 26 West, PO Box 287, Poplarville, MS 39470 USA Email: [email protected] Abstract Non-native, invasive perennial grasses have not been widely targeted for classical biological control with insects, despite their global prevalence and damaging effects, in part because of a perceived paucity of host-specific insect herbivores. Armored scales (Hemiptera: Diaspididae) have not been used for biological weed control. However, over 250 armored scale species occur on grasses, of which 87% feed only on this family and 58% feed on only one grass genus, suggesting that armored scales may have unrealized biological control potential. We selected the armored scale Rhizaspidiotus donacis Leonardi as a candidate agent against the exotic, invasive, water-consuming grass known as giant reed (Arundo donax L.), based on literature records and our collections indicating host-specificity to the genus Arundo and its broad geographic range in the Mediterranean basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Invasives and Biofuels
    Invasives and Biofuels Roger C. Anderson School of Biological Sciences Illinois State University Biofuel derived substitutes for petroleum • Two categories of liquid biofuels – First generation • Ethanol (from plant starch, sugar) • Biodiesel (from plant & animal oils) • Methanol (wood) – Second generation • Ceullosic ethanol production • Woody plants and grasses First Generation Biofuels • Examples: Corn, Soybeans, sunflower, sugar cane • Costly: Requires high input of resources – Fertilizer, pesticides, tillage – Utilization prime agricultural land • Degrades natural resources – Dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico • Human food chain • Generally, will not persist without human intervention – Rarely invasive Second Generation Biofuels • Uses grasses, herbs, and trees • Grown on marginal, lower productivity land • Neutral to negative carbon budget Miscanthus giganteus • Low resource demand (fertilizer, pesticides) • Not in human food chains • Perennial Crops – Once planted they will persist – Can be invasive Switchgrass Second Biomass Generation Biofuels Cellulose Enzymes Breakdown Cellulose CO2 Sugars CO2 Ethanol CO2 Fossil BTU 1.23 Fossil BTU 0.74 Fossil BTU @ 0.1 Gasoline Corn Ethanol Cellulosic Ethanol From Coal & Natural Gas From Petroleum Desirable Characteristics of Biofuel Plants • C 4 photosynthesis • Long canopy duration • Perennial • No known pests or diseases • Rapid growth in spring -(to outcompete weeds) • Sterility • High water-use efficiency • Partition nutrients belowground in the fall Two Potential Conflicts in the Nation’s
    [Show full text]
  • Growth Response of Lemna Gibba L. (Duckweed) to Copper and Nickel Phytoaccumulation Effet De L’Accumulation De Cu Et Ni Sur La Croissance De Lemna Gibba L
    NOVATECH 2010 Growth response of Lemna gibba L. (duckweed) to copper and nickel phytoaccumulation Effet de l’accumulation de Cu et Ni sur la croissance de Lemna gibba L. (lentilles d’eau) N. Khellaf, M. Zerdaoui Laboratory of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Badji Mokhtar University, P.O. Box 12, 23000 Annaba, Algeria (E-mail: [email protected] (N. Khellaf); [email protected] (M. Zerdaoui)) RÉSUMÉ Pour déterminer la tolérance et la capacité de phytoaccumulation du cuivre (Cu) et du nickel (Ni) par une espèce de lentilles d’eau, Lemna gibba L., les plantes sont exposées à différentes concentrations de Cu et Ni (0,1 à 2,0 mg/L) dans une solution de Coïc et Lesaint dilué à 1/4. Le pH est maintenu constant à 6,0 (± 0,1) et le flux de lumière est de 12 h/jour. Le cuivre et le nickel sont tolérés par L. gibba à des concentrations ≤ 0,3 mg/L et ≤ 0,5 mg/L, respectivement. Cependant, la croissance des plantes diminue de 50% (I50) quand le milieu de culture contient 0,45 mg/L de Cu ou 0,75 mg/L de Ni. La plus faible concentration causant une inhibition complète (LCI) est de 0,5 et 1,0 mg/L respectivement en présence de Cu et Ni. Les résultats de l’analyse du métal dans les tissus des plantes révèlent une grande accumulation de Cu et une faible accumulation de Ni dans les tissus végétaux (pour la concentration ne causant aucune inhibition dans la croissance). Une diminution de la concentration de métal dans l’eau est également observée.
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Use Dynamics of an Invasive Reed, Arundo Donax, from Leaf to Stand
    Wetlands DOI 10.1007/s13157-011-0188-1 ARTICLE Water-Use Dynamics of an Invasive Reed, Arundo donax, from Leaf to Stand David A. Watts & Georgianne W. Moore Received: 13 December 2010 /Accepted: 17 May 2011 # Society of Wetland Scientists 2011 Abstract We investigated water use of an invasive riparian Introduction reed species, Arundo donax (L.), along moisture gradients to determine how extensively this plant might affect water Invasive species have altered the structure and function of resources. On an approximately 250 m stretch of the numerous ecosystems (Vitousek 1990; Walker and Smith Lower Rio Grande in South Texas, we measured the gas 1997;D’Antonio et al. 1999; Parker et al. 1999; Belnap et exchange of water vapor at the leaf scale and structural al. 2005; Lau 2008). In water-limited river systems, there characteristics, such as leaf area and shoot density, at the are added pressures from riparian invasive species (Dukes stand scale. To assess the effect of water availability, we and Mooney 2004), which can not only alter the dynamics used transects perpendicular to the edge of the river between vegetation and geomorphology in riparian systems along a potential moisture gradient. Stands of A. donax (Rowntree 1991), but negatively affect hydrology if used approximately 8.8±0.9 mm of water per day during increases in leaf transpiration rate, leaf area, and/or access the peak of the 2008 growing season; this rate of water use to previously unused sources of moisture lead to reductions is at the high end of the spectrum for plants. Transpiration in soil moisture content (Walker and Smith 1997).
    [Show full text]
  • Simulating the Hydrologic Impact of Arundo Donax Invasion on the Headwaters of the Nueces River in Texas
    Hydrology 2015, 2, 134-147; doi:10.3390/hydrology2030134 OPEN ACCESS hydrology ISSN 2306-5338 www.mdpi.com/journal/hydrology Article Simulating the Hydrologic Impact of Arundo donax Invasion on the Headwaters of the Nueces River in Texas Shailee Jain 1, Srinivasulu Ale 2,*, Clyde L. Munster 1, R. James Ansley 2 and James R. Kiniry 3 1 Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA; E-Mails: [email protected] (S.J.); [email protected] (C.L.M.) 2 Texas A&M AgriLife Research (Texas A&M University System), Vernon, TX 76384, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] 3 Grassland Soil and Water Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Temple, TX 76502, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-940-552-9941 (ext. 232); Fax: +1-940-552-2317. Academic Editor: Heejun Chang Received: 31 May 2015 / Accepted: 13 August 2015 / Published: 20 August 2015 Abstract: Arundo donax (hereafter referred to as Arundo), a robust herbaceous plant, has invaded the riparian zones of the Rio Grande River and the rivers of the Texas Hill Country over the last two decades. Arundo was first observed along the Nueces River in central Texas in 1995 by the Nueces River Authority (NRA). It then spread rapidly downstream due to its fast growth rate and availability of streamflow for its consumptive use, and it completely displaced the native vegetation, primarily Panicum virgatum (hereafter referred to as switchgrass) in the riparian zone.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to a Study of Arundo Donax
    An Assessment and Management Protocol for Arundo donax in the Salinas Valley Watershed A Capstone Project Presented to the Faculty of Earth Systems Science and Policy in the Center for Science, Technology, and Information Resources at California State University Monterey Bay In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science by Alana J. Oakins May 2001 Preface This is an under-graduate student report. The opinions and conclusions presented do not necessarily reflect the final material to be presented as the outcome of the Salinas Sediment Study (2000-1 contract). Nor do they necessarily reflect the opinions or conclusions of the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, who funded the work, or any of its staff. Having said that, I hope you enjoy the report. It is the product of an extra-ordinary level student dedication to the science of bettering the environment of the Central Coast while recognizing the social and economic importance of its agriculture and industry. Dr. Fred Watson Project leader. Student Capstone Advisor Table of Contents Abstract…p.4 Part I Background: Arundo donax Management and Eradication in Riparian Systems…p.5 1.1 Introduction…p.5 1.2 Arundo donax Historical Facts…p.5 1.3 Plant Biology of Arundo donax…p.6 1.4 Effects of Disturbance on the Viability of Arundo donax…p.7 Reproductive viability of Arundo donax…p.7 Flood as a disturbance…p.8 Fire as a disturbance…p.8 1.5 Problems Associated with Arundo donax…p.8 Effects on stream flow and stream morphology…p.8 Loss of native
    [Show full text]
  • Arundo Donax Near Big Bend National Park, Texas (Left), and Near Eagle Pass, Texas, Along the Rio Grande (Right)
    Weed Risk Assessment for Arundo United States donax L. (Poaceae) – Giant reed Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service June 14, 2012 Version 1 Aerial view of Arundo donax near Big Bend National Park, Texas (left), and near Eagle Pass, Texas, along the Rio Grande (right). Source: Photographs taken by John Goolsby and obtained from http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/AR/archive/jul09/arundo0709.htm. Agency Contact: Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory Center for Plant Health Science and Technology Plant Protection and Quarantine Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service United States Department of Agriculture 1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300 Raleigh, NC 27606 Weed Risk Assessment for Arundo donax Introduction Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) regulates noxious weeds under the authority of the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. § 7701-7786, 2000) and the Federal Seed Act (7 U.S.C. § 1581-1610, 1939). A noxious weed is “any plant or plant product that can directly or indirectly injure or cause damage to crops (including nursery stock or plant products), livestock, poultry, or other interests of agriculture, irrigation, navigation, the natural resources of the United States, the public health, or the environment” (7 U.S.C. § 7701-7786, 2000). We use weed risk assessment (WRA) —specifically, the PPQ WRA model1—to evaluate the risk potential of plants, including those newly detected in the United States, those proposed for import, and those emerging as weeds elsewhere in the world. Because our WRA model is geographically and climatically neutral, it can be used to evaluate the baseline invasive/weed potential of any plant species for the entire United States or any area within it.
    [Show full text]