PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2018 | 27 | 4 |
Tytuł artykułu

Valuation of ecosystem services for implementing innovative clean technology

Treść / Zawartość
Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
EN
Abstrakty
EN
Sustainable development of high nature value areas promotes the use of resources and services that rely on the unique assets of a particular ecosystem without undermining its integrity. Implementing innovative technologies, especially in the field of renewable energy sources, supports this process and helps to preserve environmentally valuable areas such as semi-natural grasslands. This study employs the ecosystem services valuation method to assess the environmental impacts of implementation of innovative IFBB technology in the Notec River Valley of western Poland as a part of a proposed implementation potential analysis framework. Six different categories of ecosystem services were analysed. Results show that implementing IFBB technology has a positive impact on the local ecosystem, generates additional value for potential investors, and thus could affect the perception of a renewable energy generation technology as being viable to implement.
Słowa kluczowe
Wydawca
-
Rocznik
Tom
27
Numer
4
Opis fizyczny
p.1513-1521,fig.,ref.
Twórcy
autor
  • Department of Industrial Product Quality and Ecology, Faculty of Commodity Science, Poznan University of Economics and Business, Poznan, Poland
  • Department of Industrial Product Quality and Ecology, Faculty of Commodity Science, Poznan University of Economics and Business, Poznan, Poland
Bibliografia
  • 1. SCARLAT N., DALLEMAND J.F., BANJA M. Possible impact of 2020 bioenergy targets on European Union land use. A scenario-based assessment from national renewable energy action plans proposals, Renew. Sust. Ener. Rev. 18, 595, 2013.
  • 2. IGLINSKI B., IGLINSKA A., KUJAWSKI W., BUCZKOWSKI R., CICHOSZ M. Bioenergy in Poland, Renew. Sust. Ener. Rev. 15, 2999, 2011.
  • 3. BUDZIANOWSKI W.M. Sustainable biogas energy in Poland: Prospects and challenges, Renew. Sust. Ener. Rev. 16, 342, 2011.
  • 4. NIZAMI A.S., MURPHY J.D. What type of digester configurations should be employed to produce biomethane from grass silage? Renew. Sust. Ener. Rev. 14, 1558, 2010.
  • 5. EUROSTAT, Agricultural production – animals, [accessed 2017 February 07], Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php/Agricultural_ production_-_animals, 2015.
  • 6. BRIEMLE G. Addressing and promoting Extensive Grassland. New ways to the principle of rewarding ecological agricultural services in Baden-Württemberg, Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung, 32. (6), 171, 2000.
  • 7. MIZGALSKI A., STĘPNIEWSKA M. Ecosystem services assessment for Poland – challenges and possible solutions, Ekonomia i Środowisko, 2 (42), 54, 2012.
  • 8. HANSSON M., FOGELFORS H. Management of a semi-natural grassland; results from a 15-year-old experiment in southern Sweden, Journal of Vegetation Science, 11, 31, 2000.
  • 9. JOUVEN M., BAUMONT R. Simulating grassland utilization in beef suckler systems to investigate trade-offs between production and floristic diversity, Agricultural Systems, 96, 260, 2008.
  • 10. PÄRTEL M., BRUUN H.H., SAMMUL M. Biodiversity in temperate European grasslands: origin and conservation, Grassland Science in Europe, 10, 1, 2005.
  • 11. PEETERS A. Past and future of European grass lands. The challenge of the CAP towards 2020, Grassland Science in Europe, 17, 17, 2012.
  • 12. ROGNLI O.A., FJELLHEIM S., PECETTI L., BOLLER B. Semi-natural grasslands as a source of genetic diversity, Grassland Science in Europe, 18, 303, 2013.
  • 13. GOLIŃSKI T. Analysis of economic aspects of the implementation of the agri-environmental programme on permanent grassland in Poland, Grassl. Sci. Eur. 17, 771, 2012.
  • 14. SOLON J. The concept of "Ecosystem Services" and its applications in ecological and landscape studies, Instytut Geografii i Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania Polskiej Akademii Nauk, 2008.
  • 15. MILLENNIUM ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENT Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis, Island Press, Washington, D.C., 2005.
  • 16. ISO 13065:2015 Sustainability criteria for bioenergy, [accessed 07.03.16], Available at: https://www.iso.org/standard/52528.html, 2015.
  • 17. POSKROBKO B. Environmental services as an economics category of sustainable development, Ekonomia i Środowisko”, 1 (37), 20, 2010.
  • 18. ISSELSTEIN J., KAYSER M. Functions of grassland and their potential in delivering ecosystem services, Grassland Science in Europe, 19, 199, 2014.
  • 19. KRONENBERG J. Ecosystem services in cities, Sustainable Development - Applications nr 3, Uniwersytet Łódzki, 2012.
  • 20. HÖNIGOVÁ I., VAČKÁŘ D., LORENCOVÁ E., MELICHAR J., GÖTZL M., SONDEREGGER G., OUŠKOVÁ V., HOŠEK M., CHOBOT K. Survey on grassland ecosystem services, Report of the European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity, Nature Conservation Agency of the Czech Republic, 2012.
  • 21. HAINES-YOUNG R., POTSCHIN M. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): 2011 Update, European Environment Agency, Centre for Environmental Management, University of Nottingham, 2011.
  • 22. EEA Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) version 4.3 (update January 2013), Europejska Agencja Środowiskowa, 2016.
  • 23. SUNDSETH K. Promotion of socioeconomic benefits of Natura 2000, Natura 2000: Biuletyn Komisji Europejskiej o przyrodzie i bioróżnorodności, Komisja Europejska, 2010.
  • 24. DIKOVA M. European Commission Biodiversity Technical Assistance Units Supporting Small & Medium Enterprises to Benefit Biodiversity in Natura 2000 Areas by Creating a Dedicated Pro-biodiversity Investment Market, BTAU Project, 2008.
  • 25. KARPOWICZ Z., FOXALL J., DAY M. Handbook for Developing and Implementing Pro-Biodiversity Projects-an output from the EC Biodiversity Technical Assistance Unit project, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, 2009.
  • 26. POSKROBKO B. Methodological aspects of economics of sustainable development, [in:] Poskrobko, B., (eds.), The economics of sustainable development in the light of canons science, Wyd. WSE, Białystok, 12, 2011.
  • 27. WACHENDORF M., RICHTER F., FRICKE T., GRAß R., Neff R. Utilization of semi-natural grassland through integrated generation of solid fuel and biogas from biomass I: Effects of hydrothermal conditioning and mechanical dehydration on mass flows of organic and mineral plant compounds, and nutrient balances, Grass and Forage Sci. 64 (2), 132, 2009.
  • 28. RICHTER F., FRICKE T., WACHENDORF M. Influence of sward maturity and pre-conditioning temperature on the energy production from grass silage through the integrated generation of solid fuel and biogas from biomass (IFBB): 1. The fate of mineral compounds, Bioresour. Technol. 102, 4855-4865, 2011.
  • 29. HENSGEN F., RICHTER F., WACHENDORF M. Integrated generation of solid fuel and biogas from green cut material from landscape conservation and private households, Bioresour. Technol. 102 (22), 10441, 2011.
  • 30. INTERREG CENTRAL EUROPE, Interreg CENTRAL EUROPE Cooperation Programme: European Territorial Cooperation 2014-2020, [accessed 2017 February 07], Available at: http://www.interregcentral.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Documents/Programme_documents/ CE_Cooperation_programme_with_annexes.zip, 2014.
  • 31. DANUBENERGY Improving eco-efficiency of bio-energy production and supply in riparian areas of the Danube river basin and other floodplains in Central Europe, [accessed 13.01.2015], Available at: http://danubenergy.eu/,2014.
  • 32. MRiRW Ministry A&RD Report on the implementation of the Rural Area Development Program for the years 2007-2013, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, [accessed 07.03.16], Available at: http://www.minrol.gov.pl/Wsparcie-rolnictwa-i-rybolowstwa/, 2014.
  • 33. BAŃSKI J. Agricultural land use, in: Bański, J. (ed.), Atlas of Polish Agriculture, IGiPZ PAN, Warszawa, 47, 2010.
  • 34. COSTANZA R., D’ARGE R., DEGROOT R., FARBER S., GRASSO M. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital, Nature, 387, 253, 1997.
  • 35. DAILY G.C., ALEXANDER S., EHRLICH P.R., GOULDER L., LUBCHENCO J., MATSON P.A., MOONEY H.A., et al. Ecosystem services: benefits supplied to human societies by natural ecosystems, Issues in Ecology, 1 (2), 1, 1997.
  • 36. DAILY G.C., SODERQVIST T., ANIYAR S., ARROW K., DASGUPTA P. The value of nature and the nature of value. Science, 289, 395, 2000.
  • 37. HEAL G. Valuing ecosystem services, Ecosystems, 3, 24, 2000.
  • 38. PAGIOLA S. How much is an ecosystem worth?: assessing the economic value of conservation. World Bank Publications, 2005.
  • 39. NORGAARD R.B. Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder, Ecological Economics, 69 (1), 1219, [accessed 07.03.16], Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VDY-4XT6NR6-1/2/f27a0fca9d71a40a2a543593491e5da6, 2010.
  • 40. CHMIELEWSKI T.J., MICHALIK-ŚNIEŻEK M. A method of integrated evaluation of cultural ecosystem services at the landscape scale and its application in the Vistula river gorge in the Kazimierz Landscape Park, Ekonomia i Środowisko, 2 (42), 176, 2012.
  • 41. MICHAŁOWSKI A. Material environmental services in the light of the assumptions of the sustainable development economy, Ekonomia i Środowisko, 1 (39), 45, 2011.
  • 42. STĘPNIEWSKA M. Resources of the Polish official statistics for valuation of provisioning ecosystem services, Ekonomia i Środowisko, 4 (51), 102, 2014.
  • 43. COMELLO S.D. A framework for firm-level ecosystem service valuation and representation, Stanford University, [accessed 13.01.2016], Available at: http://purl.stanford.edu/xm806hp0906, 2012.
  • 44. BRZEG A., WOJTERSKA M. Systematic review of plant communities in Wielkopolska together with the assessment of their threat level, Physiographic research on Western Poland, series B - Botany, 45, 7, 1996.
  • 45. SOUSSANA J.-F., LOUISEAU P., VUICHARD N., CESCHIA E., BALESDENT J., CHEVALLIER T., ARROUAYS D. Carbon cycling and sequestration opportunities in temperate grasslands, Soil Use and Management, 20, 219, 2004.
  • 46. KUIK O. The Avoidance Costs of Greenhouse Gas Damage: A Meta-Analysis, CASES project, WP3, European Commission, 2007.
  • 47. NBP NBP Exchange rates, National Bank of Poland, [accessed 07.03.16], Available at: http://www.nbp.pl/ homen.aspx?f=/kursy/ kursyen.htm, 2016.
  • 48. VERHEIJEN F.G.A., JONES R.J.A., RICKSON R.J., SMITH C.J. Tolerable versus actual soil erosion rates in Europe, Earth-Science Reviews, 94, 23, 2009.
  • 49. BAZZOFFI P. Soil erosion tolerance and water runoff control: minimum environmental standards, Regional Environmental Change, 9, 169, 2009.
  • 50. PIMENTEL D., HARVEY C., RESOSUDARMO P., SINCLAIR K., KURZ D., MCNAIR M., CRIST S., SHPRITZ L., FITTON L., SAFFOURI R., BLAIR R. Environmental and economic costs of soil erosion and conservation benefits, Science, 267, 1117, 1995.
  • 51. KŘŮMALOVÁ V., PRAŽAN J., DRLÍK J. Ohodnocení vybraných veřejných statků pocházejících ze zemědělství (Valuation of selected public goods from agriculture), Výzkumný ústav zemědělské ekonomiky, Praha, 2000.
  • 52. LEITINGER G., TASSER E., NEWESELY C., OBOJES N., TAPPEINER U. Seasonal dynamics of surface runoff in mountain grassland ecosystems differing in land use, Journal of Hydrology, 385, 95, 2010.
  • 53. PITHART D., KŘOVÁKOVÁ K., DUŠEK J., ŽALOUDÍK J. Case study: Ecosystem services of a floodplain with a preserved hydrological regime, Czech Republic, [w:] Saalismaa, N., i in., (red.), The role of environmental management and eco-engineering in disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation, Geneva, ProactNet, 34, 2008.
  • 54. RYBANIČ R., ŠEFFER J., ČIERNA M. Economic valuation of benefits from conservation and restoration of flood-plain meadows, [w:] Šeffer, J., Stanová, V., (red.), Morava River Floodplain Meadows – Importance, Restoration and Management, DAPHNE – Centre for Applied Ecology, Bratislava, 147, 1999.
  • 55. WOJEWÓDZTWO LUBUSKIE LUBUSKIE VOIVODES Official Journal of the Lubuskie Voivodeship, Order of the Regional Director for Environmental Protection in Gorzów Wielkopolski of January 14, 2014. regarding the plan protective tasks for the Natura 2000 area of Dolina Dolnej Noteci, Gorzów Wielkopolski, 2014.
  • 56. WOJEWÓDZTWO WIELKOPOLSKIE WIELKOPOLSKIE VOIVODESHIP Journal of the Wielkopolskie Voivodeship, Order of the Regional Director for Environmental Protection in Bydgoszcz and Regional Director for Environmental Protection in Poznań of 28 April 2014 on the establishment of plan of conservation tasks for the Natura 2000 area of Dolina Noteci, Poznań, 2014.
  • 57. BALE C.S., VARGA L., FOXON T.J. Energy and complexity: New ways forward, Applied Energy, 138, 150, 2014.
  • 58. GOLIŃSKI T., LEPECH M. Implementation Potential Analysis of Innovative Technology Focusing on Renewable Energy Generation from Semi-Natural Grassland Biomass: A Case Study for the Notec River Valley, Biomass and Bioenergy, (After peer review), 2017.
  • 59. KULCZYCKA J., LELEK Ł., LEWANDOWSKA A., ZAREBSKA J. Life Cycle Assessment of Municipal Solid Waste Management – Comparison of Results Using Different LCA Models, Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 24, 1, 125, 2015.
  • 60. DZIKUĆ M., PIWOWAR A., Life Cycle Assessment as an Eco-Management Tool within the Power Industry, Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 24, 6, 2381, 2015.
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikatory
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.agro-2f1e61f3-00f6-4f15-9158-46bf2aafd963
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.