1. Soil Health and Water Quality
Impacts of Growing Energy Beets for
Advanced Biofuel Production in
North-Central United States
Zhulu Lin
Agricultural & Biosystems Engineering Department
North Dakota State University at Fargo
USDA-NIFA Project Director’s Meeting, Washington DC
October 12-13, 2016

2. Co-PIs
• Carrington Research and Extension Center
(CREC), NDSU
– Mr. Blaine Schatz, director and agronomist
– Dr. Michael Ostlie, agronomist
– Dr. Jasper Teboh, soil scientist
• Dept. of Agribusiness & Applied Economics,
NDSU
– Dr. David Ripplinger, bioenergy economist
• School of Natural Resource Sciences, NDSU
– Dr. Caley Gasch (?), microbial biologist

3. Other Team Members
• Dept. of Ag & Biosystems Engineering, NDSU
– Mr. Mohammad Anar, Ph.D. candidate
– Ms. Mengqi (Ivy) Xiong, M.S., graduated in May 2016
• CREC, NDSU
– Ms. Szilvia Yuja, research specialist
– Undergraduate summer interns
• Dept. of Agribusiness & Applied Economics
– Dr. Aaron De Laporte, postdoc research associate
– Mr. Asanka Wijesinghe, M.S. graduated in May 2016

4. Background
• EISA of 2007 or the revised Renewable
Fuels Standard (RFS2) mandates the use
of 36 BGY of renewable fuels of 2022:
– 15 BGY of conventional biofuels
– 4 BGY of advanced biofuels
• Sugarcane and sugarbeet
– 16 BGY of cellulosic biofuels
– 1 BGY of biomass-based biodiesel

5. Global Biofuel Production by
Feedstock
Source: www.agri-outlook.org
Corn (US)
Sugarcane (Brazil)

6. Sugarbeet Production in US
Red River Valley (RRV)

7. Energy Beets and the RRV

8. Project Objectives
• Field scale
1. Conduct field experiment to assess the impacts of energy beet
production on soil properties and rotation crops;
2. Improve and apply the DSSAT and RZWQM models to
simulate crop yields, water flow, and nutrient transport
processes in energy beet fields;
• Watershed scale
3. Develop a spatial econometric model to simulate land use
changes surrounding potential beet-biorefinery sites in the
RRV; and
4. Apply SWAT to simulate downstream water quality impact
caused by energy beet biofuel production.

9. Research Methods

10. Field Experiment

11. Field Measurements
• Assessing impacts on soil properties and rotation
crops
– Soil: texture, aggregate stability, bulk density,
hydraulic conductivity, and microbial enzyme activities
(phosphatase, urease, NO3-reductase, NH4-oxidase)
– Crop: yield, plant height, grain quality, nutrient
content, residue C/N
• Collecting data for sugarbeet model development
– Plant growth: Leaf number, LAI, top and root mass
– Soil water (4 depths): SWC, nitrate

12. Model Development
RZWQM
Sugarbeet
Models
Improvement&
programming
DSSAT
Calibration&
validation
Analysis &
Applications
Calibration/validation

13. Land Use Change and Water
Quality Impact Simulations
Yields & costs
(production,
transportation,
opportunity)
Economic
Model
Land use
distribution
surrounding beet-
biorefineries
SWAT
Beet &
ethanol
prices, plant
capacity
Downstream
water quality
impacts

14. Results & Discussion

15. O1. Field Study Preliminary
Results
Corn following soybeanCorn following energy beets

16. Effect of Preceding Crops on
Corn
Height and Yield Starch and Protein

17. Soil Enzyme Assays (2nd Yr)
0
75
150
225
300
375
Phosphatase Urease
ug/g
Beet Corn Soybean Wheat

18. Soil Enzyme Assays (2nd Yr)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
NO3 Reductase NH4 Oxidase
ug/g
Beet Corn Soybean Wheat

19. O2. Model Development
• CERES-Beet improved and incorporated
into DSSAT and RZWQM
• Both models calibrated and validated
against 2014 and 2015 field data
• Model calibration and parameter sensitivity
analysis done with PEST software

20. DSSAT Calibration (2014)

21. DSSAT Validation (2015)

22. Parameter Sensitivity Analysis
Total Observations LAI Observations
Top Observations Root Observations

23. RZWQM Calibration (2014)
Plant growth Soil water content
Days after Planting
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
SoilProfileNO3-N(kg/ha)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Simulated
Observed

24. RZWQM Validation (2015)
Plant growth Soil water content
Days after Planting
20 40 60 80 100 120
SoilProfileNO3-N(g/ha)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Simulated
Observed

25. O3. Land Use Changes @ Five
Potential Beet-Biorefinery Sites

26. Current Scenario
(Bt: $30/ton; El: $1.5/gal)

27. Capacity Scenario
(Bt: $35/ton; El: $1.7/gal)

28. ¼ Transportation Scenario
(Bt: $30/ton; El: $1.5/gal)

29. 1.5 Transportation Scenario
(Bt: $40/ton; El: $1.9/gal)

30. O4. Downstream WQ Impact
Marginal land
8.7%

31. Cropping Scenarios
• Sugarbeet Scenario
– All arable marginal lands (8.7%) are planted with
sugarbeets (4%+8.7% = 12.7%)
– Environmentally bad scenario
• Alfalfa Scenario
– All currently cultivated marginal lands (2.5%) are
converted back to grassland planted with alfalfa
(1.5%+2.5% = 4%)
– Environmentally good scenario

32. Downstream WQ Loads
Sediment Total P

33. Downstream WQ Loads
Nitrate Total N

34. Output & Impact

35. Output
• Model/software
– Sugarbeet module added to DSSAT &
RZWQM
• Thesis/dissertations (2 M.S. & 1 Ph.D.)
– 2 M.S. graduated in May 2016
• Journal article (1)
• Conference papers/presentations (18)
– ASABE (5), AGU (1), AWRA (1), AAEA (1),
EWRC (2), Others (8)

36. Impact
• Regional sugarbeet producers through
various extension activities
• DSSAT and RZWQM developers and
users
• Regional energy beet biofuel industry
• Policymakers and natural resources
managers

37. Acknowledgements
• USDA-NIFA Foundational Program (2013-
67020-21366)
• North Dakota Renewable Energy Council
• DSSAT: Dr. Gerrit Hoongenboom
• RZWQM: Drs Liwang Ma & Patricia
Bartling

38. Thank you!