To:

Cc:
From:
Sent:
Subject:

Stoner, Nancy[Stoner.Nancy@epa.gov]
McCabe, Janet[McCabe.Janet@epa.gov]; Marcia Willhite[Marcia.Willhite@lllinois.gov]
Steve John
Tue 10/1/2013 8:41 :32 PM
Synergies between perennial biomass crops and water quality

Nancy,
Good to see you at the CenUSA biomass I water quality workshop and Hypoxia Task Force
meeting last week in Minneapolis. Here are the comments I sent to the workshop organizers and
presented during the public comment period of the HTF meeting.
As you suggested, this is cc'ed to Janet McCabe in the Office of Air and Radiation. Marcia
Willhite of Illinois EPA is also cc'ed.
I appreciate the challenges of crafting policies and economic analyses related to multifunctional
agriculture, but I think it is worth the effort. For example, the attached paper included in the
CenUSA workshop packet compares the DOE, EPA, and USDA analyses of biomass feedstocks
to meet the RFS2 targets. It does not mention if environmental externalities were addressed in
these studies. Scientific assessments comparing the positive and negative impacts of alternative
feedstock scenarios, notably perennial bioenergy crops and com stover, could form the basis of
policies to achieve renewable energy targets and also enhance water quality and ecosystem
health.
Perennial biomass crops selected, sited, and managed to provide fuel, feed, and ecosystem
services can begin a transformation of the Com Belt landscape on a scale comparable to the
transformation that was driven by the introduction of inorganic nitrogen fertilizer after World
War II. Inorganic N made grain-only farm operations feasible in much of the Midwest, which in
tum contributed to over-reliance on fossil fuels and the water quality impacts of row crop
production. As the U.S. ramps up production of renewable energy, perennial biomass crops offer
an enormous opportunity to reduce the carbon footprint of agriculture and enhance the ecological
functioning of the agricultural landscape.
I would be happy to elaborate on my HTF comments and would welcome your feedback.
Regards and wishes for a quick end to the shutdown.
Steve John
Executive Director
Agricultural Watershed Institute
4004 College Park Road
Decatur, IL 62521
217-877-5640 - office
217-620-0300 - cell

CREW FOIA 2014-006851-0001894

-------- Original Message -------Subject:some "how-to-get there" comments

Date:Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:16:58 -0500 (CDT)

Ken,

To follow up on our conversation after the workshop adjourned, here for reference are some additional
ideas I jotted down for "actionable strategies to incent adoption of perennials on the landscape":

Collaborative R&D on linkages between perennial biomass crops (PBC) and modified
drainage systems. Buffers don't remove nitrates lost via tile drainage. Wetness-tolerant perennial
bioenergy or forage crops could be grown in saturated buffers or slopes or seasonal wetlands that
could remove nitrates by crop uptake as well as denitrification. The strategic selection and
placement of PBC creates a big opportunity for co-production of harvestable biomass and clean
water by modifying drainage systems that were designed to facilitate row crop production in
naturally wet areas.
Modify the RFS2 policies so that credit is given for use of biomass (presumably co-fired with
fossil fuels) in co-generation plants generating heat and power for corn ethanol facilities.
Co-firing biomass to replace some fossil fuels would not increase the amount of ethanol being
made but it would reduce the amount of fossil fuel needed to make ethanol. This could also help
ramp up PBC on the landscape to speed the transition to advanced biofuels.
We didn't talk much about how to overcome resistance of corn/bean producers to adoption of PBC.
One possibility is to pair up a corn-grower and a hay producer to manage individual fields.
The hay producer could manage production of perennial bioenergy (or forage) crops plus ecoservices on HEL, wet, or other marginal land. The corn grower can still manage the prime cropland
and leave the PBC to someone else. With appropriate incentives, a cadre of grassland specialists
could be developed with equipment and expertise for co-production of biomass and eco-services.
Can't resist putting in a plug for the Green Lands Blue Waters idea to establish a number of
experimental watersheds where both alternative cropping systems and alternative policies
can be tested. We are modestly trying to do this in the Upper Sangamon (central Illinois). This
would be somewhat similar to the MRBI watersheds but we envision greater latitude to go beyond
existing NRCS-approved BMPs to test the agricultural, environmental, and economic outcomes of
perennial crops, drainage modifications, alternative incentive systems, etc.

Would you share these ideas with Jason for the workshop record?

Thanks and regards,

Steve John
Executive Director

CREW FOIA 2014-006851-0001895

Agricultural Watershed Institute

4004 College Park Road
Decatur, IL 62521
217-877-5640 - office
217-620-0300 - cell

CREW FOIA 2014-006851-0001896