DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.5436313.v1
title: Southwestern Kansas switchgrass bioenergy landscape design case study data

description: Various data underlying the study:<br>High-resolution techno-ecological modeling of a bioenergy landscape to identify climate mitigation opportunities in cellulosic ethanol production<br>John L. Field, Samuel G. Evans, Ernie Marx, Mark Easter, Paul R. Adler, Thai Dinh, Bryan Willson, and Keith Paustian<br>In publication at Nature Energy<br><br>Contains the following files:<br><br><b>Switchgrass_datasets_archive.xlsx</b> - Excel file of switchgrass field trial data collected from the literature for use in DayCent model calibration and validation as previously reported in<br>Field JL, Marx E, Easter M, Adler PR, Paustian K (2016) Ecosystem model parameterization and adaptation for sustainable cellulosic biofuel landscape design. GCB Bioenergy, 8, 1106–1123. (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.12316/abstract)<br><br>Contains data from 24 studies, with the following data types:<br><br>* site characteristics<br><br>* experimental treatments (147 site x treatment combinations)<br><br>* measured biomass yields (573 annual data points)<br><br>* nitrous oxide emissions measurements (11)<br><br>* soil organic carbon measurements (18)<br><br>* nitrate leaching measurements (4)<br><br><br><b>crop.100</b> - DayCent-format crop parameterization file including entries for upland (SG3U) and lowland (SG3L) switchgrass ecotypes used in both the Nature Energy and GCB Bioenergy papers cited above. <br><br><br><b>NatureEnergy_20170908.gdb.zip</b> - an ArcGIS-format geo-database including GIS shape-files and attributes characterizing the case study landscape and optimized landscape designs i, ii, and iii (underlies publication Figs. 1-3 in their entirety, as well as points i, ii, iii, and iv in Fig. 4).<br><br><br><b>landscape_i.csv, landscape_ii.csv, and landscape_iii.csv</b> - attributes and assessment results for the land parcels selected for switchgrass cultivation by our optimization routine for landscape designs i-iii. The associated soil texture distributions can be plotted using the code at https://github.com/johnlfield/soil_plotter. <br><br>Contains the following data types:<br><br>* gid - unique identifier for each polygon<br><br>* mukey area - area of the polygon (ha)<br><br>* distance - distance (km) from Hugoton to the centroid of the transportation cell (as the crow flies)<br><br>* nlcd - 2011 NLCD land use category, resampled to a 240 meter resolution using majority assignments<br><br>* lcc - NRCS non-irrigated land capability class<br><br>* irr - boolean identifier for irrigated land based on 2002 Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Irrigated Agriculture Dataset for the United States (MIrAD-US)<br><br>* social_cost_tot – optimized minimum total social cost (direct production cost plus monetized GHG externalities) of feedstock produced in this polygon and delivered to the biorefinery (USD Mg-1)<br><br>* n_opt – corresponding nitrogen fertilizer application rate (kg N ha-1 y-1)<br><br>* yield_opt – corresponding harvested biomass yield (Mg ha-1 y-1)<br><br>* cost_tot – corresponding total direction production costs for delivered biomass, including on-farm costs and transport costs but excluding GHG externalities (USD Mg-1)<br><br>* ghg_int_tot – corresponding total lifecycle GHG emissions intensity of biomass production, including emissions from on-farm energy use, upstream fertilizer production, soil organic carbon changes, direct and indirect soil nitrous oxide emissions, biomass transport fuel use, and indirect land use change due to displacement of exiting production of food or fodder (Mg CO2eq (Mg biomass)-1)<br><br>* cult_cost_opt – corresponding farm-gate break-evening price of biomass production as per our custom crop production budget (USD Mg-1)<br><br>* trans_cost – corresponding farm-to-biorefinery biomass transport costs, estimated based on one-way transport distance using the Trucking Cost Model (USD Mg-1)<br><br>* farm_emission_opt – corresponding GHG emissions from farm operations and non-fertilizer inputs (Mg CO2eq (Mg biomass)-1)<br><br>* N_emission_opt – corresponding GHG emissions from upstream fertilizer production (Mg CO2eq (Mg biomass)-1)<br><br>* SOC_emission_opt – corresponding GHG emissions from soil organic carbon changes (Mg CO2eq (Mg biomass)-1)<br><br>* N2O_emission_opt – corresponding GHG emissions from direct and indirect soil nitrous oxide emissions (Mg CO2eq (Mg biomass)-1)<br><br>* transport_emission – corresponding GHG emissions from biomass transport fuel use (Mg CO2eq (Mg biomass)-1)<br><br>* iLUC_emission – corresponding GHG emissions from indirect land use change due to displacement of exiting production of food or fodder (Mg CO2eq (Mg biomass)-1)<br>