See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/44622751

Assessment of the availability of agricultural crop residues in the European

Union: Potential and limitations for bioenergy use

Article in Waste Management · October 2010

DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2010.04.016 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

349 7,830

3 authors:

Nicolae Scarlat Milan Martinov

European Commission University of Novi Sad
101 PUBLICATIONS 5,251 CITATIONS 83 PUBLICATIONS 894 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jean Francois Dallemand

European Commission
91 PUBLICATIONS 5,023 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Milan Martinov on 10 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Waste Management 30 (2010) 1889–1897

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Waste Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman

Assessment of the availability of agricultural crop residues in the European

Union: Potential and limitations for bioenergy use
Nicolae Scarlat a,*, Milan Martinov b, Jean-François Dallemand a
a
European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Energy, Via E. Fermi 2749-TP 450, 21027 Ispra (Va), Italy
b
Faculty of Technical Sciences, Biosystems Engineering, Trg Dositeja Obradovica 6, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper provides a resource-based assessment of the available agricultural crop residues for bioenergy
Received 31 July 2009 production in the European Union, at the level of the 27 Member States. The assessment provides the
Accepted 12 April 2010 amount of the residues produced, collected, their present uses and the residues left available for bioen-
Available online 21 May 2010
ergy. This study considers the crop production and yields and multi-annual yield variation for each crop.
The calculation was based on specific residues to product ratios, which were determined, depending on
the crop type and crop yield. Sustainable removal rates were considered in order to protect soil fertility.
The results show large spatial and temporal variations of available crop residues within EU27. The aver-
age amount of crop residues available for bioenergy in EU27 was estimated at 1530 PJ/year, with a var-
iation between 1090 and 1900 PJ/year. The average value represents about 3.2% in final energy
consumption in the EU27 while the variation 2.3–4%. This variation, which is even larger at the level
of Member States, may result in shortages in biomass supply in some years, when crop residues are avail-
able in a lower amount than the average.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Member State level, based on a comprehensive analysis. The main

The new European Union Directive on the promotion of the use
of energy from renewable sources (Directive 2009/28/EC of 23
April 2009), includes a binding target of a 20% share of renewable
energy in energy consumption in EU and differentiated national
overall targets by 2020. The use of biomass for transport fuel, heat
and electricity production will have to increase substantially in
order to meet the proposed binding target of renewable energy
in the EU energy mix of 20% by 2020.
Biomass is expected to contribute to around two-thirds of the
renewable energy share in 2020 according to projections
(European Commission, 2009). Therefore, the use of biomass for
bioenergy production must consider the use of all available re-
sources in a sustainable way, without causing negative impacts.
The different residues resulting from the production of agricultural
crops might contribute to the achievement of the renewable en-
ergy targets, as proposed for 2020.
There are several studies providing the biomass assessment po-
tential, at EU or world level, including different biomass resources
– forestry, agriculture and/or waste. As bioenergy development
provides new opportunities for using agricultural crop residues,
this paper proposes an estimation of the currently available
biomass residues from agricultural crop production at EU and
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 0332 78 6551; fax: +39 0332 78 9992.
E-mail address: nicolae.scarlat@ec.europa.eu (N. Scarlat).
agricultural crops were included in the study: wheat, barley, oats,
rye, rice, maize, sunflower and rapeseed, based on present produc-
tion and agricultural practices. The assessment was based on
actual crop production, sustainable removal rates from land and
current competitive uses of residues. Crop production and yields,
multi-annual yield variation for each crop and the specific residues
to product ratios, depending on the crop type and crop yield were
all included as the most important factors that must be considered.
Since there is a large annual variation in the crop production,
the amount of agricultural crop residues varies significantly. There-
fore, this paper proposes an estimate of the average, minimum and
maximum amounts of residues, to consider this yearly variability,
detailed at Member States level.
2. Production of agricultural crop residues in the EU27
2.1. Crop residue production and yearly variation
In the European Union, here are large differences in terms of
cultivated area, types of crops and yields, due to the climate condi-
tions, specific soil condition and farming practices between Mem-
ber States. Cereals and oilseeds are important crops, in terms of
area cultivated and production (Fig. 1). Annual crops are quite
variable in yield from one year to another, particularly at a local le-
vel, depending on precipitations in rain-fed conditions that lead to
a variability in the crop residues produced.

0956-053X/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2010.04.016
1890 N. Scarlat et al. / Waste Management 30 (2010) 1889–1897

70

60
sunflower

rape
50
rice
Production [Mt]

maize
40
oats

30 rye

barley

20 wheat

10

0
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
G
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
R
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
Fig. 1. Crop production in different Member States. Source: Eurostat (2009).

Significant amounts of agricultural residues are generated from
agricultural crop production and partially remain in the field after
harvest. Residue production depends on a number of factors that
include the types of crops, crop rotation, crop mix and agricultural
practices. The amount of residues is directly related to crop pro-
duction, and depends on yield and cultivated area. The availability
of residues depends on the amount that can be removed from land
to maintain land fertility and on their competitive use for agricul-
tural or industrial purposes.
The use of agricultural crop residues for bioenergy production
(as straw or stover – stalks, ears, leaves, or cobs), requires accurate
data on their availability by crop type, but also on their local and
annual variability. The estimation of the residues available for bio-
energy production provides information on the best locations for a
bioenergy plant location and also on plant size.
The crop yields depend upon specific local agro-ecological con-
ditions (climate and precipitation pattern, soil properties, etc.),
plant varieties, farming techniques, etc. Crop residue yields are
even more variable than crop yields and depend on plant variety,
crop yield, harvesting techniques and the cutting height (Sum-
mers et al., 2003; SEI, 2004). Nevertheless, the assessment of
the crop residue availability contains inherent inaccuracies due
to multiple plant varieties in the area, crop yield variations, cli-
mate and soil conditions, farming practices and harvesting tech-
niques. Residue production depends on weather conditions and
whether the crop is irrigated or rain-fed, and moisture availabil-
ity, temperature, soil, etc. (Patterson et al., 1995; Panoutsou and
Labalette, 2006).
2.2. Environmental and agricultural constraints for crop residue
removal from land
erosion (Johnson et al., 2006; USDA-NRCS, 2006). The effect of bio-
mass removal depends on crop, farming practices (crop rotation,
tillage, fertilisation), site conditions (soil type, soil fertility, soil or-
ganic matter, soil carbon, moisture, topography and slope, risk of
erosion, etc.) (Walsh et al., 2000; Kadam and McMillan, 2003), cli-
mate conditions (wind, precipitation patterns), and harvesting
equipment (Nelson, 2002; Wilhelm et al., 2004; Ericsson and Nils-
son, 2006; Graham et al., 2007).
A part of the crop residues may be removed from land while
avoiding soil degradation and depletion of organic matter and
without reducing soil fertility (Ericsson and Nilsson, 2006). Appro-
priate crop residue removal rates should be based on the minimum
level of crop residue that must be kept on land to maintain the soil
quality, soil organic matter and reduce the risk of erosion (Patter-
son et al., 1995; Johnson et al., 2006). The removal of nutrients
from land with crop residues can be compensated by conservation
tillage, adequate crop rotation and the addition of manure, dige-
state from biogas plants or biomass ash from combustion plants.
Biomass removal from land-and associated nutrients-removal
might require additional fertilisation to compensate the loss of
nutrients with crop residues. The environmental and economic
costs associated with fertiliser application must also be considered
(USDA-NRCS, 2006).
Therefore, the estimation of the amount of residue that must be
left on the cropland is a challenge and entails a high degree of
uncertainty, since it depends to a high extent on the local condi-
tions. As a result of varying local conditions, the estimates of the
amount of residues that may be removed while maintaining soil
productivity vary widely.
3. Assessment of crop residue availability

There are economic and environmental concerns associated
with the removal of crop residues from land. Agricultural crop res-
idues play an important role in maintaining or improving soil char-
acteristics, protecting the soil from erosion, maintaining or
increasing soil organic matter, maintaining mineral nutrients in
soil and improving water retention (Nelson, 2002).
Removing crop residue could reduce soil quality, lead to loss of
soil organic matter, soil carbon and nutrient content, and increase
3.1. Methodology for estimating crop residue availability
In order to provide estimates of the crop residues that can be
used for bioenergy production, this paper takes into account the
crop production and residue production, environmental con-
straints for collection and their competitive uses (Edwards et al.,
2005), depending on the livestock sector and animal population
(cattle, horses, and sheep), or horticulture/mushroom production.
 N. Scarlat et al. / Waste Management 30 (2010) 1889–1897 1891

Therefore, the estimate of the agricultural crop residues was
done taking into account:
 types of crops and area of crop production;
 yields of crops (wheat, rye, barley, oats, maize, rice, rapeseed
and sunflower);
 crop residue-to-yield ratios, depending on the crop yields;
 crop residue removal rate according to the environmental con-
straints and the requirements for soil conservation;
 competitive use of crop residues for animal bedding (cattle,
horses and sheep) and mushroom production.
Since the amount of agricultural residues is directly related to
crop production, the estimation was based on specific residue-to-
product ratios, depending on the crop type and crop yield.
The amount of collectable crop residues that can be removed
from land was estimated by subtracting the amount of crop resi-
dues which must be left in the field to meet all the environmental
and harvesting constraints. Sustainable removal rates were consid-
ered in order asses the residues that might be removed from land.
These rates were established based on data available in literature
per crop, to incorporate the environmental constraints that prevent
collection of crop residues.
The availability of agricultural residues also took into account
their existing competitive uses, depending on the livestock and
mushroom production. The amount of residues used for different
purposes was estimated taking into account the animal population
(cattle, horses and sheep) and mushroom production in each Mem-
ber State. For the different uses of straw, an average consumption
of straw was considered for each species and an average use of
straw for mushrooms, depending on production.
The estimates of crop residues include crop residues produced
in EU27 from the above-mentioned crops, averaged over a period
of 10 years (1998–2007). Detailed national data for the years
1998–2007 were used to estimate the availability of resources of
straw and crop residues in all EU27 Member States. Crop produc-
tion and area harvested for 1998–2007 were obtained from Euro-
stat and used to calculate the average crop yield and the crop
production over these years.
Due to the large annual variation of the crop production, the
amount of agricultural crop residues produced varies significantly.
Not taking into consideration this variation may result in shortages
in biomass availability in some years. Therefore, crop residue pro-
duction was calculated for each year and the average, minimum
and maximum amounts of residues were determined for the peri-
od analysed to consider the yearly variability in crop residue
production.
3.2. Residue-to-crop production ratios
Data on crop yields are easily available, while data on the straw
and stover yields is very limited, since the aim of agricultural pro-
duction was always to maximise yields, while the total biomass
yield was not considered important. A wide variation in residue-
to-seed ratios is reported in the literature. The relationship be-
tween residue-to-seed production is very specific to the type of
crop and plant variety. It is very difficult to make a straightforward
estimation of this ratio, since it is influenced by climate and soil
conditions and the farming practices (tillage, density of planting,
fertilisation, etc.) as well (Patterson et al., 1995; Linden et al.,
2000; Graham et al., 2007). Adverse field conditions and crop
stress, such as insufficient nutrients and water that might reduce
the Harvest Index (HI) (Wilhelm et al., 2004; Johnson et al., 2006).
The available data on the residue-to-yield ratio show large scat-
tering, being reported for different plant varieties, farming prac-
tices, climate conditions, etc., and the correlations found vary
accordingly. Several studies showed that Harvest Index (HI) in-
creases with rising total biomass yields (Wilhelm et al., 2004).
Other studies showed little or no correlation between straw and
grain yield (Lee and Grove, 2006). The data found in the literature
on the residue-to-seed ratios per crop type from a number of stud-
ies is provided in Table 1.
The relationship between the residue-to-yield ratios and crop
yield can be used for a better estimation with higher accuracy of
the crop residue production. Therefore, the residue-to-yield ratios
vs. crop yield were plotted, based on the data available, and resi-
due-to-yield ratios best fit curves were produced for each type of
crop, depending on the crop yield (Figs. 2 and 3).
Table 2 shows the correlation found between the residue-to-
yield ratios and crop yield and the coefficients of determination
R2 for each crop. The R2 shows different accuracy of the prediction
of product to residues curve for each crop, as depending on the
data available.

Table 1
Residue-to-crop production ratios.

Wheat Winter Spring Barley Oats Rye Maize Sunflower Rapeseed Rice
wheat wheat
Aboudrade et al. (2006) 2–2.8
De la Vega et al. (2001) and De la Vega and Hall (2002) 1–1.9
Ericsson and Nilsson (2006) 1.3 1.3 1.3 1
Glassner et al. (1998) 1
Graham et al. (2007) 1.7 1.3 1.5 2
Johnson et al. (2006) 1.2 1 1.4 0.9 1.5
Kadam and McMillan (2003) 1.34 0.9–1.1
Koopmans and Koppejan (1997) 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 2 1.76
Koukios (1998) 0.6 1.3 2.6 1.1
Linden et al. (2000) 0.75–1
Nelson (2002) 1.7 1.3 1 1 1
Panoutsou and Labalette (2006) 1 1.24 1.27 0.7 1.4 1
Patterson et al. (1995) 1.3–1.8 1.17–1.7 1.5–1.8 1.25–1.9
Petersen et al. (1995) 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.7
Rathke et al. (2005, 2006) 1.5–1.7
Rinaldi et al. (2003) 2–2.8
Kaltschmitt and Hartmann (2000) 0.8 0.9 0.9–1 1.2 1.7
Sokhansanj et al. (2002) 0.8–1.2
Soriano et al. (2004) 2.6–3.0
Summers et al. (2003) 0.8–2.3
Walsh et al. (2000) 1.7 1.3 1 1 1
Wilhelm et al. (2004) 1
1892 N. Scarlat et al. / Waste Management 30 (2010) 1889–1897

2.0 et al., 1995). A number of studies provide estimates on the collec-

1.8 tion of crop residue from the crop land, generally varying between
30% and 60%, while maintaining soil organic matter, soil organic
1.6
carbon and protecting it from erosion (Glassner et al., 1998; Kadam
Ratio straw: grain [-]

1.4 and McMillan, 2003; Katterer et al., 2004; Panoutsou and Labalette,
1.2 2006; USDA-NRCS, 2006; Christou et al., 2007; Van der Sluis et al.,
2007).
1.0
Glassner et al. (1998) estimated that 30–60% of maize stover
0.8 can be sustainably harvested, and Wyman proposed a 58% sustain-
0.6 y = -0.3629Ln(x) + 1.6057 able harvesting rate (Kadam and McMillan, 2003). Other studies
0.4 R2 = 0.2795 show that only around 35% of the maize residue is available in con-
ventional tillage. In the case of reduced tillage, farming might allow
0.2
an increased removal rates and higher availability of straw for
0.0 other uses (USDA-NRCS, 2006; Johnson et al., 2006; Kadam and
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0
McMillan, 2003). In case of no till farming, 68–75% of the maize
Yield [t/ha]
residue can be available, or up to 76–82% (Glassner et al., 1998;
Fig. 2. Straw-to-grain ratio for wheat. Source: Patterson et al. (1995), Koukios Kadam and McMillan, 2003; USDA-NRCS, 2006).
(1998), Diamantidis and Koukios (2000), Walsh et al. (2000), Nelson (2002), Kadam The data reported in the literature on the sustainable removal
and McMillan (2003), Katterer et al. (2004), SEI (2004), Johnson et al. (2006), Lee rates of various crop residues is provided in Table 3. This study
and Grove (2006), Panoutsou and Labalette (2006), USDA-NRCS (2006), and Graham
used the sustainable removal rates of 40% for wheat, rye, barley
et al. (2007).
and oats and 50% for maize, rice, rapeseed and sunflower, as pre-
sented in Table 4.

2.0
3.4. Competitive use of crop residues
1.8

1.6 In addition to the environmental constraints and economic con-

Ratio straw: seed [-]

1.4 siderations, the availability of crop residues for bioenergy produc-

1.2

1.0 Table 3
Sustainable removal rates [%].
0.8
y = -0.1807Ln(x) + 1.3373 Crops Wheat, Maize Sunflower Rapeseed Rice
0.6 R2 = 0.1732 barley,
0.4 rye, oats
Christou et al. (2007) 15 60 60 60
0.2
Ericsson and Nilsson 25 25
0.0 (2006)
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Glassner et al. (1998) 30–60
Yield [t/ha] (76–82)a
Graham et al. (2007) 30–70a
Fig. 3. Straw-to-grain ratio for maize. Source: Petersen et al. (1995), Koukios (1998), Katterer et al. (2004) 60 60
Diamantidis and Koukios (2000), Sokhansanj et al. (2002), Kadam and McMillan Newman (2003) 50
(2003), Wilhelm et al. (2004), Johnson et al. (2006), Panoutsou and Labalette (2006), Nikolaou et al. (2003) 30 30 30 30
USDA-NRCS (2006), and Graham et al. (2007). Patterson et al. (1995) 40
Panoutsou and 50 60
Labalette (2006)
Kadam and McMillan 40–50 40
(2003) (35–70a)
Table 2
USDA 60 60–70a
The correlations proposed for the residue-to-yield ratios for the different crops
Van der Sluis et al. 30–40
(where y – residue-to-yield ratio; x – crop yield).
(2007)
Crop Correlation R2 Walsh et al. (2000) 30–40 30–40
a
Wheat y= 0.3629
Ln(x) + 1.6057 0.2795 No tillage.
Rye y= 0.3007
Ln(x) + 1.5142 0.2198
Oats y= 0.1874
Ln(x) + 1.3002 0.2121
Barley y= 0.2751
Ln(x) + 1.3796 0.3631
Maize y= 0.1807
Ln(x) + 1.3373 0.1732
Rice y= 1.2256
Ln(x) + 3.845 0.5727 Table 4
Sunflower y= 1.1097
Ln(x) + 3.2189 0.2551 Characteristics of agricultural crop residues (Patterson et al., 1995; Nikolaou et al.,
Rapeseed y= 0.452
Ln(x) + 2.0475 0.1669 2003; DEA, 2006; Christou et al., 2007).

Sources Residue-to-seed Availability Seed Straw

ratio [%] moisture [%] moisture [%]

3.3. Crop residue collection Wheat 0.8–1.6 40 15 15

Rye 0.9–1.6 40 15 15
Barley 0.8–1.3 40 15 15
The residue removal rate varies depending on a combination of Oats 0.9–1.4 40 15 15
factors, including equipment limitations (Glassner et al., 1998; Maize 0.9–1.2 50 15 30
Graham et al., 2007; Wilhelm et al., 2004), plant variety and the Rice 1.2–2.2 50 20 25
Rapeseed 1.4–2.0 50 15 40
harvest height (Summers et al., 2003), yields (Van der Sluis et al.,
Sunflower 2.2–3.2 50 15 40
2007), environmental requirements and water shortage (Patterson
 N. Scarlat et al. / Waste Management 30 (2010) 1889–1897
tion depends on other competing uses (Patterson et al., 1995). The
main competitive uses of crop residues are for incorporating into
soil, animal feed and bedding, mushroom cultivation, surface
mulching in horticulture and industrial uses (Powlson, 2007).
Straw is often incorporated in soil to protect against soil ero-
sion, as fertiliser, and soil structure improver. Straw is used for
crop protection, mainly in cold climates when they are left in the
ground during winter (Panoutsou and Labalette, 2006). Straw for
surface mulching is also a valuable option for controlling soil ero-
sion in combination with no or conservative tillage. Wheat straw is
used as substrate for the mushroom production, together with
horse manure or poultry litter.
Animal breeding is the most important competitive use of straw
and stover for animal feeding and bedding. Straw is commonly
used as bedding for cattle, horses and pigs and even as fodder.
Maize stover is a potential feed for cattle, providing an important
share in their diet, although its nutritive quality is low. The amount
of straw used depends on the straw availability, livestock, farming
and housing systems, and how long they stay indoors (Tuyttens,
2005). Straw can be used in industry to produce pulp and paper
or as insulating material for buildings. However, the industrial uses
of straw were estimated to count for a very small proportion
(around 1%) of total production, although little info is available
(RPS-MCOS, 2004).
4. Results
4.1. Crop residue production
Crop residue yields were calculated using the residue-to-prod-
uct ratio, depending on crop yield proposed in this paper for all
countries. Crop residue production was afterward established
based crop residue yields and crop acreage. The main data on the
range of residue-to-crop ratio, availability, seed and straw mois-
ture content used in the calculations are presented in Table 4.
The total amount of crop residues produced in EU27 every year
was estimated at 258 M dry tonnes/year on average, based on the
residue yields and crop area. The share of different crop residues in
EU27 was calculated (Fig. 4). The contribution of wheat to the
straw production (dry matter) is the highest (42.2%) followed by
maize and barley (18.8%), rapeseed (6.9%) and sunflower (5.2%).
For the 10-year period, a variation of crop residue production be-
tween 200 and 305 M dry tonnes/year at EU level was established.
Fig. 5 shows the minimum, average, and the maximum crop resi-
due production in all Member States. This figure shows the large
variation of crop residue produced in each country, due to the var-
iation in the crop production over this period of time.
The analysis of the sustainable removal rates for crop residue
collection concluded that, on average, about 40% of wheat, barley,
rye, oat residues and 50% of the maize, rapeseed and sunflower
sunflower
rapeseed
rice 5.2%
6.9%
1.3%
wheat
maize
42.2%
18.8%
oats
3.2%
barley rye
18.8% 3.6%
Fig. 4. Share of crop residues produced in EU27.
1893
residues can be collected, if the environmental and the harvesting
constraints mentioned above are taken into account. The choice of
these average factors was based on the experts’ estimations and
derived from data reported in the literature on the sustainable
rates, as presented above. The consideration of average factors in-
duces a rate of uncertainty, but they represent a good approxima-
tion of the sustainable removal rates at higher (country) scale.
Based on the sustainable removal rates of crop residues dis-
cussed above, residue-to-crop yield and seed and straw moisture
content (Table 4), the amount of collectable crop residues was esti-
mated. The total average, maximum and minimum amount of col-
lectable crop residues was established for each crop and for each
country. The results show that 111 M tonnes dry matter of crop
residues/year can be collected, on average, in EU27. However, this
amount can vary between 86 and 133 M tonnes dry matter/year,
depending on crop residue production. The data produced at coun-
try level are shown in Fig. 6.
4.2. Present use of crop residues
The amount of crop residues presently used for different pur-
poses (other than for energy production) was estimated for all
Member States. This takes into account the mushroom production
and the animal population (cattle, horses and sheep) in each
country.
An average consumption of straw was considered for animal
breeding, by species, and mushroom production. For the use of
straw for cattle bedding a consumption of 1.5 kg of straw/day per
head of cattle, used by a quarter of the cattle population was con-
sidered. A similar rate of straw use was considered for equines
(horses, mules) of 1.5 kg of straw/day per horse. For sheep, an aver-
age consumption on 0.1 kg straw/day per head of sheep was con-
sidered. For the use of straw for pigs a consumption of 0.5 kg of
straw/day/head of pig, one-eighth of the pig population using
straw was considered, since bedding is less important and most
big farms do not apply it. Based on these factors, besides the energy
uses, the main uses of crop residues at EU level, averaged for the
whole period considered in this study, are around 28 Mt/year for:
cattle (17 Mt/year), horses (2.2 Mt/year), sheep (3.7 Mt/year), pigs
(3.7 Mt/year) and mushroom production (1.6 Mt/year). The current
use of crop residues (mainly straw) at country level is shown in
Fig. 7.
4.3. Crop residues available for bioenergy
This study shows that the amount of crop residues presently
available for energy is quite significant. The estimates show that
the total average amount of crop residues left available for bioen-
ergy production in EU27 reaches 1530 PJ/year (after considering
the environmental, harvesting constraints and other competitive
uses). This estimation was based on Low Heating Value (LHV) of
crop residues of 17.5 MJ/kg dry matter. This analysis shows that
the potentially available resources are unevenly distributed be-
tween countries due to the different production of agricultural
crops, environmental conditions and different uses of crop residues
(Fig. 8). Most of the crop residues are available in the countries
with a large agricultural sector and high agricultural production:
France, Germany, Romania, Spain, Italy, Hungary and Poland.
The data also show a higher temporal variability of available
residues in the EU, from 1090 PJ/year to maximum 1900 PJ/year,
depending on the various conditions considered in this study. This
variation is higher at country level and especially in New Member
States, such as Romania, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, reflecting the
climate influence and the difference in agricultural technologies.
The agricultural residues can have an important contribution to
the energy supply in the Member States. The share that crop
1894 N. Scarlat et al. / Waste Management 30 (2010) 1889–1897

60

Crop residues production [Mt dry/year]

50

40

30

20

10

AT
IT

MT

FI
G
IE

LV

SI
CY

PT
H

R
BG

LT
BE

CZ

EE

ES

SK
FR

SE
PL
DK
DE

UK
LU

NL
Min Average Max

Fig. 5. Production of crop residues in EU27.

30
Collectable crop residues [ M dry t/year]

25

20

15

10

0
EE
IE
DE

PT
IT

FI
HU
MT

SI
BE

ES
FR

SE
PL
GR

RO
DK

UK
LU

NL
LT
BG
CZ

SK
CY

AT
LV

Min Average Max

Fig. 6. Total collectable crop residues in EU27.

residues might have in the final energy consumption in EU27 and
each Member State was established. Thus, at EU27 level, the use of
agricultural crop residues alone for energy production could con-
tribute by 3.2% to the final energy consumption averaged over
the period considered in this study. However, this figure ranges
from minimum 2.3% to maximum 4.0%, depending on the availabil-
ity of residues in different years. The share in final energy con-
sumption varies significantly from country to country, depending
on the resource available and the internal energy consumption,
with values well above the EU average. Thus, crop residues can
have a much higher contribution than this average in final energy
consumption in some countries such as Hungary (14%), Romania
(13%), Bulgaria (13%), or even Denmark (7%) and France (5.7%), if
considering the average final energy consumption in each of these
MS for the 10 year period investigated (Fig. 9).
Denmark is a pioneer in the use of straw for energy production
with about 11 combined heat and power (CHP) plants, using
17.9 PJ of straw from the 44 PJ residues available on average in
Denmark. One straw plant in UK (Ely) uses 2.9 PJ of straw every
year, compared with 88 PJ residues found available on average in
this study in the UK. Another large power plant in Spain, Sanguesa,
currently uses 2.3 PJ of straw, while the available residue amount is
124 PJ on average. This shows that, even in the most advanced
countries in EU from the point of view of bioenergy production,
crop residues are used only to a very small extent compared to
their potential.
5. Discussion and recommendations
The estimates of the agricultural crop residues in EU27 show
that they are produced and are available to be used for energy pro-
duction in large quantities and could therefore play an important
role for sustainable energy production. There are good opportuni-
ties but also limitations for the use of crop residues for bioenergy.
There are a number of issues that must be considered: resources
(quantity, multi-annual yield variation), logistics (energy demand
in the area, storage, security of supply, harvesting period, and
 N. Scarlat et al. / Waste Management 30 (2010) 1889–1897 1895

4.0

3.5

3.0

Crop residues [Mt/year]

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
EE
IE
DE

PT
HU
MT
IT

FI
BE

ES
FR

SE
GR

RO
PL

SI
DK

UK
LU

NL
BG

LT

SK
CZ

CY

AT
LV
Mushroom Cattle Sheep Horses Pigs

Fig. 7. Utilisation of crop residues at country level in EU27.

450

400
Available crop residues [PJ/year]

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
G
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
H
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
R
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Min Average Max

Fig. 8. Total crop residues available for bioenergy production in EU27.

transportation distance), technological (available technologies),
economical (costs of resources and cost of energy), social issues
(perception and attitude of farmers). The accurate estimation of
the availability of agricultural crop resources for their use for bio-
energy purposes is very important to the increased security and
continuity of biomass supply. Therefore, this study was based on
a conservative basis to provide a resource-based assessment of
the currently available agricultural crop residues, which takes into
account various agricultural, environmental constraints and com-
petitive uses.
The estimates of the agricultural crop residues available for bio-
energy in each Member State show large spatial and temporal vari-
ations, due to different specific geographic and climatic conditions
and status of agriculture activities, closely related to the crop pro-
duction. Taking the average amount of crop residues available for
bioenergy as reference, the range of the yearly deviation from
the average values was established for the EU27 and each MS.
For the EU27 as whole, this range was found between +23% and
28% (Fig. 10) at the EU27 level. This variation is even larger in
some Mediterranean Countries (in Portugal from +54% to 82%)
and New Member States (in Latvia from +97% to 54%, in Estonia
from +86% to 70%, in Romania from +50% to 53%).
The results show that, in some years, lower crop production
than average can be achieved, due to various conditions. This
may result in shortages in biomass supply in some years, when
crop residues are available in a lower amount and this might cause
problems in the operation of bioenergy plants. Therefore, the min-
imum amount of crop residues can be used, with the highest de-
gree of certainty, for planning bioenergy plants in a specific region.
Planning a bioenergy plant must take into account the resource
available, but also their competitive uses when there is a high de-
mand in the area for bioenergy or other competitive use. The com-
petitive uses, for animal husbandry or horticulture/mushroom
production, or even other bioenergy plants, might reduce the
amount available of biomass for bioenergy. Other new uses of
biomass and new technologies such as lignocellulosic biofuels or
1896 N. Scarlat et al. / Waste Management 30 (2010) 1889–1897

20

18

16

14

12
Share [%]
10

0
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
GR
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
Min Average Max

Fig. 9. Share of available crop residues in final energy consumption in EU27.

100%

80%

60%

40%
Variation [%]

20%

0%
IE
EE
DE

IT

FI
PT
HU
MT

SI
BE

ES

SE
FR

PL
GR

RO
DK

UK
LU

NL
LT
BG
CZ

SK
CY

AT
LV

-20%

-40%

-60%

-80%

Fig. 10. Variation of crop residues availability for bioenergy.

bio-refineries may also become strong competitors to straw fired
power plants, especially because these plants need a huge amount
of biomass for the economy of scale.
6. Conclusions
This study revealed that important amounts of agricultural crop
residues are available in the EU, estimated at 1530 PJ/year, on aver-
age, which can be used in a sustainable way for bioenergy produc-
tion. Important amounts of crop residues are available in France,
Germany, Romania, Spain, Italy, Hungary, Poland, etc.
However, the results show large spatial and temporal variations
at EU27 level, between 1090 and 1900 PJ/year. This yearly varia-
tion of crop residue ranges between +23% and 28% compared to
the average data, as reference. Crop residue availability at Member
State level shows an even larger yearly variation from the EU aver-
age values, especially for some Mediterranean Countries and New
Member States. Crop residues can have a large contribution of bio-
mass to energy supply to the EU Renewable Energy targets in 2020.
In EU27, the share of agricultural residue in final energy consump-
tion, averaged over the 10 year period considered in this study,
could reach 3.2% on average, ranging from 2.3% to 4%, depending
on the availability of residues in different years. The share in final
energy consumption in EU27 varies from country to country,
depending on the resource and internal energy consumption,
reaching up to 14% in Hungary, 13% in Romania and Bulgaria and
even up to 7% in Denmark and 5.7% in France.
These large spatial and temporal variations, closely related to
the crop production, must be taken into account when planning
bioenergy plants, otherwise shortages of fuel might cause prob-
lems in the operation of bioenergy plants. Therefore, the minimum
amount of crop residues must be used as a basis for planning bio-
energy plants in a specific region.
A deeper analysis of resource availability must consider crop
mix, crop rotation, plant variety, local specific soil and climate con-
ditions. A GIS approach would be a useful follow-up and more
accurate tool for estimating crop residues at regional and local
 N. Scarlat et al. / Waste Management 30 (2010) 1889–1897
level, incorporating detailed soil and climate conditions, crop rota-
tion and the crop mix, crop yields and competitive uses, at local le-
vel instead of using averaged data at country level.
References
Aboudrade, A., Debaeke, P., Bouaziz, A., Chekli, H., 2006. Effects of soil tillage and
fallow management on soil water storage and sunflower production in a semi-
arid Mediterranean climate. Agricultural Water Management 83, 183–196.
Christou, M., Eleftheriadis, I., Panoutsou, C., Papamichael, I., 2007. Current Situation
and Future Trends in Biomass Fuel Trade in Europe. Country Report of Greece.
<http://eubionet2.ohoi.net/> (accessed July 2009).
Danish Energy Authority (DEA), 2006. Biomass Statistics: Straw. <http://
www.ens.dk/da-DK/Info/TalOgKort/Statistik_og_noegletal/Maanedsstatistik/
Documents/Metode_Halm-2005.doc> (accessed July 2009).
De la Vega, A.J., Hall, A.J., 2002. Effects of planting date, genotype, and their
interactions on sunflower yield. Crop Science 42, 1191–1201.
De la Vega, A., Chapman, S.C., Hall, A.J., 2001. Genotype by environment and indirect
selection for yield in sunflower. I. Two-mode pattern analysis of oil and biomass
yield across environments in Argentina. Field Crops Research 72, 17–38.
Diamantidis, N.D., Koukios, E.G., 2000. Agricultural crops and residues as feedstocks
for non-food products in Western Europe. Industrial Crops and Products 11, 97–
106.
Edwards, R.A.H., Šúri, M., Huld, T., Dallemand, J.F., 2005. GIS-based assessment of
cereal straw energy resource in the EU. In: Proceedings of the 14th European
Biomass Conference and Exhibition. Biomass for Energy, Industry and Climate
Protection, 17–21 October 2005, Paris.
Ericsson, K., Nilsson, L.J., 2006. Assessment of the potential biomass supply in
Europe using a resource focussed approach. Biomass and Bioenergy 30, 1–15.
European Commission, 2009. Communication from the Commission to the Council
and the European Parliament, The Renewable Energy Progress Report:
Commission Report in Accordance with Article 3 of Directive 2001/77/EC,
Article 4(2) of Directive 2003/30/EC and on the Implementation of the EU
Biomass Action Plan, SEC (2009) 503 Final.
Eurostat, 2009. Eurostat Website. <http://www.epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu>
(accessed July 2009).
Glassner, D.A., Hettenhaus, J.R., Schechinger, T.M., 1998. Corn stover collection
project. In: US Department of Energy Great Lakes Regional Biomass Energy
Program (Ed.), Proceedings of BioEnergy’98: Expanding BioEnergy Partnerships.
Madison, WI, October 4–8, 1998. Coalition of Great Lakes Governors, Chicago, IL,
pp. 1100–1111.
Graham, R.L., Nelson, R., Sheehan, J., Perlack, R.D., Wright, L.L., 2007. Current and
potential US corn stover supplies. Agronomy Journal 99, 1–11.
Johnson, J.M.F., Allmaras, R.R., Reicosky, D.C., 2006. Estimating source carbon from
crop residues, roots and rhizodeposits using the grain-yield database.
Agronomy Journal 98, 622–636.
Kadam, K.L., McMillan, J.D., 2003. Availability of corn stover as a sustainable
feedstock for bioethanol production. Bioresource Technology 88, 17–25.
Kaltschmitt, M., Hartmann, H., 2000. Energie aus Biomasse: Grundlagen. Techniken
und Verfahren. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, ISBN 3-540-64853-4.
Katterer, T., Andrén, O., Persson, J., 2004. The impact of altered management on
long-term agricultural soil carbon stocks – a Swedish case study. Nutrient
Cycling in Agroecosystems 70, 179–187.
Koopmans, A., Koppejan, J., 1997. Agricultural and Forest Residues – Generation,
Utilization and Availability. Regional Consultation on Modern Applications of
Biomass Energy, 6–10 January 1997, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Koukios, E.G., 1998. Agriculture as a Source of Biomass in Western Europe, Report
for Biomass for Greenhouse Gas Emission REDuction (BRED) Project.
Bioresource Technology Unit, National Technical University of Athens, Athens.
Lee, C., Grove, J., 2006. Straw Yields from Six Small Grain Varieties 2003–2004 and
2004–2005 Growing Seasons. University of Kentucky. <http://www.uky.
View publication stats
1897
edu/Ag/GrainCrops/Research/Research_pdf/SmallGrains_StrawYields2005.pdf>
(accessed July 2009).
Linden, D.R., Clapp, C.E., Dowdy, R.H., 2000. Long-term corn grain and stover yields
as a function of tillage and residue removal in east central Minnesota. Soil and
Tillage Research 56, 167–174.
Nelson, R.G., 2002. Resource assessment and removal analysis for corn stover and
wheat straw in the Eastern and Midwestern United States—rainfall and wind-
induced soil erosion methodology. Biomass and Bioenergy 22, 349–363.
Newman, R., 2003. A Trial Burn of Rape Straw and Whole Crops Harvested for
Energy Use to Assess Efficiency Implications. B/U1/00768/00/00, URN 03/1569.
Nikolaou, A., Remrova, M., Jeliazkov, I., 2003. Lot 5: Bioenergy’s Role in the EU
Energy Market. Biomass Availability in Europe.
Panoutsou, C., Labalette, F., 2006. Cereals straw for bioenergy and competitive uses.
In: European Commission (Ed.), Proceedings of the Cereals Straw Resources for
Bioenergy in the European Union, Pamplona, Pamplona, 18–19 October 2006.
Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability.
Patterson, P.E., Makus, L., Momont, P., Robertson, L., 1995. The Availability,
Alternative Uses and Value of Straw in Idaho. Final Report of the Project BD-
K251, Idaho Wheat Commission, College of Agriculture, University of Idaho.
Petersen, C.T., Jørgensen, U., Svendsen, H., Hansen, S., Jensen, H.E., Nielsen, N.E.,
1995. Parameter assessment for simulation of biomass production and nitrogen
uptake in winter rape. European Journal of Agronomy 4, 77–89.
Powlson, D., 2007. Using straw for energy – implications for soils and agriculture.
In: European Commission (Ed.), Proceedings of the Workshop Cereals Straw and
Agricultural Residues for Bioenergy in New Member States and Candidate
Countries CC, 2–3 October 2007, Novi Sad, Serbia. Joint Research Centre,
Institute for Energy, Ispra, Italy.
Rathke, G.W., Christen, O., Diepenbrock, W., 2005. Effects of nitrogen source and
rate on productivity and quality of winter oilseed rape grown in different crop
rotations. Field Crops Research 94, 103–113.
Rathke, G.W., Behrens, T., Diepenbrock, W., 2006. Integrated nitrogen management
strategies to improve seed yield, oil content and nitrogen efficiency of winter
oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.): a review. Agriculture, Ecosystems and
Environment 117, 80–108.
Rinaldi, M., Losavio, N., Flagella, Z., 2003. Evaluation and application of the
OILCROP–SUN model for sunflower in southern Italy. Agricultural Systems 78,
17–30.
RPS-MCOS, 2004. An Assessment of the Renewable Energy Resource Potential of Dry
Agricultural Residues in Ireland. Report for Sustainable Energy Ireland.
Sokhansanj, S., Turhollow, A., Cushmana, J., Cundiff, J., 2002. Engineering aspects of
collecting corn stover for bioenergy. Biomass and Bioenergy 23, 347–355.
Soriano, M.A., Orgaz, F., Villalobos, F.J., Fereres, E., 2004. Efficiency of water use of
early plantings of sunflower. European Journal of Agronomy 21, 465–476.
Summers, M.D., Jenkins, B.M., Hyde, P.R., Williams, J.F., Mutters, R.G., Scardacci, S.C.,
Hair, M.W., 2003. Biomass production and allocation in rice with implications
for straw harvesting and utilization. Biomass and Bioenergy 24, 163–173.
Sustainable Energy Ireland (SEI), 2004. Liquid Biofuels Strategy Study for Ireland,
Dublin, Ireland.
Tuyttens, F.A.M., 2005. The importance of straw for pig and cattle welfare: a review.
Applied Animal Behaviour Science 92, 261–282.
United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resource Conservation Service
(USDA-NRCS), 2006. White Paper Crop Residue Removal for Biomass Energy
Production: Effects on Soils and Recommendations. <http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/
management/files/AgForum_Residue_White_Paper.pdf> (accessed July 2009).
Van der Sluis, E., Shane, R., Stearns, L., 2007. Local Biomass Feedstocks Availability
for Fuelling Ethanol Production. Biofuels, Food and Feed Tradeoffs, Biofuels,
Food and Feed Tradeoffs Conference, April 12–13, 2007, St. Louis, Missouri.
Walsh, M.E., Perlack, R.L., Turhollow, A., de la Torre Ugarte, D., Becker, D.A., Graham,
R.L., Slinsky, S.E., Ray, D.E., 2000. Biomass Feedstock Availability in the US: 1999
State Level Analysis. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN.
Wilhelm, W.W., Johnson, J.M.F., Hatfield, J.L., Voorhees, W.B., Linden, D.R., 2004.
Crop and soil productivity response to corn residue removal: a literature
review. Agronomy Journal 96, 1–17.