Modeling site suitability and production potential of carinata-based sustainable jet fuel in the southeastern United States

[摘要] The aviation sector is currently responsible for 2.6% of global carbon emissions. Carbon emissions of the aviation sector are expected to increase by 3-4% each year due to the rising demand for air travel. The use of bio-jet fuel derived from carinata (Brassica carinata) is a potential solution for mitigating carbon emissions from the aviation sector. This study determines suitable sites for growing carinata across three southeastern states of Georgia, Alabama, and Florida. Suitable edaphic (average soil storage, soil organic carbon, root zone depth) and climatic variables (temperature) along with historical land use trajectories were used for determining the land suitability for carinata production. The weights of the edaphic variables were decided by surveying experts using the Analytical Hierarchy Process. This study also determined the susceptibility of frost events in growing season of carinata from 2010 to 2017. Finally, the composite risk was calculated by multiplying the probability of potential damage risk and probability of land risk. Considering minimum risk level of 5%, about 45.56% (0.77 million ha) of land in Georgia, 0.81% (0.01 million ha) land in Alabama and about 3.04% (0.05 million ha) of land in Florida is suitable for growing carinata. Depending upon the composite risk level and expected carinata yields, the total production potential of carinata was between 1.87 and 3.91 million metric tons which was sufficient for producing between 980 and 2045 million liters of bio-jet fuel sufficient enough to replace 1.4%-2.33% of the current jet fuel consumption in the United States. Our study will feed into current policy debate about reducing carbon footprint of the aviation sector in the United States and promote development of bio-economy for rural America. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

[发布日期] 2019-12-01

[关键词] Analytical hierarchy process;Biofuels;Catastrophic risk;Composite risk;Land availability risk;Site suitability modeling