Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
B-1 Growing biofuel feedstock on airport lands is a potential future revenue opportunity for air- ports. This opportunity has arisen from otherwise disparate developments. First, the aviation industry is focusing efforts in developing alternative jet fuels from oil-rich plant stocks. While this market is currently in a nascent phase, demand for feedstock is predicted to expand in coming years and airports could be in a position to provide a cost-effective supply. Second, researchers assessing land uses that represent a wildlife hazard risk have determined that turf grass, which covers the vast majority of airport lands, is a high risk particularly because it is preferred by certain large birds such as Canada geese. It is recommended that turf be converted to other cover types and specific biofuel feedstock crops have been determined to reduce risks of wildlife hazards. Wildlife Strikes Collisions between wildlife and aircraft (wildlife strikes) are a serious concern for both eco- nomic and safety reasons (DeVault et al. 2013a). Wildlife strikes cost the civil aviation industry in the United States nearly $1 billion annually, and over 255 people were killed in wildlife strikes worldwide from 1988â2013 (Dolbeer et al. 2014). Roughly 70% of wildlife strikes to aircraft occur â¤152 m above ground level, thus in the airport environment (Dolbeer 2011). It is clear that under- standing the causal factors contributing to wildlife-aircraft collisions at airports and developing solutions to reduce the likelihood of such collisions are critical challenges facing wildlife managers and aviation officials (Blackwell et al. 2009). Habitat management is the most important long-term component of an integrated approach to reducing wildlife hazards at airports (DeVault and Washburn 2013, Belant and Ayers 2014). Historically, the principal land cover at airports has been turf grass. In addition to the linear strips of turf grass normally present adjacent to air-operations areas, many airports (in the United States and abroad) contain large expanses of turf grass in outlying areas (Washburn and Seamans 2013). In the contiguous United States, 39â50% of airport land cover is composed of turf grass, and these airport grasslands collectively cover well over 3,300 km2 (DeVault et al. 2012). Although turf grass is useful in some airport areas and has a place in habitat management at airports (especially alongside runways and taxiways), large expanses of turf grass can attract haz- ardous birds like Canada geese and European starlings (DeVault et al. 2011), and are expensive for airports to maintain. Further, maintenance of large grasslands conflicts with recent industry initiatives promoting âgreenerâ airports. Ongoing research challenges the longstanding paradigm that turf grass should be the dominant land cover at airports (DeVault et al. 2013b, Martin et al. 2013). Some researchers have suggested that with careful planning, much of the turfgrass acreage currently present at airports could be converted to more productive land usesâsuch as solar arrays A P P E N D I X B Biofuel Feedstock Propagation Future Opportunity
B-2 Renewable Energy as an Airport Revenue Source and biofuel productionâwithout increasing the risk of damaging wildlife strikes with aircraft (DeVault et al. 2012, 2013b, Martin et al. 2013). Rather than consume resources and produce greenhouse gas emissions, these alternative land uses could generate revenue and renewable energy for airports. Research on Biofuel Feedstock Biologists from the USDA, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center and Missis- sippi State University are conducting research on several fronts to identify safe alternatives to turf grass at airports from a wildlife-strike perspective. Schmidt et al. (2013) studied bird use of areas managed for native warm season grasses (NWSG), a cellulosic biofuel (Tilman et al. 2006), com- pared to nearby airfield grasslands. They found that birds of species categorized as âmoderateâ to âextremely highâ with regard to hazard level to aircraft accounted for only 2% of all birds observed in NWSG areas, and concluded that NWSG might be considered a viable land use adjacent to airfields in some regions. In addition to these studies, several ongoing efforts by this research group are addressing wildlife use of renewable energy production efforts at airports. In Mississippi, a multi-year field study assessing wildlife use of fields containing switchgrass or a NWSG mixture found that use by birds and mammals considered hazardous to aircraft was low overall. Seasonal variability in hazardous species use occurred in both vegetation types but overall appeared lower in switch- grass fields. Also, a project funded by the U.S. Department of Defense began in 2014 that will demonstrate and validate the use of monoculture switchgrass at military installations in the east- ern United States as a means of reducing wildlife strike risk and lowering costs associated with maintaining large turf-grass areas. Finally, a study is just underway in North Carolina that will investigate use of oilseed crops (e.g., camelina) by birds and large mammals at several general aviation airports. Conclusions Although most researchers agree that renewable energy production should be increased, this âscaling-upâ of production raises a number of environmental issues, notably adverse effects on wildlife and competition with human food production. However, airport lands are mostly unsuit- able for wildlife conservation and commodity production due to the increased risk of wildlife- aircraft collisions often associated with these land uses. Also, airports offer one of the few land uses where reductions in wildlife abundance and habitat quality are necessary and socially acceptable. Thus, locating renewable energy projects at airports could help mitigate many of the challenges currently facing renewable-energy policy makers, developers, and conservationists (DeVault et al. 2012, 2013b). The recent and ongoing studies described here suggest that some types of renew- able energy production can be compatible with safe airport operation, and in some cases might actually reduce the risk of wildlife strikes from that posed by large expanses of turf grass. A shift in airport land-management paradigms on a large scale from large expanses of turf grass to alterna- tive land covers could play a meaningful role in regional renewable energy strategies. References Belant, J. L., and C. R. Ayers. 2014. ACRP Synthesis 52: Habitat Management to Deter Wildlife at Airports. Trans- portation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC. Blackwell, B. F., T. L. DeVault, E. FernÃ¡ndez-Juricic, and R. A. Dolbeer. 2009. Wildlife Collisions with Aircraft: A Missing Component of Land-Use Planning for Airports. Landscape and Urban Planning 93:1â9.
Biofuel Feedstock Propagation Future Opportunity B-3 DeVault, T. L., M. J. Begier, J. L. Belant, B. F. Blackwell, R. A. Dolbeer, J. A. Martin, T. W. Seamans, and B. E. Washburn. 2013b. Rethinking Airport Land-Cover Paradigms: Agriculture, Grass, and Wildlife Hazards. Human-Wildlife Interactions 7:10â15. DeVault, T. L., J. L. Belant, B. F. Blackwell, J. A. Martin, J. A. Schmidt, L. W. Burger, Jr., and J. W. Patterson, Jr. 2012. Airports Offer Unrealized Potential for Alternative Energy Production. Environmental Management 49:517â522. DeVault, T. L., J. L. Belant, B. F. Blackwell, and T. W. Seamans. 2011. Interspecific Variation in Wildlife Hazards To Aircraft: Implications for Airport Wildlife Management. Wildlife Society Bulletin 35:394â402. DeVault, T. L., B. F. Blackwell, and J. L. Belant, eds. 2013a. Wildlife in Airport Environments: Preventing Animalâ Aircraft Collisions through Science-Based Management. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD. DeVault, T. L., and B. E. Washburn. 2013. Identification and Management of Wildlife Food Resources at Airports. Pages 79â90 in: Wildlife in Airport Environments: Preventing AnimalâAircraft Collisions through Science-Based Management. T. L. DeVault, B. F. Blackwell, and J. L. Belant, eds. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Dolbeer, R. A. 2011. Increasing Trend of Damaging Bird Strikes with Aircraft Outside the Airport Boundary: Implications for Mitigation Measures. Human-Wildlife Interactions 5:235â248. Dolbeer, R. A., S. E. Wright, J. R. Weller, and M. J. Begier. 2014. Wildlife Strikes to Civil Aircraft in the United States 1990â2013. National Wildlife Strike Database Serial Report Number 20. Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Airport Safety and Standards, Washington, DC. 98 pp. Martin, J. A., T. J. Conkling, J. L. Belant, K. M. Biondi, B. F. Blackwell, T. L. DeVault, E. FernÃ¡ndez-Juricic, P. M. Schmidt, and T. W. Seamans. 2013. Wildlife Conservation and Alternative Land Uses at Airports. Pages 117â125 in: Wildlife in Airport Environments: Preventing AnimalâAircraft Collisions through Science-Based Management. T. L. DeVault, B. F. Blackwell, and J. L. Belant, eds. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD. Pennington, D., M. C. Gould, M. Seamon, W. Knudson, P. Gross, and T. McLean. 2012. Expanding Bioenergy Crops to Non-Traditional Lands in MichiganâFinal Report. Michigan State University Extension. Based on work supported by the Department of Energy, Award no. DE-EE0000753. 66 pp. Schmidt, J. A., B. E. Washburn, T. L. DeVault, T. W. Seamans, and P. M. Schmidt. 2013. Do Native Warm-Season Grasslands Near Airports Increase Bird Strike Hazards? American Midland Naturalist 170:144â157. Tilman, D., J. Hill, and C. Lehman. 2006. Carbon-Negative Biofuels from Low-Input High-Diversity Grassland Biomass. Science 314:1598â1600 Washburn, B. E., and T. W. Seamans. 2013. Managing Turfgrass to Reduce Wildlife Hazards At Airports. Pages 105â114 in: Wildlife in Airport Environments: Preventing AnimalâAircraft Collisions through Science- Based Management. T. L. DeVault, B. F. Blackwell, and J. L. Belant, eds. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.