Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews xxx (xxxx) xxxxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Balancing straw returning and chemical fertilizers in China: Role of straw

nutrient resources

Huajun Yin1, Wenqiang Zhao1, Ting Li, Xinying Cheng, Qing Liu
Key Laboratory of Mountain Ecological Restoration and Bioresource Utilization & Ecological Restoration and Biodiversity Conservation Key Laboratory of
Sichuan Province, Chengdu Institute of Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A BS T RAC T

Keywords: Currently, large-scale farmland degradation resulted from the overuse of chemical fertilizers has become a
Straw nutrient resource major issue in China. Meanwhile, a large sum of straw nutrient resources have been lost from the farmland due
Chemical fertilizer to the straw removal from elds, which in return aggravated the degradation in farmland quality and long-term
Crop yield productive capacity of soil resources. Whether current straw management practices represent rational
Farmland degradation
utilization and how straw can be used more eciently have become the most important but least studied
Environmental pollution
problems for China's green agricultural development. Based on the China's Ocial Statistics, we rst collected a
Straw management policy
large number of data on the annual crop yields, crop sown areas and chemical fertilizer consumption of dierent
crop types in 31 China's mainland provinces from 1998 to 2014. Straw yields and straw nutrient resources were
calculated to assess the potential contribution of straw resources to chemical fertilizers. Our estimation
demonstrates that straw returning to farmlands could counterbalance all of the K2O, the majority of the P2O5,
and a portion of the N in chemical fertilizers. Promoting the return of straw to eld has a great potential to
reduce the use of chemical fertilizer, air pollutant emission and environmental burden. Thus, we propose that
the Chinese government should adjust the policies to take promoting straws returned to eld as priority, instead
of greatly encouraging straw removal from eld. Innovative straw decomposing technologies and returning
practices are also needed to assure China's green agricultural development and reduce environmental pollution
in the future.

1. Introduction further aggravate straw nutrient losses from the elds.

China is one of the largest agricultural countries in the world. In
2015, the total crop yield and sown area in China amounted to
621.44 million tons (hereafter Mt) and 11,3340.5 thousand hectares,
respectively [1]. Accompanied by the constant increase in crop
production, the crop straw yield has grown dramatically [2]. China
is now one of the most abundant countries in terms of straw
resources in the world (g. 1) [3], and the average annual increase
in the rate of crop straw production was about 4% in China over the
last several decades [4]. As a source of bioenergy, livestock forage
and other sources of loss (including open eld burning, being
throwing aside, etc.), crop straws in China have long been removed
from the eld, which has led to a large sum of straw nutrient losses
from the elds. Meanwhile, straw resource utilization policy will
further be encouraged in China's 13th Five-Year Plan Period (2016
2020), and the comprehensive utilization eciency of straw will be
up to 85% by applying new advanced technologies [5]. This will
At the same time, China is now the largest producer and consumer
of synthetic fertilizers, accounting for ca. 35% of the global total
consumption [6]. A tremendous amount of inorganic fertilizers (nitro-
gen, phosphorous and potassium) have been applied to the farmland to
boost food production, despite the fact that China's agronomic nutrient
use eciency (i.e., the ration of crop yield to the amount of fertilizer
applied) has gradually increased over the past 10 years [7]. As a
consequence, both straw removal and the overuse of chemical fertili-
zers have led to soil quality degradation (i.e., the loss of soil organic
matter, low soil fertility, inecient nutrient-use, and subsequently low-
yielding land) and heavy environmental impacts (i.e., agricultural non-
point pollution) [8]. Policy makers are challenged by the dilemma of
resource competition/allocating among various straw users to balance
the economic benets and environmental eects [9]. As one of the
renewable resources with high eciency and rationality, straw resource
utilization not only meets the demands for resources as the economy
grows (i.e., saving the scarce natural resources and substitution for

Corresponding author.
E-mail address: liuqing@cib.ac.cn (Q. Liu).
1
These authors contributed equally to this work.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.076
Received 20 December 2016; Received in revised form 21 June 2017; Accepted 22 June 2017
1364-0321/ 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Please cite this article as: Yin, H., Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.076
H. Yin et al.
Fig. 1. Distribution of the 5-year average crop sown area and 5-year average straw yield during 20102014 at province level in China. The collected data include 31 provinces
(Hongkong, Macao and Taiwan are not included), which were obtained from the China Rural Statistical Yearbook [14].
depleted resources), but also provide a basis for environmental
protection and sustainable development of society in China [3].
Consequently, people are paying more attention to the social and
economic advantages of straw utilization, and less attention to the
ecological consequences of removing straw from the elds on farmland
quality. In fact, the excessive removal of straw from the eld has greatly
resulted in eld nutrient depletion and the decrease in soil organic
matter content [10], and thus degraded the long-term productive
capacity of soil resources [11]. From an ecosystem mass balance
perspective, however, straw removal greatly disrupts the nutrient
cycling of agricultural systems, and degrades the long-term productive
capacity of soil since a large amount of nutrient resources are taken
away from the elds [12,13]. Whether current straw management
practices represent rational utilization and how straw can be used more
eciently have become the most important but least studied problems
for China's green agricultural development. In this paper, we assessed
the potential contribution of straw resources to chemical fertilizer
consumption based on the ocial Chinese data of crop yield, straw
yield and chemical fertilizer consumption from 1998 to 2014. The
bioenergy content and pollutant emission from straw combustion were
also calculated to evaluate the environmental impact of straw use for
biofuel.
2. Methodology
2.1. The main crop production in China
China is one of the biggest crop production countries, producing
large amounts of crop straw annually. The crops grown in China
include rice, wheat, maize, soybean, peanut, canola, cotton, potato,
sesame, jute, sugarcane, sugarbeet, tobacco, etc. The rst 7 of these
2
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews xxx (xxxx) xxxxxx
crop types comprise 96.4% of the total grain, oil-bearing, cotton, bre,
sugar, and tobacco straw yields of China in 2014. Detailed information
on the chemical fertilizer consumption or straw nutrient contents of
other crop types is not available in the Chinese ocial statistics. Hence,
the main Chinese eld crops selected in this study were rice (Oryza
sativa L.), wheat (Triticum spp.), maize (Zea mays L.), soybean
(Glycine max (L.) Merr.), peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.), canola
(Brassica spp.), and cotton (Gossypium spp.). These 7 crops were
chosen to evaluate the status of main straw resource in China.
Since Hong Kong and Macao possess limited areas of farmland and
their negligible crop yields are not recorded in China's ocial statistics,
the regions we covered in the current work contained China's 31
mainland provinces. The crop yields (108 t) and crop sown areas (103
ha) of the 31 provinces were obtained from the China Rural Statistical
Yearbook [14]. The sown areas of the 7 main crops in China during
19982014 varied from 99.27 to 114.7 million hectares (Table S1).
Among the provinces, Henan Province exhibits the largest crop yields
of China, followed by Heilongjiang, Shandong and Anhui (Table S2).
The detailed data on crop yield, crop sown area, straw yield, and
chemical fertilizer consumption for each crop type and province can be
collected after 1998. However, the chemical fertilizer consumption (N,
P, K) for each crop type cannot be obtained from the Chinese ocial
statistics before 1998. Thus, the period investigated in this study
ranges from 1998 to 2014.
2.2. Crop yield (CY)
The total CY in China was calculated based on the sum of the CY
values of 7 crop types in the 31 provinces using the following equation:
CYtotal = CYij
H. Yin et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews xxx (xxxx) xxxxxx

Table 1
Net contents (NC, 106 t) and total net contents (TNC, 106 t) of N, P2O5 and K2O in chemical fertilizers across the 7 main crops in China from 1998 to 2014. The detailed data were
calculated according to the Compendium of National Agricultural Products Cost-benet [15].

NC/TNC 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

NCRice N 6.36 6.51 6.16 5.70 5.75 5.28 5.45 5.57 5.48 5.59 5.55 5.60 5.73 5.64 5.54 5.61 5.54
P2O5 1.70 1.73 1.71 1.77 1.78 1.70 1.52 1.81 1.73 1.83 1.80 1.80 1.93 1.94 1.96 1.97 2.04
K2O 1.39 1.40 1.39 1.34 1.40 1.38 1.34 1.66 1.73 1.91 1.70 1.77 1.98 2.06 2.13 2.23 2.39
NCWheat N 5.43 5.37 5.61 4.43 4.69 3.98 4.05 4.41 4.56 4.71 4.68 4.92 5.25 5.24 5.25 5.17 5.40
P2O5 1.95 1.96 1.81 1.62 1.71 1.44 1.36 1.85 2.04 1.98 1.92 2.01 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.09 2.28
K2O 1.10 1.10 1.37 0.91 0.99 0.81 0.78 1.11 1.27 1.40 1.52 1.53 1.76 1.79 1.87 1.92 2.06
NCMaize N 5.66 5.89 5.25 5.35 5.59 5.54 5.22 5.00 5.73 5.96 5.95 6.50 6.94 6.82 7.03 7.37 7.73
P2O5 1.10 1.13 1.13 1.24 1.31 1.24 1.18 1.31 1.59 1.78 1.71 1.87 2.13 2.37 2.59 2.74 2.94
K2O 0.72 0.69 0.71 0.69 0.83 0.77 0.78 0.96 1.24 1.47 1.43 1.63 1.90 2.14 2.44 2.61 2.87
NCSoybean N 0.43 0.39 0.45 0.44 0.48 0.59 0.48 0.49 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.53 0.49 0.43 0.44 0.37 0.36
P2O5 0.18 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.32 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.33 0.31 0.29 0.27 0.25 0.26
K2O 0.10 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.29 0.31 0.32 0.29 0.29 0.26 0.26
NCPeanut N 0.37 0.48 0.53 0.45 0.43 0.47 0.48 0.50 0.52 0.47 0.47 0.54 0.54 0.52 0.55 0.56 0.57
P2O5 0.20 0.25 0.28 0.36 0.31 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.34 0.32 0.35 0.36 0.39 0.41 0.42 0.41 0.40
K2O 0.10 0.14 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.25 0.19 0.24 0.28 0.26 0.26 0.29 0.34 0.33 0.34 0.35 0.36
NCCanola N 0.87 0.96 1.12 0.99 1.06 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.77 0.88 1.01 1.02 1.01 0.97 0.98 1.03
P2O5 0.29 0.34 0.44 0.41 0.49 0.44 0.31 0.40 0.40 0.33 0.35 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.40 0.43 0.43
K2O 0.11 0.13 0.15 0.14 0.16 0.17 0.14 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.20 0.21 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.29 0.31
NCCotton N 1.03 0.89 1.00 1.17 1.15 1.49 1.35 1.22 1.41 1.48 1.29 1.20 1.23 1.27 1.22 1.13 1.26
P2O5 0.32 0.27 0.34 0.39 0.36 0.47 0.44 0.38 0.51 0.56 0.46 0.45 0.46 0.50 0.49 0.47 0.50
K2O 0.25 0.21 0.27 0.32 0.31 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.52 0.62 0.49 0.46 0.50 0.55 0.53 0.51 0.55
TNC N 20.15 20.49 20.12 18.53 19.15 18.35 18.03 18.14 19.14 19.48 19.32 20.30 21.2 20.93 21.00 21.19 21.89
P2O5 5.74 5.84 5.91 6.03 6.22 5.92 5.41 6.37 6.91 7.10 6.89 7.23 7.76 8.05 8.26 8.36 8.85
K2O 3.77 3.80 4.18 3.71 4.00 3.89 3.87 4.78 5.47 6.08 5.89 6.20 7.04 7.40 7.85 8.17 8.80
TNCsum 29.66 30.13 30.21 28.27 29.37 28.16 27.31 29.29 31.52 32.66 32.10 33.73 36.00 36.38 37.11 37.72 39.54

where i is the crop type and j is the province. The CY values of the 31 used fertilizer type of China, which has been representatively
provinces from 1998 to 2014 are shown in Table S2. utilized by many researchers to calculate the quantities of N,
P2O5, and K2O in compound fertilizers. Hence, the net contents of
2.3. Chemical fertilizer consumption N, P2O5, and K2O in compound fertilizer (NCcompound-N,
NCcompound-P2O5, NCcompound-K2O, 106 t) were formulated as:
The chemical fertilizer types widely used in China consist of
nitrogen (urea, ammonium bicarbonate, etc.), phosphorus (calcium FCPHcompound i CSAi
NCcompound N =
superphosphate, etc.), potassium (potassium chloride, etc.), and com- 3
pound fertilizers (diammonium hydrogen phosphate, etc.). The mean
annual chemical fertilizer consumption per hectare (FCPH) of the
dierent crops in China was derived from the Compendium of National FCPHcompound i CSAi
Agricultural Products Cost-benet [15]. The FCPH values found in Ref NCcompound P 2O5 =
3
[15]. were the net contents of N, P2O5 and K2O per hectare.

(1) The net contents of N, P2O5 and K2O in nitrogen, phosphorus and
potassium fertilizers were calculated using the following equations: FCPHcompound i CSAi
NCcompound K 2O =
3
NCN = FCPHN i CSAi
(3) The total net contents of N, P2O5 and K2O in all chemical
NCP2 O5 = FCPHP2 O5i CSAi fertilizers: the total net contents of N, P2O5 and K2O (TNCN,
TNCP2O5, TNCK2O, 106 t), and the sum of the total net contents of
nutrients (TNCsum, 106 t) in all chemical fertilizers were calculated
using the following equations:
NCK2 O = FCPHK2 Oi CSAi
where NCN, NCP2O5 and NCK2O (106 t) are the net contents of N, TNCN = NCN + NCcompound N
P2O5 and K2O in nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium fertilizers,
respectively, FCPHi (106 t hectares1) is the chemical fertilizer TNCP2 O5 = NCP2 O5 + NCcompound P2 O5
consumption per hectare of crop type-i in China, and CSAi (103 ha)
is the crop sown area of crop type-i.
TNCK2 O = NCK2 O + NCcompound K2 O
(2) For the net contents of N, P2O5 and K2O in the compound
fertilizers, it was reported that a range of 1023% for N, 10
20% for P2O5 and 825% for K2O has been used for the dierent
fractions of compound fertilizer types in China [16]. According to TNCsum = TNCN + TNCP2 O5 + TNCK2 O
the data from the China Phosphate Fertilizer Industry Association,
the 15-15-15 common type compound fertilizer (N, P2O5, and K2O
in equal proportions) was the main compound fertilizer used in
China, with 54% of the market share [16]. In addition, this All the NC and TNC values of the 7 main crops in China during
compound fertilizer (15-15-15) is regarded as the most widely 19982014 are presented in Table 1.

3
H. Yin et al.
2.4. Variations in crop yields and chemical fertilizer consumption
from 1998 to 2014
To compare the variations in the increasing percentages (IP) of crop
yields (CY) and net contents of nutrients in all chemical fertilizers
(TNC) in China from 1998 to 2014, two calculation methods were used:
CYn + 1 CY 1998
IP1(CYn + 1) = 100%; IP1(TNCn + 1)
CY 1998
TNCn + 1 TNC1998
= 100%
TNC1998
CYn + 1 CYn
IP 2(CYn + 1) = 100%; IP 2(TNCn + 1)
CYn
TNCn + 1 TNCn
= 100%
TNCn
where IP1 and IP2 represent the increasing percentage considering
1998 as the base year and between two adjacent years, respectively.
CYn+1 and TNCn+1 are the total crop yields and total net nutrient
contents in all chemical fertilizers in year-n+1 (n = 19982013),
respectively.
2.5. Straw yield
The straw yield (SY) analyzed in this study refers to the quantity of
residues after the crop is harvested, including stalks, stubbles, and
leaves [17]. Additionally, process residues from the harvesting crops,
such as rice hulls, maize cobs, and peanut husks, were not included.
The sum of straw yield (SYsum, 104 t) in China was estimated on an air-
dried basis by multiplying the crop yield (CY) by the Field Residue
Index (FRI) based on the following equation [17]:
SYsum = CYij FRIij
where i is the crop type, and j is the province. The FRI values of the
dierent crop types were originated from Refs [17,18]., which were
dierent among the 31 provinces due to varied climate, soil fertility
levels, and management [19]. Table S3 lists the residue indices for the
main Chinese crops. The calculated SY and SYsum values of the 31
provinces in China are shown in Table S4.
2.6. Nutrient resource of straw
Straw nutrient (SN) resources are indicated by the net quantity of
N, P2O5 and K2O (106 t). Here, we calculated the SN amount for each
crop type to obtain the total SNN, SNP2O5 and SNK2O in China:
SNN = SYi CN i
SNP2 O5 = SYi CPi 2.29
SNK2 O = SYi CK i 1.2
where i is the crop type, CN, CP, and CK are the nutrient content
coecients of N, P and K in straws, respectively. The coecients were
collected from the Organic Fertilizer Nutrient in China [20] and
presented in Table S5. The two conversion coecients (2.29 and 1.2)
represent the ratios of P2O5 and K2O to P and K, respectively [21].
2.7. Potential contribution of straw to chemical fertilizer
Straw nutrients returned to soil can greatly contribute to soil
fertility and reduce the consumption of chemical fertilizers in China.
The average straw nutrient resources and total chemical fertilizer
consumption in recent 5 years (20102014) are compared to investi-
gate to what extent the straw nutrients can counterbalance fertilizer
consumption, and provide suggestions for the green development of
agriculture during the China's 13th Five-Year Plan Period (2016
4
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews xxx (xxxx) xxxxxx
2020). Considering that chemical fertilizers cannot be entirely utilized
by crops, we used two calculation methods to analyze the contribution
of straw nutrients to chemical fertilizers:
SN PR
P1 =
TFC RE
SN PR
P2 =
TFC
where P1 is the percentage of straw nutrients accounting for the net N,
P2O5 or K2O contents (i.e., eectively utilized by crops) in all chemical
fertilizers, RE is the apparent recovery eciencies of the net N, P2O5 or
K2O contents in fertilizers, PR is the percentage of straw returning to
the eld (0100%), and P2 is the percentage of straw nutrients
accounting for the total N, P2O5 or K2O contents in all chemical
fertilizers. As found in the Research Report on Fertilizer Utilization
Eciency of Three Major Grain Crops in China [7], the average RE
values of N, P2O5 or K2O fertilizers (REN, REP2O5 and REK2O) for the 3
major crops (rice, wheat, and maize) were 33%, 24% and 42%,
respectively. The chemical fertilizer consumption of the 3 crops in
2014 comprised 84% of the 7 crop types, according to the fertilizer data
in Table 1. Therefore, the RE values of the 3 major crops were used to
represent the average RE values of the 7 main crops in this study
(Fig. 1).
2.8. Potential energy value within the crop straw
The potential energy values of dierent crop straws as biofuel were
represented by computing the standard coal equivalent (SCE) [22]. The
average SCE value for each crop straw was formulated as:
SCEi = SYi CFi
Hi
CFi = 100%
Hcoal
where i is the crop type, SY is the straw yield (104 t), CF is the
conversion factor of standard coal equivalent for crop straw, H is the
heating value of crop straw (MJ kg1), and Hcoal is the heating value of
standard coal (29.31 MJ kg1) [22]. The H and CF values of dierent
crop straws in China are shown in Table S1.
2.9. Emission of gas pollution and particle number from crop straw
burning
The calculation processes of potential emissions (PE) of gas
pollutions (PEgas) and particle number (PEparticle) from the three major
agricultural crop straws (rice, wheat, maize) were given below:
PEgas = EFgas i SYi 50.02%
PEparticle = EFparticle i SYi 50.02%
where i is the crop type, EFgas is the emission factor of gas pollution
(g kg1), EFparticle is the emission factor of particle number (particles
kg1), SY is the straw yield (104 t), and 50.02% is the potential straw
percentage for biofuel production [23]. The EFgas and EFparticle values
of rice, wheat and maize straws in China are shown in Table S3, which
were evaluated using a self-built burning stove and an aerosol chamber
in a previous study [24].
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Overuse of chemical fertilizers
China has achieved twelve consecutive years of growth in crop
production since the Chinese government implement a series of
policies and management measures (i.e., protecting crop procurement
prices, agricultural tax relief, and planting structure adjustments, etc.)
H. Yin et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews xxx (xxxx) xxxxxx

Fig. 2. Crop yield, straw yield and total chemical fertilizer consumption of the 7 main
crops in China from 1998 to 2014. The data were collected from the China Rural
Statistical Yearbook and Compendium of National Agricultural Products Cost-benet
[14,15].

to guarantee food security after the 1990s. The total crop yields of the 7
main agricultural crops increased from 481.23 Mt in 1998 to
597.95 Mt in 2014, which represented an increasing percentage of
24.25% from 1998 to 2014 (Fig. 2, Table S2). Although China's grain
output has dramatically increased, tremendous chemical fertilizers
have been overused to boost crop production from a limited area of
cropland [25]. China's total consumption of chemical fertilizers in-
creased from 29.66 Mt in 1998 to 39.54 Mt in 2014, with an increasing
percentage of 33.31% (Fig. 2, Table 1). From 19982014 (17 years),
China's crop yield and chemical fertilizer consumption showed an
increasing trend in total, with the exception of 19992003, during
which the crop production and the consumption of chemical fertilizers
in China were generally lower compared to all the other years listed in
the Fig. 2, mainly due to the lower crop sown area [26].
China had implemented a number of mature technology mode (i.e., Fig. 3. Increasing percentages (IP) of crop yield (solid circles) and chemical fertilizer
formula fertilization by soil testing) to improve the fertilizer use eciency consumption (hollow circles) (a) using 1998 as the base year (IP1) and (b) between each
over the past decade, and by 2015 that the fertilizer comprehensive use of the two adjacent years (IP2). Chemical fertilizer consumption indicates the total net
nutrient contents (TNC) in all chemical fertilizers. The average percentage value (solid
eciency in China had risen up to 35.2% [7]. However, the increases in
and dash lines) refers to the mean values of IP for crop yield and chemical fertilizer from
both the use of chemical fertilizers and crop yields, and the increasing rate 1998 to 2014, respectively.
of chemical fertilizer consumption are generally higher than that of crop
yield in China. For example, the average growth percentage in the
chemical fertilizer consumption based on 1998 was 9.42%, whereas the 703.30 Mt in 1998 and 2014, respectively, which represent an increase
average growth percentage in crop yield was 3.84% during the period of of 9.00 Mt/yr, or a total increasing percentage of 25.75% (Fig. 2, Table
19982014 (Fig. 3a). As a whole, the increase rates of chemical fertilizer S4). The vast majority of straw is used for bioenergy and livestock
consumption from 1998 to 2014 maintained a sustained upward trend, forage, or is lost through other ways, whereas only a small amount
except for the period of 19992003. Similarly, the average growth (14.78%) of the total straw resources are directly returned to the eld
percentage in chemical fertilizer consumption between each of the two [23], which is far below the average returning percentage (approxi-
adjacent years from 1998 to 2014 was higher than that of crop yield mately 70%) in Europe, the United States and other developed
(Fig. 3b). As a result, excessive levels of chemical fertilizers had been countries [31]. Straw contains rich nutrient resources such as N, P
applied to farmlands in order to maintain the increasing rates of crop and K, and their contents in straw range between 0.651.82%, 0.08
yields in China for a long time. The long-term overuse of chemical 0.196% and 1.021.94%, respectively (Table S5). Although current
fertilizers, especially for nitrogen fertilizers, has not only reduced soil straw management practices address the resource needs and economic
fertility via driving the loss of soil organic matter, the deterioration of soil benets, the far-reaching ecological eects from removing the straw
structure (i.e., enhancing condensation degree, aromaticity, aging func- from the eld are often underestimated. Straw removal from the eld
tion, etc.), the decrease in the energy level of soil humus, microbial has greatly aggravated the environmental burdens and soil fertility
biomass content and enzyme activities due to the acidify eect of N degradation in farmlands.
fertilizer application [2729], but also has led to serious environmental
degradation, such as enhanced nitrogen deposition [30] and agricultural 3.3. Potential contribution of straw to fertilizer
non-point pollution (i.e., nitrate pollution of groundwater, eutrophication
of surface waters, and soil acidication). Since straw contains rich N, P and K resources, we analyzed to what
extent returning the straw nutrients to the led can theoretically
3.2. Straw nutrient resource counterbalance chemical fertilization consumption of these nutrients.
Considering that crops can only partially utilize the applied chemical
China's crop straw production has dramatically increased with the fertilizers, we analyzed the potential contribution of straw nutrients to
increase of crop yield. Total straw yields averaged 559.28 and chemical fertilizers under two scenarios: (I) the eciently used

5
H. Yin et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews xxx (xxxx) xxxxxx

13th Five-Year Green Agriculture Development Plan. The annual mean

straw yield was up to 674.91 Mt, including 19.52 Mt of total nutrient
resources, 6.11 Mt of N, 2.00 Mt of P2O5 and 11.41 Mt of K2O during
20102014. Furthermore, the 5-year average chemical fertilizer con-
sumption of N, K2O and P2O5 were 21.25 Mt, 8.26 Mt and 7.85 Mt,
respectively.

(I) The eciently-used chemical fertilizer (i.e., obtained through

multiplying the amount of specic fertilizer consumption by its
utilization eciency) for N, K2O and P2O5 were about 7.01 Mt/yr,
3.30 Mt/yr and 1.98 Mt/yr, respectively (Fig. 4a). Assuming that
the straw nutrient resources can completely be translated into soil
fertility after returning to the eld, only 28.92% and 98.86% of the
straw returned to the eld can theoretically counterbalance the
amounts of eciently-used chemical fertilizers of K2O and P2O5,
respectively. Although the full return of straw cant completely
counterbalance the current consumption rate of N fertilizers, the
N nutrient resources in straws can replace approximately 87.22%
of the total N fertilizer consumption when all straw was returned
to the eld.
(II) When considering the potential contributions of the straw nu-
trients to the total chemical fertilizer consumption, only 68.80% of
the straw returned to the eld can fully counterbalance the total
chemical fertilizer consumption of K2O (Fig. 4b). Meanwhile, the
full return of straw nutrients can take up 28.77% and 24.25% of N
and P2O5 fertilizer consumption, respectively.

Overall, promoting the return of straw to the eld has a great

potential to reduce the use of chemical fertilizer despite neglecting the
actual straw nutrient utilization eciency in the eld and thus slightly
overestimating the contribution of straw nutrient resources to chemical
fertilizer consumption.

3.4. Straw bioenergy and pollutant emission

Fig. 4. The average annual total nutrient contents of N, K2O and P2O5 in straw and their
potential contributions to (a) the amount of eciently-used chemical fertilizers and (b)
the total chemical fertilizer consumption under dierent proportions of straw return to
the eld during 20102014. The solid blue line, green line and red line represent the
average annual total amounts of eciently-used chemical fertilizers (a) and total
chemical fertilizer consumption (b) of N, P2O5 and K2O, respectively. The dotted blue
line, green line and red line represent the average annual total straw nutrient contents of
N, P2O5 and K2O, respectively. P1 is the percentage of straw nutrients accounting for the
net N, P2O5 or K2O contents (i.e., eectively utilized by crops) in all chemical fertilizers.
P2 is the percentage of straw nutrients accounting for the total N, P2O5 or K2O contents in
all chemical fertilizers. PR is the percentage of straw returning to the eld (0100%).
(For interpretation of the references to color in this gure legend, the reader is referred to
the web version of this article)
chemical fertilizer and (II) the total chemical fertilizer consumption.
The straw yield and chemical fertilizer consumption in recent 5 years
was adopted to better provide management implications for China's
Crop straws contain rich bioenergy, and had traditionally been used
as one of the most important energy sources in China, especially in the
rural areas [23]. The total straw yields in China were equivalent to
255.4373.3 Mt of standard coal equivalent (SCE) from 1998 to 2014
(Table 2). The amount of total SCE was mainly contributed by rice
(77.298.5 Mt), maize (61.8129.6 Mt) and wheat (60.488.4 Mt).
Soybean, peanut, canola and cotton together provided less than 20%
of the total SCE (Table 2). The straw percentage for biofuel production
was approximately 50.02%, which was the sum of the straw burned for
cooking food/warming, or burned directly in elds and that used for
biofuel combustion [17]. Hence, the potential energy derived from part
of the straw yield was 186.7 Mt of SCE in 2014.
With improved living conditions in rural areas, the dwellers and
farmers tend to rely more on commercial fuel, which leads to even
more open eld burning or accelerated comprehensive utilization of
straw resource removed from the eld. Thus, we further evaluated the
pollutant emission derived from straw burning to assess its potential

Table 2
Standard coal equivalent (SCE, Mt) of the 7 main crop straws in China from 1998 to 2014. The SCE value of specic crop straw was estimated by multiplying straw yield (SY) by
conversion factor (CF) of standard coal equivalent.

SCE (Mt) 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

SCERice 96.2 95.8 90.5 85.6 84.1 77.2 86.0 86.7 81.3 89.2 91.9 93.4 93.6 95.9 97.5 97.1 98.5
SCEWheat 76.3 79.3 69.5 65.4 62.8 60.4 64.0 68.0 75.8 76.4 78.6 80.5 80.6 82.1 84.6 85.4 88.4
SCEMaize 78.2 75.2 61.8 66.7 71.4 68.2 76.8 82.1 89.2 90.0 98.5 97.2 105.4 115.1 122.9 131.1 129.6
SCESoybean 13.2 12.3 13.5 13.4 14.4 13.4 15.1 14.1 12.9 11.1 13.3 12.9 13.0 12.5 11.3 10.4 10.5
SCEPeanut 6.5 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.2 7.4 7.9 7.8 6.9 7.0 7.5 7.9 8.4 8.6 9.0 9.1 8.9
SCECanola 14.8 18.1 20.3 20.2 18.7 20.3 23.4 23.2 19.6 18.0 21.4 24.2 23.2 23.8 24.9 25.7 26.2
SCECotton 8.2 6.9 7.9 8.8 8.8 8.7 11.3 10.2 13.4 13.6 13.3 11.4 10.7 11.9 12.4 11.4 11.1
SCEtotal 293.4 294.5 271.4 268.2 268.3 255.4 284.5 292.1 299.2 305.3 324.6 327.5 334.8 349.9 362.4 370.2 373.3

6
H. Yin et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews xxx (xxxx) xxxxxx

Potential emission of gas pollution (PEgas, Tg) derived from crop straw combustion in China from 1998 to 2014. The PEgas value of specic crop straw was calculated by multiplying straw yield (SY) by emission factor of gas pollution (EFgas).
negative impact on environment pollution to provide more information

391.16
126.39

147.84
84.33

11.46

13.44
2014 and recommendation on the trade-o between straw use for energy and

6.84

0.11
0.08
0.19

0.06
0.03
0.09

0.10
0.05
0.15
use for fertilizer. During 19982014, the total potential gas emissions
from open burning and biofuel combustion of the three main crop

387.00
straws (rice, wheat and maize) in China ranged from 250.98 Tg to

122.07

149.49
83.18

11.06

13.59
2013

6.75

0.11
0.08
0.19

0.06
0.03
0.09

0.10
0.05
0.15
391.16 Tg, while the potential particle emissions were between 3.10
1024 and 4.72 1024 particles (Tables 3 and 4). In 2014, the potential
emissions of CO, CO2, NO, NO2 and NOx were measured to be 6.84,

375.84
120.95

140.12
84.33, 0.11, 0.08 and 0.19 for rice, 11.46, 126.39, 0.06, 0.03 and 0.09
83.47

10.96

12.74
2012

6.77

0.11
0.08
0.19

0.06
0.02
0.09

0.09
0.05
0.14
for wheat, and 13.44, 147.84, 0.10, 0.05 and 0.15 for maize, respec-
tively. The percentage of CO2 emission of the three crop straws in 2014
was the largest (91.67%), followed by CO (8.11%), NOx (0.11%), NO

360.71
117.31

131.24
82.14

10.63

11.93
(0.07%) and NO2 (0.04%). The total gas emissions of the three major
2011

6.66

0.11
0.08
0.19

0.06
0.02
0.08

0.09
0.04
0.13
crops in 2014 were in the order of maize (161.58 Tg) > wheat (138.03
Tg) > rice (91.55 Tg), whereas the total particle number emissions
followed the order of maize (1.99 1024) > rice (1.92 1024) > wheat

344.13
115.16

120.21
80.13

10.44

10.93
2010

(0.81 1024).
6.50

0.10
0.08
0.18

0.06
0.02
0.08

0.08
0.04
0.12
Crop straws, on the one hand can provide abundant energy for
agricultural and industrial production systems (373.3 Mt of SCE in
333.64

2014), but on the other hand, straw biomass combustion releases

115.02

110.88
80.01

10.42

10.08
2009

6.49

0.10
0.08
0.18

0.06
0.02
0.08

0.07
0.04
0.11

carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and

air carbon particulates [4], which can cause serious atmospheric
quality deterioration (e.g., acid rain, global warming and photochemi-
330.87
112.30

112.34

cal smog) [24,32,33], nutrient loss (nitrogen, sulfur, phosphorus, and

78.70

10.18

10.21
2008

6.39

0.10
0.08
0.18

0.06
0.02
0.08

0.08
0.04
0.11

carbon), and even human health hazards [34,35]. Therefore, from a

long-term eco-environmental perspective, the use of crop straws for
biofuel production should be assessed with a holistic approach.
314.35
109.15

102.67
76.39
2007

6.20

0.10
0.08
0.17

9.89

0.06
0.02
0.08

9.34

0.07
0.03
0.10

4. Recommendations
305.12

China's agriculture is under enormous pressure due to the high

108.30

101.78
69.65
2006

5.65

0.09
0.07
0.16

9.82

0.05
0.02
0.08

9.25

0.07
0.03
0.10

fertilizer consumption and large demand for grain from the increasing
population. Nowadays, green agricultural development in China is a
priority for sustainable agricultural development. For example, the 2020
289.11

Fertilizer Use Zero Growth Action Plan was implemented in 2015 to

74.25

97.16

93.68
2005

6.02

0.10
0.07
0.17

8.81

0.05
0.02
0.07

8.52

0.06
0.03
0.10

reduce the use of chemical fertilizers [36]. Although the China's fertilizer-
use eciency for the growth of major crops has reached the internation-
ally recognized suitable range [7], ensuring the continued increases in
275.66
73.68

91.53

87.56

crop yield while adhering to the policies of the 2020 Fertilizer Use Zero
2004

5.98

0.09
0.07
0.17

8.30

0.05
0.02
0.07

7.96

0.06
0.03
0.09

Growth Action Plan will be a huge challenge in China. Our results suggest
that promoting straw return to the eld is a potentially eective and
250.98

important measure to achieve the above goals. Specically, our estimation

66.12

86.25

77.77
2003

demonstrated that the complete return of straw to the eld could

5.36

0.09
0.07
0.15

7.82

0.04
0.02
0.06

7.07

0.05
0.03
0.08

compensate for all of the K2O, the majority of the P2O5 and some of
the N in fertilizers. Meanwhile, returning straw to the eld has many
265.10

advantages in improving farmland soil quality, reducing pollutant emis-

71.99

89.74

81.39
2002

5.84

0.09
0.07
0.16

8.13

0.05
0.02
0.06

7.40

0.05
0.03
0.08

sion from straw combustion and providing environmental benets to

some extent. However, the current proportion of straw returning to soil is
far from satisfactory compared to developed countries. Therefore, the
264.80

Chinese government should adjust the policies to take promoting straws

73.32

93.45

76.06
2001

5.95

0.09
0.07
0.17

8.47

0.05
0.02
0.07

6.92

0.05
0.03
0.08

returned to eld as priority instead of greatly encouraging straw resource

utilization as bioenergy and livestock forage. Under current straw
management practices, promoting straw return to eld as much as
269.50
77.48

99.26

70.43
2000

possible should be highly recommended to assure China's green agricul-

6.29

0.10
0.08
0.18

9.00

0.05
0.02
0.07

6.40

0.05
0.02
0.07

tural development in the near future.

Despite the many advantages for reducing fertilizer use and
306.55

environmental pollution, there are still several unsolved problems in

113.30
82.08

10.27

85.73
1999

6.66

0.11
0.08
0.19

0.06
0.02
0.08

7.79

0.06
0.03
0.09

terms of addressing the popularization of straw return practices in

China. First, one of the biggest challenges in promoting straw-return-
ing practices eectively is the lack of high-eciency straw-returning
306.02
109.02

technologies. Straw decomposes slowly in the eld and the released

82.39

89.22
1998

6.68

0.11
0.08
0.19

9.88

0.06
0.02
0.08

8.11

0.06
0.03
0.09

nutrients cannot satisfy the rapid nutrient requirements necessary for

crop growth. Hence, the government should increase its investment in
developing innovative technologies for rapid straw decomposition in
Table 3

Wheat

Maize

Sum
NO2

NO2

NO2
Rice

NOx

NOx

NOx

the eld. Second, the lack of awareness by farmers and the general
CO2

CO2

CO2
NO

NO

NO
CO

CO

CO

public regarding the negative consequences of straw removal from

7
H. Yin et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews xxx (xxxx) xxxxxx

Table 4
Potential emission of particle number (PEparticle, 1024 particles) derived from straw combustion in China from 1998 to 2014. The PEgas value of specic crop straw was calculated by
multiplying straw yield (SY) by the emission factor of particle number (EFparticle).

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Rice 1.87 1.87 1.76 1.67 1.64 1.50 1.68 1.69 1.58 1.74 1.79 1.82 1.82 1.87 1.90 1.89 1.92
Wheat 0.70 0.73 0.64 0.60 0.58 0.55 0.59 0.62 0.70 0.70 0.72 0.74 0.74 0.75 0.78 0.78 0.81
Maize 1.20 1.16 0.95 1.03 1.10 1.05 1.18 1.26 1.37 1.38 1.51 1.49 1.62 1.77 1.89 2.01 1.99
Sum 3.77 3.76 3.35 3.30 3.32 3.10 3.45 3.57 3.65 3.82 4.02 4.05 4.18 4.39 4.57 4.68 4.72

elds is a major barrier to popularizing straw-returning practices.
Appropriate policy interventions and guidance should be established to
increase the public's awareness and knowledge regarding the important
signicance of straw-returning practices in terms of sustainable
agriculture and environmental protection. Third, another main barrier
to the eective application of straw-returning practices in China is the
high cost. The government needs to oer much more incentives (i.e.,
agricultural subsidies) to motivate farmers to adopt and popularize
straw-returning practices.
Green agriculture has already become a major theme in China.
Consequently, theories on ecosystem mass cycling should be intro-
duced for the sustainable development of agriculture and the protec-
tion of environment. We should take full advantage of straw returning
to improve farmland soil quality while applying chemical fertilizers to
maintain the demand for crop production in the short term. We argue
that eciently balancing chemical fertilizer consumption and straw
returning practices is imperative and the foundation of both sustain-
able agricultural development and steady increases in crop production.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Prof. Yiqi Luo at Department of
Microbiology & Plant Biology, University of Oklahoma for further
comments on data analysis. We thank Prof. Yuqin Wang from National
Agricultural Information System for providing Compendium of National
Agricultural Products Cost-benet. We also acknowledge the sta and
post-graduate students in belowground Ecology Group and the Maoxian
Mountain Ecosystem of CERN Research Station for their kind help with
data collection. This work was supported jointly by the Frontier Science
Key Research Programs of CAS (QYZDB-SSW-SMC023), the National
Natural Science Foundation of China (31670449 and 31500445), the CAS
Light of West China Program (Y6C2051100) and the Youth Innovation
Promotion Association, CAS (2013242).
Appendix A. Supporting information
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found in the
online version at doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.076.
References
[1] National Bureau of Statistics of the Peoples Republic of China (NBS). Report on
crop production in 2015 (in Chinese); 2015. Available online: http://www.stats.
gov.cn/tjsj/zxfb/201512/t20151208_1286449.html. [Accessed 15 December
2008].
[2] Zhang X, Davidson EA, Mauzerall DL, Searchinger TD, Dumas P, Shen Y. Managing
nitrogen for sustainable development. Nature 2015;528(7580):519.
[3] Zeng XY, Ma YT, Ma LR. Utilization of straw in biomass energy in China. Renew
Sustain Energ Rev 2007;11(5):97687.
[4] Hong JL, Ren LJ, Hong JM, Xu CQ. Environmental impact assessment of corn
straw utilization in China. J Clean Prod 2016;112:17008.
[5] Ministry of Agriculture of the Peoples Republic of China (MOA). Chinas 13th ve-
year agricultural Scientic and Technological Plan (in Chinese); 2017.Available
online: http://www.moa.gov.cn/sjzz/kjs/dongtai/201703/t20170310_5514395.
htm. [Accessed 17 March 2010].
[6] Sun B, Zhang LX, Yang LZ, Zhang FS, Norse D, Zhu ZL. Agricultural non-point
source pollution in China: causes and mitigation measures. AMBIO
2012;41(4):3709.
[7] Ministry of Agriculture of the Peoples Republic of China (MOA). Research report
on fertilizer utilization eciency of three major grain crops in China (in Chinese);
2013. Available online: http://www.moa.gov.cn/zwllm/zwdt/201310/t20131010_
3625203.htm. [Accessed 13 October 2010].
[8] Liu JG, Diamond J. China's environment in a globalizing world. Nature
2005;435(7046):117986.
[9] Tilman D, Socolow R, Foley JA, Hill J, Larson E, Lynd L, et al. Benecial biofuels-
the food, energy, and environment trilemma. Science 2009;325(5938):2701.
[10] Bhattacharyya P, Chakraborty A, Bhattacharya B, Chakrabarti K. Evaluation of
MSW compost as a component of integrated nutrient management in wetland rice.
Compost Sci Util 2003;11(4):34350.
[11] Sheehan J, Aden A, Paustian K, Killian K, Brenner J, Walsh M, et al. Energy and
environmental aspects of using corn stover for fuel ethanol. J Ind Ecol 2003;7(3
4):11746.
[12] Korsaeth A, Eltun R. Nitrogen mass balances in conventional, integrated and
ecological cropping systems and the relationship between balance calculations and
nitrogen runo in an 8-year eld experiment in Norway. Agr Ecosyst Environ
2000;79(2):199214.
[13] Vitousek PM, Naylor R, Crews T, David MB, Drinkwater LE, Holland E, et al.
Nutrient imbalances in agricultural development. Science
2009;324(5934):151920.
[14] National Bureau of Statistics of China . China rural statistical yearbook (in
Chinese). . Beijing: China Statistics Press; 1998.
[15] National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC). Compendium of national
agricultural products cost-benet (in Chinese). Beijing: China Statistics Press;
19982015.
[16] Zhang WF, Li LK, Chen XP, Zhang FS. The present status and existing problems in
China's compound fertilizer development (in Chinese). Phosphate Compd Fertil
2009;24:146.
[17] Wang XY, Yang L, Steinberger Y, Liu ZX, Liao SH, Xie GH. Field crop residue
estimate and availability for biofuel production in China. Renew Sustain Energ Rev
2013;27(6):86475.
[18] Wang XY, Xue S, Xie GH. Value-taking for residue factor as a parameter to assess
the eld residue of eld crops (in Chinese). J China Agric Univ 2012;17(1):18.
[19] Smith DL, Hamel C. Crop yield physiology and processes. Berlin, Heidelberg, New
York: Springer-Verlag; 1999.
[20] He PA, Li R. Organic fertilizer nutrient in China (in Chinese). Beijing: National
Agro-Tech Extension and Service Center (NATESC), China Agriculture Press; 1999.
[21] Gao LW, Ma L, Zhang WF, Wang FH, Ma WQ, Zhang FS. Estimation of nutrient
resource quantity of crop straw and its utilization situation in China (in Chinese).
Trans CSAE 2009;25(7):1739.
[22] Wei MG, Wang XY, Xie GH. Maturity dates of main eld crop residues in dierent
regions of China. J China Agric Univ 2012;6:003.
[23] Ministry of Agriculture of the Peoples Republic of China (MOA). Resources survey
and evaluation report of crop straw in China (in Chinese); 2010. Available online;
http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2010-12/16/content_1767577.htm. [Accessed 10
December 2016].
[24] Zhang HF, Ye XG, Cheng TT, Chen JM, Yang X, Wang L, et al. A laboratory study of
agricultural crop residue combustion in China: emission factors and emission
inventory. Atmos Environ 2008;42(36):843241.
[25] Liu HT, Li J, Li X, Zheng YH, Feng SF, Jiang GM. Mitigating greenhouse gas
emissions through replacement of chemical fertilizer with organic manure in a
temperate farmland. Chin Sci Bull 2015;60(6):598606.
[26] He T, Wu ZW. Chinese grain output change analysis in 19912003 and forecast. (in
Chinese). China Grain Econ 2004;5:301.
[27] Guo JH, Liu XJ, Zhang Y, Shen JL, Han WX, Zhang WF, et al. Signicant
acidication in major Chinese croplands. Science 2010;327(5968):100810.
[28] Liu EK, Yan CR, Mei XR, He WQ, Bing SH, Ding LP, et al. Long-term eect of
chemical fertilizer, straw, and manure on soil chemical and biological properties in
northwest China. Geoderma 2010;158(3):17380.
[29] L J, Zhang Y, Wang X, Zhao G, Zhang C. Eect of long-term single application of
chemical fertilizer on soil properties and crop yield. J Appl Ecol 2001;12(4):569.
[30] Liu XJ, Zhang Y, Han WX, Tang AH, Shen JL, Cui ZL, et al. Enhanced nitrogen
deposition over China. Nature 2013;494(7438):45962.
[31] Wang HY, Wang F, Sun RH, Gao CY, Wang YJ, Sun N, et al. Policies and
regulations of crop straw utilization of foreign countries and its experience and
inspiration for China (in Chinese). Trans CSAE 2016;32(16):21622.
[32] Andreae MO, Merlet P. Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning.
Glob Biogeochem Cy 2001;15(4):95566.
[33] Dong L, Gao SQ, Xu GW. No reduction over biomass char in the combustion
process. Energ Fuel 2009;24(1):44650.
[34] Torigoe K, Hasegawa S, Numata O, Yazaki S, Matsunaga M, Boku N, et al. Inuence
of emission from rice straw burning on bronchial asthma in children. Pediatr Int
2000;42(2):14350.
[35] Zhang YX, Tao S, Shen HZ, Ma JM. Inhalation exposure to ambient polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons and lung cancer risk of Chinese population. Proc Natl Acad
Sci USA 2009;106(50):210637.
[36] Ministry of Agriculture of the Peoples Republic of China (MOA). The 2020 fertilizer
use zero growth action plan (in Chinese); ; 2015. Available online: http://www.
gov.cn/xinwen/2015-03/18/content_2835617.htm. [Accessed 15 March 2018].