Field trials in Europe with Miscanthus over the past 25 years have demonstrated that interspecies hybrids such as M. × giganteus (M × g) combine both high yield potentials and low inputs in a wide range of soils and climates. Miscanthus hybrids are expected to play a major role in the provision of perennial lignocellulosic biomass across much of Europe as part of a lower carbon economy. However, even with favourable policies in some European countries, uptake has been slow. M × g, as a sterile clone, can only be propagated vegetatively, which leads to high establishment costs and low multiplication rates. Consequently, a decade ago, a strategic decision to develop rapidly multiplied seeded hybrids was taken. To make progress on this goal, we have (1) harnessed the genetic diversity in Miscanthus by crossing and progeny testing thousands of parental combinations to select several candidate seed‐based hybrids adapted to European environments, (2) established field scale seed production methods with annual multiplication factors >1500×, (3) developed the agronomy for establishing large stands from seed sown plug plants to reduce establishment times by a year compared to M × g, (4) trialled a range of harvest techniques to improve compositional quality and logistics on a large scale, (5) performed spatial analyses of yield potential and land availability to identify regional opportunities across Europe and doubled the area within the bio‐climatic envelope, (6) considered on‐farm economic, practical and environmental benefits that can be attractive to growers. The technical barriers to adoption have now been overcome sufficiently such that Miscanthus is ready to use as a low‐carbon feedstock in the European bio‐economy.

In the anaerobic digestion and biogas industry in Germany, the step of energy crop production accounts for a high proportion of the greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impacts. Replacing annual energy crops, for example maize, by perennial biomass crops such as miscanthus offers the potential to increase the sustainability of biogas crop production. However, the cutting tolerance of miscanthus and the mechanisms influencing it need to be investigated to assess its potential as a biogas crop. For this purpose, a field trial with different harvest regimes was conducted to identify the potential methane yield and cutting tolerance of Miscanthus x giganteus. Several fertilization regimes were tested under nitrogen‐limited conditions in a pot trial to investigate the mechanisms behind the cutting tolerance. The refilling of carbohydrate (starch) stores in the rhizome was identified as a very important factor influencing the cutting tolerance of miscanthus, whereas the nutrient relocation appeared to be of less importance. The field trial revealed that Miscanthus x giganteus offers a very high methane yield potential of approx. 6000 m³ ha⁻¹ when harvested in October, which is within the range of the methane hectare yield of energy maize. The substrate‐specific methane yield of Miscanthus x giganteus biomass decreased with later harvest dates and reached 247 ml (g oDM)⁻¹ in October. This harvest date delivered very high, stable yields of on average 26 t DM ha⁻¹ over two years and enabled a good cutting tolerance. Green harvest in October was identified to be suitable for Miscanthus x giganteus and is recommended for biogas utilization. In conclusion, the perennial biomass crop Miscanthus x giganteus is a very promising biogas crop and offers the potential to increase the sustainability of the anaerobic digestion sector in Germany by replacing a substantial area of biogas maize cultivation.

Miscanthus is a promising fiber crop with high potential for sustainable biomass production for a biobased economy. The effect of biomass composition on the processing efficiency of miscanthus biomass for different biorefinery value chains was evaluated, including combustion, anaerobic digestion and enzymatic saccharification for the production of bioethanol. Biomass quality and composition was analyzed in detail using stem and leaf fractions of summer (July) and winter (March) harvested biomass of eight compositionally diverse Miscanthus sinensis genotypes. Genotype performance in tests for enzymatic saccharification, anaerobic digestion and combustion differed extensively. The variation between the best and the worst performing genotype was 18% for biogas yield (ml g⁻¹ dm) and 42% for saccharification efficiency (glucose release as %dm). The ash content of the best performing genotype was 62% lower than that of the genotype with the highest ash content and showed a considerably high ash melting temperature during combustion. Variation between genotypes in biomass quality for the different thermochemical bioconversion processes was shown to be strongly correlated to differences in biomass composition. The most important traits that contributed favorably to biogas yields and saccharification efficiency were a high content of trans‐ferulic acid, a high ratio of para‐coumaric acid to lignin and a low lignin content. Additionally, a high content of hemicellulosic polysaccharides positively affected saccharification efficiency. Low contents of ash and inorganic elements positively affect biomass quality for combustion and low potassium and chloride contents contributed to a higher ash melting temperature. These results demonstrate the potential for optimizing and exploiting M. sinensis as a multipurpose lignocellulosic feedstock, particularly for bioenergy applications.

Environmental issues surrounding conventional annual biogas crops have led to growing interest in alternative crops, such as miscanthus. In addition to the better environmental performance, miscanthus can be grown on marginal land where no competition with feed and food crops is anticipated. On marginal land however, biomass yields are significantly lower than on good agricultural land. This raises the question of the economic and environmental sustainability of miscanthus cultivated on marginal land for biogas production. This study assessed the environmental and economic performance of miscanthus cultivated on marginal land for biogas production by conducting a Life‐Cycle Assessment and complementary Life‐Cycle Cost analysis. The functional unit chosen was 1 GJ of electricity (GJ_el.). The substitution of a fossil reference was included using a system expansion approach. Electricity generated by the combustion of miscanthus‐based biogas in a combined heat and power has considerably lower impacts on the environment than the fossil reference in most of the categories assessed. In the impact category “climate change”, the substitution of the marginal German electricity mix leads to a carbon mitigation potential of 256 kg CO₂e/GJ_el.. At 45.12 €/GJ_el., the costs of miscanthus‐based biogas generation and utilization are considerably lower than those of maize (61.30 €/GJ_el.). The results of this study clearly show that it can make economic and environmental sense to cultivate miscanthus on marginal land as a substrate for biogas production. The economic sustainability is however limited by the biomass yield. By contrast, there are no clear thresholds limiting the environmental performance. The decision needs to be made on a case‐by‐case basis depending on site‐specific conditions such as local biodiversity.

The demand for food and renewable energy is increasing significantly, whereas the availability of land for agricultural use is declining. Agrivoltaic systems (AVS), which combine agricultural production with solar energy generation on the same area, are a promising opportunity with the potential to satisfy this demand while avoiding land-use conflicts. In the current study, a Consequential Life-Cycle Assessment (CLCA) was conducted to holistically assess the environmental consequences arising from a shift from single-use agriculture to AVS in Germany. The results of the study show that the environmental consequences of the installation of overhead AVS on agricultural land are positive and reduce the impacts in 15 of the 16 analysed impact categories especially for climate change, eutrophication and fossil resource use, as well as in the single score assessment, mainly due to the substitution of the marginal energy mix. It was demonstrated that, under certain conditions, AVS can contribute to the extension of renewable energy production resources without reducing food production resources. These include maintaining the agricultural yields underneath the photovoltaic (PV) modules, seeking synergies between solar energy generation and crop production and minimising the loss of good agricultural land.

Demand for sustainably produced biomass is expected to increase with the need to provide renewable commodities, improve resource security and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with COP26 commitments. Studies have demonstrated additional environmental benefits of using perennial biomass crops (PBCs), when produced appropriately, as a feedstock for the growing bioeconomy, including utilisation for bioenergy (with or without carbon capture and storage). PBCs can potentially contribute to Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) (2023–27) objectives provided they are carefully integrated into farming systems and landscapes. Despite significant research and development (R&D) investment over decades in herbaceous and coppiced woody PBCs, deployment has largely stagnated due to social, economic and policy uncertainties. This paper identifies the challenges in creating policies that are acceptable to all actors. Development will need to be informed by measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of greenhouse gas emissions reductions and other environmental, economic and social metrics. It discusses interlinked issues that must be considered in the expansion of PBC production: (i) available land; (ii) yield potential; (iii) integration into farming systems; (iv) R&D requirements; (v) utilisation options; and (vi) market systems and the socio‐economic environment. It makes policy recommendations that would enable greater PBC deployment: (1) incentivise farmers and land managers through specific policy measures, including carbon pricing, to allocate their less productive and less profitable land for uses which deliver demonstrable greenhouse gas reductions; (2) enable greenhouse gas mitigation markets to develop and offer secure contracts for commercial developers of verifiable low‐carbon bioenergy and bioproducts; (3) support innovation in biomass utilisation value chains; and (4) continue long‐term, strategic R&D and education for positive environmental, economic and social sustainability impacts.