scholarly journals Armut Üretiminde Karşılaştırmalı Enerji Kullanım Etkinliği ve Ekonomik Analiz: Trakya Bölgesi Örneği

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. 1072
Author(s):  
Başak Aydın ◽  
Duygu Aktürk ◽  
Erol Özkan ◽  
Harun Hurma ◽  
Mehmet Ali Kiracı
Keyword(s):  
Energy Use ◽  
Agricultural Practices ◽  
Energy Output ◽  
Net Energy ◽  
Energy Productivity ◽  
Good Agricultural Practices ◽  
Net Profit ◽  
Use Efficiency ◽  
Relative Profit ◽  
Ratio Energy

This study includes the agricultural enterprises producing pear which apply and do not apply good agricultural practices in Thrace Region. The basic purpose of this study is the determination of input use amounts and energy use efficiency and economical comparison of the enterprises applying and not applying good agricultural practices. In Kırklareli, Edirne and Tekirdağ, 16 pear producers which carry through good agricultural practices participated in the survey. According to the results, total energy input, energy output, energy output/input ratio, energy productivity, specific energy, energy density and net energy were determined to be respectively as 30.046.64 MJ, 36.000 MJ, 1.20, 0.50 kg/MJ, 2.00 MJ/kg, 1.80 MJ/TL and 5.953.36 MJ in the enterprises applying good agricultural practices. Total energy input, energy output, energy output/input ratio, energy productivity, specific energy, energy density and net energy were determined to be respectively as 32.111.92 MJ, 33.600 MJ, 1.05, 0.44 kg/MJ, 2.29 MJ/kg, 2.05 MJ/TL and 1.488.08 MJ in the enterprises not applying good agricultural practices. In Thrace Region the cost of producing; one kg of pear was calculated 1.11 TL in the enterprises which applied good agriculture while it was calculated 1.12 TL at the enterprises which did not apply the good agriculture. Total expenses, gross output value, gross profit, net profit and relative profit were determined to be respectively as 16.682.80 TL, 24.250 TL, 14.938.10 TL, 7.567.20 TL and 1.45 in the enterprises applying good agricultural practices. Total expenses, gross output value, gross profit, net profit and relative profit were determined to be respectively as 15.652 TL, 21.000 TL, 11.511.80 TL, 5.348 TL and 1.34 in the enterprises not applying good agricultural practices. According to energy use efficiency and economic analysis results, pear farming was determined to be more advantageous in the enterprises applying good agricultural practices.

scholarly journals Energy Efficiency of Continuous Rye, Rotational Rye and Barley in Different Fertilization Systems in a Long-Term Field Experiment

Agronomy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 229
Author(s):  
Gerhard Moitzi ◽  
Reinhard W. Neugschwandtner ◽  
Hans-Peter Kaul ◽  
Helmut Wagentristl
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Total Energy ◽  
Energy Input ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Energy Output ◽  
Winter Rye ◽  
Net Energy ◽  
Energy Productivity ◽  
Total Energy Input ◽  
Use Efficiency

A goal in sustainable agriculture is to use fossil energy more efficiently in crop production. This 60-year-old experiment on a silt loam chernozem investigated effects of fertilization (unfertilized control, mineral fertilizer (NPK) and farmyard manure (FYM)) and rotation (continuous winter rye (CR), winter rye in rotation (RR), spring barley in rotation (SB) on diesel fuel consumption, total energy input (made of both direct and indirect inputs), crop yield, energy output, net-energy output, energy intensity, energy productivity and energy use efficiency. The input rates of fertilizer, herbicides and seeds were set constant during the experiment. Soil tillage was done with a moldboard plough with subsequent combined seedbed preparation and seeding. The mean calculated total energy input was highest in NPK with 11.28 GJ ha−1 and lowest in the unfertilized control with 5.00 GJ ha−1. Total energy input for FYM was intermediate with 6.30 GJ ha−1. With energetic consideration of NPK nutrients in FYM the total energy input increased to the level of NPK. The share of the fertilizer energy on the total energy input was 49% for NPK. Fertilization with FYM and NPK increased yield and energy output considerably, especially of CR and SB which attained about doubled values. Crop rotation also increased the yield and energy output, especially of unfertilized rye, which attained values increased by about 75%. Fertilization with FYM resulted in the highest energy efficiency as the net-energy output, the energy productivity and the energy use efficiency were higher but the energy intensity was lower compared to unfertilized controls and NPK. When the nutrients in FYM were also energetically considered, the energy efficiency parameters of FYM decreased to the level of the NPK treatment. Crop rotation increased the energy efficiency of winter rye compared to the monoculture.

scholarly journals Energy budget and carbon footprint in a wheat and maize system under ridge furrow strategy in dry semi humid areas

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Changjiang Li ◽  
Shuo Li
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Footprint ◽  
Energy Budget ◽  
Agricultural Development ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Cropping System ◽  
Energy Output ◽  
Net Energy ◽  
Energy Productivity ◽  
Carbon Efficiency ◽  
Net Returns

AbstractThe well-irrigated planting strategy (WI) consumes a large amount of energy and exacerbates greenhouse gas emissions, endangering the sustainable agricultural production. This 2-year work aims to estimate the economic benefit, energy budget and carbon footprint of a wheat–maize double cropping system under conventional rain-fed flat planting (irrigation once a year, control), ridge–furrows with plastic film mulching on the ridge (irrigation once a year, RP), and the WI in dry semi-humid areas of China. Significantly higher wheat and maize yields and net returns were achieved under RP than those under the control, while a visible reduction was found for wheat yields when compared with the WI. The ratio of benefit: cost under RP was also higher by 10.5% than that under the control in the first rotation cycle, but did not differ with those under WI. The net energy output and carbon output followed the same trends with net returns, but the RP had the largest energy use efficiency, energy productivity carbon efficiency and carbon sustainability among treatments. Therefore, the RP was an effective substitution for well–irrigated planting strategy for achieving sustained agricultural development in dry semi-humid areas.

scholarly journals Effect of tillage systems on energy input and energy efficiency for sugar beet and soybean under Pannonian climate conditions

2021 ◽  
Vol 67 (No. 3) ◽  
pp. 137-146
Author(s):  
Gerhard Moitzi ◽  
Reinhard W. Neugschwandtner ◽  
Hans-Peter Kaul ◽  
Helmut Wagentristl
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Fuel Consumption ◽  
Energy Input ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Energy Intensity ◽  
Conservation Tillage ◽  
Energy Output ◽  
Net Energy ◽  
Use Efficiency

Sustainable cropping systems require efficient usage of fossil energy. This study performed on a long-term field experiment in the Pannonian Basis investigated the energy efficiency of four tillage systems (mouldboard plough (MP), deep conservation tillage (CT<sub>d</sub>), shallow conservation tillage (CT<sub>s</sub>) and no-tillage (NT)) for sugar beet and soybean production, taking fuel consumption, total energy input (made up of both direct and indirect inputs), crop yield, energy output, net-energy output, energy intensity and energy use efficiency into account. The input rates of fertiliser, chemical plant protection, and seeds were set constant across years; whereas measured values of fuel consumption were used for all tillage treatments. NT required a considerably lower energy input than MP and CT<sub>d</sub> as no fuel is needed for tillage and just slightly more fuel for additional spraying of glyphosate. Anyhow, the energy efficiency parameters did not differ between tillage treatments, as theses parameters were mainly determined by energy output, which was considerably higher than the energy input. However, year effects on the energy efficiency were observed for both crops. Nitrogen fertilisation and diesel fuel consumption were identified as the most energy-intensive inputs. Consequently, the energy input for sugar beet was higher than that for soybean, which was identified as a low-input crop. But sugar beet attained a more than 4 times higher net-energy output, a 2.5 times higher energy use efficiency, and an energy intensity for yield production of less than 3 times those of soybean.  

scholarly journals Evaluation of Greenhouse Cucumber Production Sustainability in Terms of Energy Use Efficiency

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 24
Author(s):  
Nawal Khamis Al-Mezeini ◽  
Abdulrahim M. Al-Ismaili ◽  
Said M. Tabook
Keyword(s):  
Total Energy ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Energy Output ◽  
Energy Productivity ◽  
Greenhouse Production ◽  
Energy Use Efficiency ◽  
Energy Inputs ◽  
Energy Consuming ◽  
Greenhouse Cucumber ◽  
Use Efficiency

Sustainable agricultural production could be assessed through energy-use efficiency (EUE). Thus, this paper aims to evaluate the EUE for cucumber greenhouse production in Oman. Data were obtained by interviewing farmers (face-to-face). Result indicated that total energy inputs (e.g. electricity, water, fertilizers and agrochemicals) and total energy output (cucumber yield) were 1159726.0 MJ ha-1 and 89942.9 MJ ha-1, respectively. The highest energy consuming input in the greenhouse production was electricity, consuming 88% of total energy input. This indicates that electricity had again the highest impact in cucumber greenhouse production and 99% of electricity goes for cooling the greenhouse. When all energy inputs were classified into its forms; direct (D) and indirect (ID), and renewable (R) and non-renewable (NR), the highest portion of total energy forms in greenhouse cucumber production was for D and NR energy. The EUE and energy productivity (EP) were found to be 0.07 and 0.10 kg MJ-1, respectively. Energy use in greenhouse cucumber production was inefficient and solar energy need to be implemented to improve cucumber greenhouse sustainability production.

Analysis of Energy Consumption for Protected Grape Production System in China

2014 ◽  
Vol 1073-1076 ◽  
pp. 2468-2472
Author(s):  
Dong Tian ◽  
Jing Wang ◽  
Jian Ying Feng
Keyword(s):  
Renewable Energy ◽  
Energy Consumption ◽  
Total Energy ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Survey Method ◽  
Net Energy ◽  
Average Yield ◽  
Energy Productivity ◽  
Energy Inputs ◽  
Use Efficiency

This study examines energy consumption of inputs and output used in protected grape production, and aims at to find relationship between energy inputs and yield in the major protected grape producing regions in China. For this purpose, the data were collected from 516 questionnaires which included 304 effective ones by questionnaire survey method. The results indicated that total energy inputs were 57697.84 MJha-1where the Chemical with (32.4%) and Fertilizer with about (21.1%) were the major energy consumers. About 53.4% of the total energy inputs used in protected grape production was indirect while 46.6% was direct. The non-renewable shared about 78% whereas the renewable energy did 22%. Average yield and energy consumption are calculated as 25367.22Kgha-1and 299333.2MJha-1. Energy use efficiency, energy productivity, specific energy and net energy were 5.18, 0.44 kgMJ-1, 2.27 MJkg-1and241635.36 MJha-1, respectively.

scholarly journals Energy Balance and Energy Use Efficiency of Annual Bioenergy Crops in Field Experiments in Southern Germany

Agronomy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 1835
Author(s):  
Robert Oliver Simon ◽  
Kurt-Jürgen Hülsbergen
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Energy Crops ◽  
Energy Output ◽  
Net Energy ◽  
Energy Use Efficiency ◽  
Energy Inputs ◽  
Use Efficiency

The main objective of the cultivation of energy crops is the production of renewable energy, the substitution of fossil energy resources, and a substantial contribution to energy supply. Thus, energy yield and energy efficiency are the most important criteria for the assessment of energy crops and biomass-based renewable energy chains. Maize is the energy crop with the highest cultivation acreage in Germany because of its high energy yields, but is the subject of controversial debate because of possible detrimental effects on agro-ecosystems. This raises the question as to which energy crops and production systems could be used instead of maize, in order to increase crop diversity and lower environmental impacts. We examined yields, energy inputs, energy outputs, and energy efficiency of alternative energy crops (combinations of catch crops and main crops) compared to maize in four-year field experiments at three southern German sites by means of process analyses. Maize showed moderate energy inputs (11.3–13.2 GJ ha−1), with catch crops ranging from 6.2 to 10.7 GJ ha−1 and main crops ranging from 7.6 to 24.8 GJ ha−1. At all three sites, maize had the highest net energy output compared to the other crops (x¯ = 354–493 GJ ha−1), but was surpassed by combinations of catch and main crops at some sites (winter rye/maize: x¯ = 389–538 GJ ha−1). Although some combinations yielded higher net energy outputs than maize, no other crop or combination of crops outperformed maize regarding energy use efficiency (energy output/energy input: x¯ = 32–45).

scholarly journals The Impact of Climate Change on the Value of Growing Maize as a Biofuel

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-26
Author(s):  
Sally Olasogba ◽  
Les DUCKERS
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Carbon Footprint ◽  
Carbon Emissions ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Farm Management ◽  
Energy Output ◽  
Net Energy ◽  
Primary Concern ◽  
Impact Of Climate Change ◽  
The Impact

Abstract: Aim: According to COP23, Climate Change threatens the stability of the planet’s ecosystems, with a tipping point believed to be at only +2°C.  With the burning of fossil fuels, held responsible for the release of much of the greenhouse gases, a sensible world- wide strategy is to replace fossil fuel energy sources with renewable ones. The renewable resources such as wind, hydro, geothermal, wave and tidal energies are found in particular geographical locations whereas almost every country is potentially able to exploit PV and biomass. This paper examines the role that changing climate could have on the growing and processing of biomass. The primary concern is that future climates could adversely affect the yield of crops, and hence the potential contribution of biomass to the strategy to combat climate change. Maize, a C4 crop, was selected for the study because it can be processed into biogas or other biofuels. Four different Nigerian agricultural zones growing maize were chosen for the study. Long-term weather data was available for the four sites and this permitted the modelling of future climates. Design / Research methods: The results of this study come from modelling future climates and applying this to crop models. This unique work, which has integrated climate change and crop modelling to forecast yield and carbon emissions, reveals how maize responds to the predicted increased temperature, change in rainfall, and the variation in weather patterns. In order to fully assess a biomass crop, the full energy cycle and carbon emissions were estimated based on energy and materials inputs involved in farm management: fertilizer application, and tillage type. For maize to support the replacement strategy mentioned above it is essential that the ratio of energy output to energy input exceeds 1, but of course it should be as large as possible. Conclusions / findings: Results demonstrate that the influence of climate change is important and in many scenarios, acts to reduce yield, but that the negative effects can be partially mitigated by careful selection of farm management practices. Yield and carbon footprint is particularly sensitive to the application rate of fertilizer across all locations whilst climate change is the causal driver for the increase in net energy and carbon footprint at most locations. Nonetheless, in order to ensure a successful strategic move towards a low carbon future, and sustainable implementation of biofuel policies, this study provides valuable information for the Nigerian government and policy makers on potential AEZs to cultivate maize under climate change. Further research on the carbon footprint of alternative bioenergy feedstock to assess their environmental carbon footprint and net energy is strongly suggested. Originality / value of the article: This paper extends the review on the impact of climate change on maize production to include future impacts on net energy use and carbon footprint using a fully integrated assessment framework. Most studies focus only on current farm energy use and historical climate change impact on farm GHG emissions.   

scholarly journals Energy and Greenhouse Gases Balances of Cotton Farming in Iran: A Case Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moslem Sami ◽  
Habib Reyhani
Keyword(s):  
Total Energy ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Energy Output ◽  
Consumption Pattern ◽  
Cotton Production ◽  
Energy Productivity ◽  
Energy Inputs ◽  
Golestan Province ◽  
Ratio Energy

This study evaluated the impacts of cotton farming on the climate changes in terms of energy and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission indices. Energy consumption pattern and sensitivity of energy inputs were evaluated and share of each input in GHG emissions was determined in the form of direct and indirect emissions for cotton farms in Golestan province of Iran. The total energy input and energy output were calculated to be 34,424.19 and 41,496.67 MJ/ha respectively. The share of fertilizers by 45.0 % of total energy inputs was the highest. This was followed by energies of fuel (18.4 %) and irrigation (17.9 %) respectively. Fertilizers and fuels were also the biggest producers of GHGs in the farms with shares of 61.95 and 24.32 % of total GHGs emission. Energy ratio, energy balance, energy intensity and energy productivity were found as 1.21, 7,072.48 MJ/ha, 9.79 MJ/kg and 0.10 kg/MJ, respectively. Results of sensitivity analysis indicated that the cotton production was more sensitive to energies of seed and human labour than other inputs and an additional use of 1 MJ of each of these inputs would lead to a change in the yield by −0.75 and 0.73 kg/ha, respectively. The results also showed, in the process of cotton farming 897.80 and 1177.67 kg CO2 – equivalent of direct and indirect GHG were emitted per hectare respectively.

scholarly journals ICT Development and Sustainable Energy Consumption: A Perspective of Energy Productivity

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 2568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zheming Yan ◽  
Rui Shi ◽  
Zhiming Yang
Keyword(s):  
Energy Consumption ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Sustainable Energy ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Productivity Index ◽  
Net Energy ◽  
Energy Productivity ◽  
Productivity Improvement ◽  
Ict Development ◽  
Saving Effect

The information and communication technology (ICT) is closely related to the future of global energy consumption, not only because the ICT equipment itself increasingly consumes energy, but also because it is a general-purpose technology which may affect energy use of almost all sectors. Given the controversy over the net energy-saving effect of ICT, this paper focuses on a new perspective, i.e., energy productivity, to investigate the relationship between ICT development and energy consumption. Using a data panel of 50 economies over the period of 1995 to 2013, results of the Malmquist energy productivity index generally indicate an unbalanced development of energy productivity across the globe, while results of the patent-based ICT knowledge stock indicate a huge gap of ICT development comparing the high-income economies with the others. Furthermore, regression results indicate that ICT development is significantly related to energy productivity improvement. Finally, this paper suggests accelerating ICT development in underdeveloped economies, given the global common task of sustainable energy consumption.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document