Influence of Mechanical and Intelligent Robotic Weed Control Methods on Energy Efficiency and Environment in Organic Sugar Beet Production

Rapidly warming climate, tightening environmental requirements, an aging society, rising wages, and demand for organic products are forcing farming to be more efficient and sustainable. The main aim of this study was to perform an analytical analysis and to determine the energy use and GHG emissions of organic sugar beet production using different weed control methods. Seven different methods of non-chemical weed control were compared. Mechanical inter-row loosening, inter-row cutting and mulching with weeds, weed smothering with catch crops, and thermal inter-row steaming were performed in field experiments at the Experimental Station of Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania, 2015–2017). The other three, namely, automated mechanical inter-row loosening with cameras for row-tracking, inter-row loosening with a diesel-powered robot, and inter-row loosening with an electric robot were calculated analytically. The results showed that the average total energy use of organic sugar beet production was 27,844 MJ ha−1, of which manure costs accounted for 48–53% and diesel fuel for 29–35%. An average energy efficiency ratio was 7.18, while energy productivity was 1.83 kg MJ ha−1. Analysis of GHG emissions showed that the total average GHG emissions to the environment from organic sugar beet production amounted to 4552 kg CO2eq ha−1, and the average GHG emissions ratio was 4.47. The most sustainable organic sugar beet production was achieved by using mechanical inter-row loosening with a diesel-powered robot for weed control.

Download Full-text

Weed control in sugar beet with single and split applications of herbicides

The Journal of Agricultural Science ◽

10.1017/s0021859600024382 ◽

1971 ◽

Vol 77 (2) ◽

pp. 247-252 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Maurice Eddowes

Keyword(s):

Sugar Beet ◽

Weed Control ◽

Field Experiments ◽

Sandy Loam ◽

Soil Conditions ◽

The West ◽

West Midlands ◽

Free Environment ◽

Annual Weeds ◽

Residual Herbicide

SummaryRecent developments in chemical weed control in sugar beet have been reviewed. Two main approaches to the problem of providing reliable season-long control of annual weeds in sugar beet are, (a) the use of mixtures of herbicides applied pre-planting and incorporated into the soil during seed bed preparation, and (b) the use of split applications with a residual herbicide applied pre-emergence followed by a contact herbicide applied post-emergence.The second approach (b) was examined in a series of field experiments from 1967 to 1969, on light to medium sandy loam soils in the West Midlands. Comparisons were made between pre-emergence application of lenacil and pyrazon, pre-emergence application of lenacil and pyrazon followed by post-emergence application of phenmedipham, and post-emergence application of phenmedipham for weed control in sugar beet.Under dry soil conditions in April 1967, lenacil and pyrazon controlled only about 40% of the annual weeds, but in 1968 and 1969, when moist soil conditions predominated in April and May, lenacil and pyrazon controlled 80–95% of the annual weeds.Phenmedipham applied post-emergence gave about 90% control of annual broadleaved weeds initially, but it seemed unlikely that a single application of this herbicide would provide satisfactory weed control in sugar beet.In each of the 3 years 1967–9, a split application of a soil-acting residual herbicide (pro-emergence) followed by phenmedipham (post-emergence) gave outstanding weed control and enabled sugar beet to be established and grown until mid-June at least, in a near weed-free environment. It was concluded that this technique was the most effective for weed control in sugar beet on light to medium sandy loam soils in the West Midlands.

Download Full-text

Potential and Impacts of Cogeneration in Tropical Climate Countries: Ecuador as a Case Study

Energies ◽

10.3390/en13205254 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 13 (20) ◽

pp. 5254

Author(s):

Manuel Raul Pelaez-Samaniego ◽

Juan L. Espinoza ◽

José Jara-Alvear ◽

Pablo Arias-Reyes ◽

Fernando Maldonado-Arias ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Energy Efficiency ◽

Fossil Fuels ◽

Energy Use ◽

National Level ◽

Ghg Emissions ◽

Industrial Sector ◽

Increase Energy Efficiency ◽

High Dependency ◽

Generation Capacity ◽

Tropical Climates

High dependency on fossil fuels, low energy efficiency, poor diversification of energy sources, and a low rate of access to electricity are challenges that need to be solved in many developing countries to make their energy systems more sustainable. Cogeneration has been identified as a key strategy for increasing energy generation capacity, reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and improving energy efficiency in industry, one of the most energy-demanding sectors worldwide. However, more studies are necessary to define approaches for implementing cogeneration, particularly in countries with tropical climates (such as Ecuador). In Ecuador, the National Plan of Energy Efficiency includes cogeneration as one of the four routes for making energy use more sustainable in the industrial sector. The objective of this paper is two-fold: (1) to identify the potential of cogeneration in the Ecuadorian industry, and (2) to show the positive impacts of cogeneration on power generation capacity, GHG emissions reduction, energy efficiency, and the economy of the country. The study uses methodologies from works in specific types of industrial processes and puts them together to evaluate the potential and analyze the impacts of cogeneration at national level. The potential of cogeneration in Ecuador is ~600 MWel, which is 12% of Ecuador’s electricity generation capacity. This potential could save ~18.6 × 106 L/month of oil-derived fuels, avoiding up to 576,800 tCO2/year, and creating around 2600 direct jobs. Cogeneration could increase energy efficiency in the Ecuadorian industry by up to 40%.

Download Full-text

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

Plant Soil and Environment ◽

10.17221/615/2020-pse ◽

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 (CTd), shallow conservation tillage (CTs) 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 CTd 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.

Download Full-text

Effect of neem fertilizer rates and weed control methods on the growth and yield of soybeans (Glycine max (L.) merrill) in north Central Nigeria

Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences ◽

10.4314/jafs.v19i1.3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

pp. 31-47

Author(s):

Y. Garba ◽

Z. Yakubu ◽

A.I. Yakubu ◽

J. Alhassan ◽

M. Gana ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Field Experiments ◽

Block Design ◽

Growth And Yield ◽

Control Methods ◽

North Central ◽

Glycine Max L ◽

Number Of Leaves ◽

Experimental Treatments ◽

Fertilizer Rates

Two field experiments were conducted at the Research Farm of the Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida University, Lapai, Niger State during the 2018 and 2019 rainy seasons to determine the effect of neem fertilizer rates and weed control methods on the growth and yields of soybeans. The experimental treatments were made up of four neem fertilizer rates (0, 50, 100 and 150 kg ha-1) and six weed control methods (pendimethalin at 1.5 kg a.i ha-1 followed by one hoe weeding, pendimethalin at 2.0 kg a.i. ha-1 followed by diuron at 1.5 kg a.i ha-1, weeding once at 3 WAS, weeding twice at 3 and 6 WAS, weed free and weedy check. The experiment was a 3 × 3 factorial experiment laid out in a Randomize complete block design replicated three times. TGX 1448 – 2E variety of soybean was used for the study. Result showed that weed control efficiency was better with the use of 150 kg ha-1 of neem fertilizer, while decrease in weed dry matter was obtained at 50 kg ha-1. Increase in number of leaves and leaf area were encouraged with 150 kg ha-1 of neem fertilizer. Weed free treatments recorded the highest grain yield and 100 seed weight of soybean. Pendimethalin at 1.5 or 2.0 kg a.i ha-1 supplemented with one hoe weeding or diuron at 1.5 kg a.i ha-1 respectively can be an alternative for better control of weeds to obtain greater yield of soybean in the study area.

Download Full-text

RESPONSE OF FOUR SUGAR BEET VARIETIES TO SEED TREATMENT AND WEED CONTROL METHODS UNDER GIZA CONDITIONS

Sinai Journal of Applied Sciences ◽

10.21608/sinjas.2015.78519 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

pp. 131-146

Author(s):

Hussein Al-Sayed ◽

Ahmed Attaya

Keyword(s):

Sugar Beet ◽

Weed Control ◽

Seed Treatment ◽

Control Methods

Download Full-text

Study and determination of energy consumption to produce conventional rice of the Guilan province

Research in Agricultural Engineering ◽

10.17221/8/2011-rae ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 58 (No. 3) ◽

pp. 99-106 ◽

Cited By ~ 12

Author(s):

A. Alipour ◽

H. Veisi ◽

F. Darijani ◽

B. Mirbagheri ◽

A.G. Behbahani

Keyword(s):

Energy Efficiency ◽

Energy Use ◽

Water Productivity ◽

Diesel Oil ◽

Energy Productivity ◽

Energy Inputs ◽

Total Input ◽

Efficiency And Productivity ◽

Guilan Province

The aim of this study was to determine the energy efficiency indices in the agro-ecosystems of the Guilan province in 2010. One hundred and twenty-seven farmers were interviewed using a particularly designed questionnaire. The inputs in the calculation of energy use in agro-ecosystems embraced labour, machinery, electricity, diesel oil, fertilizers, seeds, while rice and straw yield were included in the output. The results depicted that total input and output energy into these agro-ecosystems were about 47,604 and 90,680.04 MJ/ha, respectively. The highest energy input was related to water (38.84%), electricity (27.87%) and nitrogen fertilizer (17.5%). Energy efficiency and energy productivity in these agro-ecosystems was 2.19 and 0.064 kg/MJ, respectively, and water productivity was 0.11 kg/m3. The results also showed that due to application of flood irrigation in these agro-ecosystems and also water elicited from subterranean sources by electrical pump, the inputs had the largest portion among the energy inputs to agro-ecosystems that this matter increased energy use in the unit area and also reduced energy efficiency and productivity.

Download Full-text

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

Agronomy ◽

10.3390/agronomy11020229 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

Agronomy ◽

10.3390/agronomy11091835 ◽

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).

Download Full-text