Evaluating the Sustainability of Canola Agroecosystems Using Energy Analysis, Carbon Footprint, and Greenhouse Gases

پژوهشهای زراعی ایران

Article 3, Volume 21, Issue 2 - Serial Number 70, July 2023, Pages 159-171   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jcesc.2022.76465.1168

Authors

H. R Shahhoseini¹; S Lotfi²; H Kazemi^{* 3}; B Kamkar⁴

¹PhD graduated of Agroecology, Department of Agronomy, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran

²M.Sc. Graduated of Agrotechnology, Department of Agronomy, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran

³Department of Agronomy, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran

⁴Department of Agroecothenology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
In recent decades, the need for increased food production has resulted in the expansion of intensified agriculture practices characterized by high consumption of inputs, thereby reducing agricultural sustainability. The agricultural sector's contribution to the world's energy consumption, ecological footprint, and greenhouse gas emissions has grown substantially. Emissions of greenhouse gases have negative ecological effects, including climate change, global warming, and diminished sustainable development. In this sector, energy analysis and greenhouse gas emissions in ecosystems are the most common methods for assessing sustainability. This study was conducted to evaluate the sustainability of canola agroecosystems by analyzing energy consumption, carbon footprint, and greenhouse gas emissions.
Methods and Materials
The study was conducted using a questionnaire in Kalaleh County, in Golestan province, and gathering information from Golestan Agricultural Jihad Organization, during 2018-2019. The number of samples was determined by the Cochran formula. Accordingly, 50 farms were selected for canola cultivation. The questionnaire's reliability was determined to be 0.81. To calculate the energy indices, carbon footprint, and greenhouse gas emissions, after determining the most important inputs and output, first, their amounts were determined in each of the 50 farms and then their average was calculated. The energy equivalent of each input and output was calculated by multiplying its raw value by the corresponding energy conversion factor. The carbon footprint of the canola system was calculated as the amount of land required to absorb the environmental pollution caused by input and resource consumption. Carbon uptake in canola agroecosystems served as the basis for evaluating the carbon footprint and consequently the sustainability of this study. Also, the amount of greenhouse gases produced was determined by multiplying the raw values of the consumed inputs by their emission coefficient.
 Results and Discussion
In canola agroecosystems, the total energy input was calculated to be 13,200 MJ ha^-1, the total energy output was 63,400 MJ ha^-1, the energy use efficiency was 4.8, and the energy productivity was 0.17 kg MJ^-1. In addition, the ecological footprint and global warming potential were 0.99 gha and 779.03 CO₂e ha⁻¹, respectively. In canola production, fossil fuel and nitrogen fertilizer inputs contributed the most to ecological footprint and global warming potential respectively. Reducing the number of machines entering the farm through the application of conservation tillage methods and the modernization of machines can be effective in reducing the consumption of this input. Due to the non-renewability of this input, reducing its consumption is effective in reducing both economic costs and environmental pollution. Consuming as much livestock manure (cattle) as possible and implementing crop rotations with legumes such as soybeans that can grow well in this area is effective in supplying soil nitrogen and reducing the need for chemical fertilizers.
 Conclusion
Analysis of energy indices, such as energy efficiency and net energy, revealed that energy loss in the canola farming ecosystem is low and that the system's sustainability is adequate. Evaluation of carbon footprint revealed that the value of this index for canola production in the county of Kalaleh was less than the ecological capacity of each hectare of land used for canola production, indicating the environmental sustainability of canola production in the county of Kalaleh. In general, canola agroecosystems in the county of Kalaleh were sustainable based on terms of all three indices: net energy, carbon footprint, and global warming potential. Due to the large proportion of two inputs, fossil fuel, and nitrogen fertilizer, in these indices and their significant impact on production sustainability, consumption management of these inputs and training and justification of farmers are recommended to increase production sustainability.

Keywords

Carbon efficiency; Ecological capacity; Fossil fuel; Global warming potential; Nitrogen fertilizer

References

1. Alcaoz, H., Ozcatalbas, O., & Kizilay, H. (2009). Analysis of energy use for pomegranate production in Turkey. Journal of Food Agriculture and Environment, 7, 475-80.
2. Alimagham, S. M., Soltani, A., Zeinali, E., & Kazemi, H. (2017). Energy flow analysis and estimation of greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions in different scenarios of soybean production (Case study: Gorgan region, Iran). Journal of Cleaner Production, 149, 621-628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.118
3. Asgharipour, M. R., Mousavinik, S. M., & Fartout Enayat, F. (2016). Evaluation of energy input and greenhouse gases emissions from alfalfa production in the Sistan region, Iran. Energy Reports 2: 135-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2016.05.007
4. Bhatarai, D., Abagandura, G. O., Nleya, T., & Kumar, S. (2021). Responses of soil surface greenhouse gas emissions to nitrogen and sulfur fertilizer rates to Brassica carinata grown as a bio-jet fuel. GCB-Bioenergy, 13(4), 627-639. https://doi.org/1111/gcbb.12784
5. Bolinder, M. A., Janzen, H. H., Gregorich, E. G., Angers, D. A., & Vanden Bygaart, A. J. (2007). An approach for estimating net primary productivity and annual carbon inputs to soil for common agricultural crops in Canada. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 118, 29-42. https://doi.org/1016/j.agee.2006.05.013
6. Cerutti, A., Beccaro, G. L., Bagliani, M., Donno, D., & Bounous, G. (2013). Multifunctional Ecological Footprint Analysis for Assessing Eco-efficiency: A Case Study of Fruit Production Systems in Northern Italy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 40, 108-117. https://doi.org/1016/j.jclepro.2012.09.028
7. Cochran, J. (2003). Patterns of sustainable agriculture adoption/non-adoption in Panama a thesis submitted to McGill University. McGill University, Montreal, Canad: 1-114.
8. Elsoragaby, S., Yahya, A., Mahadi, M. R., Mat Nawi, N., & Mairghany, M. (2019). Energy utilization in major crop cultivation. Energy, 173, 1285-1303. https://doi.org/1016/j.energy.2019.01.142
9. Esengun, K., Erdal, G., Gunduz, O., & Erdal, H. (2007). An economic analysis and energy use in stake-tomato production in Tokat province of Turkey. Renewable Energy, 32, 1873-1881. https://doi.org/1016/j.renene.2006.07.005
10. Guzman, J., Marrero, M., & Arellano, A. (2013). Methodology for Determining the Ecological Footprint of the Construction of Residential Buildings in Andalusia (Spain). Ecological Indicators, 25, 239-249. https://doi.org/1016/j.ecolind.2012.10.008
11. Hoffman, E., Cavigelli, M. A., Camargo, G., Ryan, M., Ackroyd, V. J., Richard, T. L., & Mirsky, S. (2018). Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in organic and conventional grain crop production: Accounting for nutrient inflows. Agricultural Systems, 162, 89-96. https://doi.org/1016/j.agsy.2018.01.021
12. Jamali, M., Soufizadeh, S., Yeganeh, B., & Emem, Y. (2021). A Comparative study of irrigation techniques for energy flow and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in wheat agroecosystems under contrasting environments in south of Iran. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 139, 110704. https://doi.org/1016/j.rser.2021.110704
13. Jankowski, K. J., Budzynski, W. S., & Kijewski, L. (2015). An analysis of energy efficiency in the production of oilseed crops of the family Brassicaceae in Poland. Energy, 81, 674-681. https://doi.org/1016/j.energy.2015.01.012
14. Jihad-e-Agricultural Organization of Golestan Province. (2019). Deputy for Plant Production Improvement. Management of agricultural affairs. Vegetable and summer office.
15. Kaltsas, A. M., Mamolos, A. P., Tsatsarelis, C. A., Nanos, G. D., & Kalburtji, K. L. (2007). Energy budget in organic and conventional olive groves. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment, 122, 243-251. https://doi.org/1016/j.agee.2007.01.017
16. Kaur, N., Kumar Vashist, K., & Brar, A. S. (2021). Energy and productivity analysis of maize based crop sequences compared to rice-wheat system under different moisture regimes. Energy, 216, 119286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119286
17. Kazemi, H., Hassanpour Bourkheili, S., Kamkar, B., Soltani, A., Gharanjic, K., & Nazari, N. M. (2016). Estimation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission and energy use efficiency (EUE) analysis in rainfed canola production (case study: Golestan province, Iran). Energy, 116, 694-700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.10.010
18. Khorramdel, S., Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Khorasani, R., & Ghorbani, R. (2013). Evaluation of carbon sequestration potential in corn fields with different management systems. Soil and Tillage Research, 133, 25-31. https://doi.org/1016/j.still.2013.04.008
19. Khorramdel, S., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Soltan Ahmadi, A., Hooshmand, M., & Mostafavi, M. J. (2021). Evaluation of Carbon Footprint and N₂O Emission Indicators for Saffron Production Systems in Khorasan Provinces. Saffron Agronomy & Technology, 9(3), 249-267. https://doi.org/10.22048/jsat.2021.255436.1413
20. Kissinger, M., & Gottlieb, D. (2012). From Global to place Oriented Hectares: The Case of Israel^,s Wheat Ecological Footprint and Its Implication for Sustainable Resource Supply. Ecological Indicators, 16, 51-57. https://doi.org/1016/j.ecolind.2011.03.012
21. Koocheki, A., & Nassiri Mahallati, M. (2016). Climate Change Effects on Agricultural Production of Iran: II. Predicting Productivity of Field Crops and Adaptation Strategies. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 14(1), 1-20. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/22067/gsc.v14i1.51157
22. Kramer, K. J., Moll, H. C., & Nonhebel, S. (1999). Total greenhouse gas emissions related to the Dutch crop production system. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 72, 9-16. https://doi.org/1016/S0167-8809(98)00158-3
23. Kumar, A., Rana, K. S., Choudhary, A. K., Bana, R. S., Sharma, V. K., Prasad, S., Gupta, G., Choudhary, M., Pradhan, A., Rajpoot, S. K., Kumar, A., Kumar, A., & Tyagi, V. (2021). Energy budgeting and carbon footprints of zero-tilled pigeonpea-wheat cropping system under sole or dual crop basis residue mulching and Zn-fertilization in a semi-arid agro-ecology. Energy, 231, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120862
24. Lal, R. (2004). Carbon emission from farm operations. Environment International, 30, 981-90. https://doi.org/1016/j.envint.2004.03.005
25. Lombardi, G. V., Parrini, S., Atzori, R., Stefani, G., Romano, D., Gastaldi, M., & Liu, G. (2021). Sustainable agriculture, food security and diet diversity. The case study of Tuscany, Italy. Ecological Modelling, 458, 109702. https://doi.org/1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109702
26. Montoya, D., Gaba, S., de Mazancourt, C., Bretagnolle, V., & Loreau, M. (2020). Reconciling biodiversity conservation, food production and farmers^,demand in agricultural landscapes. Ecological Modelling, 416, 108889. https://doi.org/1016/j.ecolmodel.2019.108889
27. Mousavi-Avval, S. H., Rafiee, S., Jafari, A., & Mohammadi, A. (2011). Energy flow modeling and sensitivity analysis of inputs for canola production in Iran. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 1464-1470. https://doi.org/1016/j.jclepro.2011.04.013
28. Naderi Mahdei, K., Bahrami, A., Aazami, M., & Sheklabadi, M. (2015). Assessment of Agricultural Farming Systems Sustainability in Hamedan Province Using Ecological Footprint Analysis (Case Study: Irrigated Wheat). Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 17, 1409-1420.
29. Ozkan, B., Fert, C., & Karadeniz, C. F. (2007). Energy and cost analysis for greenhouse and open-field grape production. Energy, 32, 1500-1504. https://doi.org/1016/j.energy.2006.09.010
30. Prakash Meena, B., Biswas, A. K., Singh, M., Das, H., Chaudhary, R. S., Singh, A. B., Shirale, A. O., & Patra, A. K. (2021). Energy budgeting and carbon footprint in long-term integrated nutrient management modules in a cereal- legume (Zea mays- Cicer arietinum) cropping system. Journal of Cleaner Production, 314, 127900. https://doi.org/1016/j.jclepro.2021.127900
31. Rathke, G. W., & Diepenbrock, W. (2006). Energy balance of winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus) cropping as related to nitrogen supply and preceding crop. European Journal of Agronomy, 24, 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2005.04.003
32. Rezaei, P., Naderi Mahdei, K., Karimi, S., & Shanazi, K. (2019). Environmental Sustainability Assessment of Farming System Using Ecological Footprint Analysis (Case Study: Potato and Cucumber Cultivation in Sofalgaran district of Bahar County). Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 29(2), 53-66. (in Persian with English abstract).
33. Rowsell, J., Jobler, J., Earl, H., Coyle, I., & Hawkins, B. (2007). Whole canola as a fuel source. Ontario alternati.ve renewable fuels research and development fund final report (OMAFRA).
34. Shahhoseini, H. R., Ramroudi, M., & Kazemi, H. (2021). Economic Analysis and Evaluating the Sustainability of Potato Production Based on Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Case Study: Golestan Province). Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 31(3), 295-311. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/22034/saps.2021.39789.2488
35. Snyder, C. S., Bruulsema, T. W., Jensen, T. L., & Fixen, P. E. (2009). Review of greenhouse gas emissions from crop production systems and fertilizer management effects. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 133, 247-266. https://doi.org/1016/j.agee.2009.04.021
36. Soltani, A., Rajabi, M. H., Zeinali, E., & Soltani, E. (2013). Energy inputs and greenhouse gases emissions in wheat production in Gorgan, Iran. Energy, 50, 54-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.12.022
37. Strapatsa, A. V., Nanos, G. D., & Tsatsarelis, C. A. (2006). Energy flow for integrated apple production in Greece. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment, 116, 176-80. https://doi.org/1016/j.agee.2006.02.003
38. Tzilivakis, J., Warner, D. J., May, M., Lewis, K. A., & Jaggard, K. (2005). An assessment of the energy inputs and greenhouse gas emission in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) production in the UK. Agricultural Systems, 85, 101-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2004.07.015
39. Unakitan, G., Hurma, H., & Yilmaz, F. (2010). An analysis of energy use efficiency of canola production in Turkey. Energy, 35, 3623-7. https://doi.org/1016/j.energy.2010.05.005
40. Yousefi, M., Khoramivafa, M., & Mondani, F. (2014a). Integrated evaluation of energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and global warming potential for sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) agroecosystems in Iran. Atmospheric Environment, 92, 501-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.04.050
41. Yousefi, M., Mahdavi Damghani, A., & Khoramivafa, M. (2014b). Energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and assessment of sustainability index in corn agroecosystems of Iran. Science of the Total Environment, 493, 330-335. https://doi.org/1016/j.scitotenv.2014.06.004