...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Environmental Science & Technology >Energy Efficiency of Conventional, Organic, and Alternative Cropping Systems for Food and Fuel at a Site in the U.S. Midwest
【24h】

Energy Efficiency of Conventional, Organic, and Alternative Cropping Systems for Food and Fuel at a Site in the U.S. Midwest

机译：美国中西部某地的食品和燃料常规，有机和替代作物系统的能源效率

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The prospect of btofuel production on a large scale has focused attention on energy efficiencies associated with different agricultural systems and production goals. We used 17 years of detailed data on agricultural practices and yields to calculate an energy balance for different cropping systems under both food and fuel scenarios. We compared four grain and one forage systems in the U.S. Midwest corn (Zea mays) - soybean (Glycine max) - wheat (Triticum aestivum) rotations managed with (1) conventional tillage, (2) no till, (3) low chemical input and (4) biologically based (organic) practices, and (5) continuous alfalfa (Medicago sativa). We compared energy balances under two scenarios: all harvestable biomass used for food versus all harvestable biomass used for biofuel production. Among the annual grain crops, average energy costs of farming for the different systems ranged from 4.8 GJ ha~(-1) γ~(-1) for the organic system to 7.1 GJ ha~(-1) y~(-1) forthe conventional; the no-till system was also low at 4.9 GJ ha~(-1) y~(-1) and the low-chemical input system intermediate (5.2 GJ ha~(-1) y~(-1)). For each system, the average energy output for food was always greater than that for fuel. Overall energy efficiencies ranged from outputinput ratios of 10 to 16 for conventional and no-till food production and from 7 to 11 for conventional and no-till fuel production, respectively. Alfalfa for fuel production had an efficiency similar to that of no-till grain production for fuel. Our analysis points to a more energetically efficient use of cropland for food than for fuel production and large differences in efficiencies attributable to management which suggests multiple opportunities for improvement.
机译：大规模生产生物燃料的前景已将注意力集中在与不同农业系统和生产目标相关的能源效率上。我们使用了17年的农业实践和产量详细数据，以计算粮食和燃料情景下不同种植系统的能量平衡。我们比较了美国中西部玉米（Zea mays）-大豆（Glycine max）-小麦（Triticum aestivum）轮作的四种谷物和一种饲草系统，其中（1）传统耕作，（2）免耕，（3）化学药品投入低（4）基于生物学的（有机）做法，以及（5）连续苜蓿（苜蓿）。我们比较了两种情况下的能量平衡：用于食物的所有可收获生物量与用于生物燃料生产的所有可收获生物量。在一年一度的谷物作物中，不同系统的平均耕作能源成本从有机系统的4.8 GJ ha〜（-1）γ〜（-1）到7.1 GJ ha〜（-1）y〜（-1）不等。常规免耕系统也很低，为4.9 GJ ha〜（-1）y〜（-1），低化学物质输入系统的中间值为5.2 GJ ha〜（-1）y〜（-1）。对于每个系统，食物的平均能量输出始终大于燃料的平均能量输出。常规和免耕食品生产的总能源效率分别为10至16的输出输入比，而常规和免耕燃料生产的总能源效率分别为7至11。苜蓿用于燃料生产的效率类似于免耕谷物燃料的生产效率。我们的分析表明，与用于燃料生产相比，农田更能有效地用于粮食生产，管理带来的效率差异也很大，这表明有很多改进的机会。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Environmental Science & Technology》 |2010年第10期|P.4006-4011|共6页
  • 作者

    ILYA GELFAND; SIEGLINDE S. SNAPP; G. PHILIP ROBERTSON;

  • 作者单位

    W. K. Kellogg Biological Station, Michigan State University, Hickory Corners, Michigan 49060 Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824;

    rnW. K. Kellogg Biological Station, Michigan State University, Hickory Corners, Michigan 49060 Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824;

    rnW. K. Kellogg Biological Station, Michigan State University, Hickory Corners, Michigan 49060 Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824 Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);美国《生物学医学文摘》(MEDLINE);美国《化学文摘》(CA);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号