Top

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

Published in:

14-11-2018 | LCA FOR AGRICULTURE

Quantifying life cycle inventories of agricultural field operations by considering different operational parameters

Authors: Giuseppe Tassielli, Pietro A. Renzulli, Seyed Hashem Mousavi-Avval, Bruno Notarnicola

Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Issue 6/2019

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Purpose

The ability to estimate fuel and lubricant consumption as well as depreciated weight of agricultural machinery used for field operations is very useful for energy and environmental analyses. In this study, life cycle inventory data of agricultural field operations were established by considering different parameters of such operations.

Methods

Agricultural operations considered in this study include tillage, cultivation, planting, harvesting and post-harvest operations. For these operations, the fuel and lubricant consumption as well as depreciated weight of tractors, combine harvesters and agricultural implements was estimated by considering different operational parameters such as tractor power, field condition, depth of operation, soil condition, tractor type, operational capacity of machine, width of operation and speed. Technical standards were used to estimate different types of power required for most agricultural operations (drawbar power, rotary power and motion power). The standards were then used to evaluate the variability of the fuel and lubricant consumption as well as depreciated weight of the implements by varying the aforementioned parameters.

Results and discussion

The results were compared to those that can be calculated with other approaches for life cycle inventory analysis of agricultural operations. Such comparison indicates that by using different parameters, representing the diverse local conditions of different field operations, a great variability of the results is obtained. For instance, diesel fuel consumption of tillage operations ranges from 12.6 to 76.0 L ha⁻¹, with an average of 34.15 L ha⁻¹ and standard deviation of 11.7 L ha⁻¹. Such representativeness of the different conditions of each field operation cannot be modelled with other tools or via the use of standard LCI datasheets.

Conclusions

The final result of this study is a novel approach for the life cycle inventory analysis of agricultural operations, in terms of fuel and lubricant consumption and of depreciated weight of the machines, which are estimated by simply selecting the operational parameters which best represent the effect of local conditions.

previous article Hybrid approach for the evaluation of organizational indirect impacts (AVOID): combining product-related, process-based, and monetary-based methods

next article The challenge of incorporating animal welfare in a social life cycle assessment model of European chicken production

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Adewoyin AO, Ajav EA (2013) Fuel consumption of some tractor models for ploughing operations in the sandy-loam soil of Nigeria at various speeds and ploughing depths. Agric Eng Int CIGR J 15(3):67–74

Al-Mansour F, Jejcic V (2017) A model calculation of the carbon footprint of agricultural products: the case of Slovenia. Energy 136(1):7–15CrossRef

ASAE D497.5 (2006) Agricultural machinery management data. In: ASAE Standards, D497.5. Am Soc Agric Biol Eng, St. Joseph, pp 349–357

Beheshti Tabar I, Keyhani A, Rafiee S (2010) Energy balance in Iran’s agronomy (1990-2006). Renew Sust Energ Rev 14:849–855CrossRef

Cederberg C, Stadig M (2003) System expansion and allocation in life cycle assessment of milk and beef production. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(6):350–356CrossRef

De Gennaro B, Notarnicola B, Roselli L, Tassielli G (2012) Innovative olive-growing models: an environmental and economic assessment. J Clean Prod 28:70–80CrossRef

Dhandapani K, Senthilkumar P, Md Nurun N, Johan EH, Terese L (2012) Theoretical and experimental investigation of diesel engine performance, combustion and emissions analysis fuelled with the blends of ethanol, diesel and jatropha methyl ester. Energy Convers Manag 53:322–331CrossRef

Dyer JA, Kulshreshtha SN, McConkey BG, Desjardins RL (2010) An assessment of fossil fuel energy use and CO2 emissions from farm field operations using a regional level crop and land use database for Canada. Energy J 35:2261–2269CrossRef

Fathollahzadeh H, Mobli H, Rajabipour A, Minaee S, Jafari A, Tabatabaie SMH (2010) Average and instantaneous fuel consumption of Iranian conventional tractor with moldboard plow in tillage. Eng Appl Sci (Asian Res Publ Netw) 5(2):30–35

Filipović D, Košutić S, Gospodarić Z, Zimmer R, Banaj Đ (2006) The possibilities of fuel savings and the reduction of CO2 emissions in the soil tillage in Croatia. Agric Ecosyst Environ 115(1–4):290–294CrossRef

Giakoumis EG, Rakopoulos CD, Dimaratos AM, Rakopoulos DC (2012) Exhaust emissions of diesel engines operating under transient conditions with biodiesel fuel blends. Prog Energy Combust Sci 38:691–715CrossRef

Grisso RD, Kocher MF, Vaughan DH (2004) Predicting tractor diesel fuel consumption. Biological Systems Engineering: Papers and Publications 164

Hanna M (2005) Fuel required for field operations. File A3-27, University Extension, Iowa State University, October 2005 available at: www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm

Harrigan TM, Rotz CA (1995) Draft relationships for tillage and seeding equipment. Appl Eng Agric 11:773–783CrossRef

IPCC (2006) Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. In: Eggleston HS, Buendia L, Miwa K, Ngara T, Tanabe K (eds) Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme. IGES, Japan http://www.ipccnggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.htm

ISO (2006a) 14040:2006 - Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework

ISO (2006b) 14044:2006 - Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines

Janulevicius A, Juostas A, Pupinis G (2013) Tractor’s engine performance and emission characteristics in the process of ploughing. Energ Convers Manag 75:498–508CrossRef

Kim S, Dale BE, Jenkins R (2009) Life cycle assessment of corn grain and corn stover in the United States. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14(2):160–174CrossRef

Kitani O (1999) CIGR handbook of agricultural engineering, Vol. 5. Energy & biomass engineering. ASABE Publication

Koga N, Tsuruta H, Tsuji H, Nakano H (2003) Fuel consumption-derived CO2 emissions under conventional and reduced tillage cropping systems in northern Japan. Agric Ecosyst Environ 99:213–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(03)00132-4 CrossRef

Labeckas G, Slavinskas S (2013) Performance and emission charakteristics of a direct injection diesel engine operating on KDV synthetic diesel fuel. Energy Convers Manag 66:173–188CrossRef

Lindgren M, Larsson G, Hansson PA (2010) Evaluation of factors influencing emissions from tractors and construction equipment during realistic work operations using diesel fuel and bio-fuels as substitute. Biosyst Eng 107(2):123–130CrossRef

Lovarelli D, Bacenetti J, Fiala M (2017) Effect of local conditions and machinery characteristics on the environmental impacts of primary soil tillage. J Clean Prod 140:479–491CrossRef

Mohammadi A, Rafiee S, Jafari A, Keyhani A, Mousavi-Avval SH, Nonhebel S (2014) Energy use efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions of farming systems in north Iran. Renew Sust Energ Rev 30:724–733CrossRef

Mousavi-Avval SH, Rafiee S, Sharifi M, Hosseinpour S, Notarnicola B, Tassielli G, Renzulli PA, Khanali M (2017a) Use of LCA indicators to assess Iranian rapeseed production systems with different residue management practices. Ecol Indic 80:31–39CrossRef

Mousavi-Avval SH, Rafiee S, Sharifi M, Hosseinpour S, Notarnicola B, Tassielli G, Renzulli PA (2017b) Application of multi-objective genetic algorithms for optimization of energy, economics and environmental life cycle assessment in oilseed production. J Clean Prod 140:804–815CrossRef

Nemecek T, Jungbluth N, Milà i Canals L, Schenck S (2016) Environmental impacts of food consumption and nutrition: where are we and what is next? Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:607–620CrossRef

Neto B, Dias AC, Mochado M (2013) Life cycle assessment of the supply chain of a Portuguese wine: from viticulture to distribution. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(3):590–602CrossRef

Notarnicola B, Hayashi K, Curran MA, Huisingh D (2012) Progress in working towards a more sustainable agri-food industry. J Clean Prod 28:1–8CrossRef

Notarnicola D, Salomone R, Petti L, Renzulli PA, Roma R, Cerutti AK (2015) Life cycle assessment in the agri-food sector. Case studies, methodological issues and best practices. Springer, Heidelberg

Notarnicola B, Sala S, Anton A, McLaren SJ, Saouter E, Sonesson U (2017a) The role of life cycle assessment in supporting sustainable agri-food systems: a review of the challenges. J Clean Prod 140:399–409CrossRef

Notarnicola B, Tassielli G, Renzulli PA, Castellani V, Sala S (2017b) Environmental impacts of food consumption in Europe. J Clean Prod 140:753–765CrossRef

Rakopoulos DC, Rakopoulos CD, Kakaras EC, Giakoumis EG (2008) Effects of ethanol–diesel fuel blends on the performance and exhaust emissions of heavy duty DI diesel engine. Energy Convers Manag 49:3155–3162CrossRef

Ramos S, Larrinaga L, Albinarrate U, Jungbluth N, Ingolfsdottir GM, Yngvadottir E, Landquist B, Woodhouse A, Olafsdottir G, Esturo A, Zufía J, Perez-Villareal B (2016) SENSE tool: easy-to-use web-based tool to calculate food product environmental impact. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21(5):710–721CrossRef

Raper RL, Reeves DW, Burmester CH, Schwab EB (2000) Tillage depth, tillage timing, and cover crop effects on cotton yield, soil strength, and tillage energy requirements, ASAE paper no. 98-1112

Sala S, Anton A, McLaren SJ, Notarnicola B, Saouter E, Sonesson U (2017) In quest of reducing the environmental impacts of food production and consumption. J Clean Prod 140:387–398CrossRef

Sendžikienė E, Makarevičienė V, Kalenska S (2012) Exhaust emissions from the engine running on multi-component fuel. Transport 27:111–117CrossRef

Settanni E, Notarnicola B, Tassielli G (2010) Combining life cycle assessment of food products with economic tools. In: Sonesson U, Belin J, Ziegler F (eds) Environmental assessment and management in the food industry. Life cycle assessment and related approaches. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge. Ch. 11, pp 207–218

Smith LA (1993) Energy requirements for selected crop production implements. Soil Tillage Res 25(4):281–299

Sonesson U, Lorentzon K, Andersson A, Barr U, Bertilsson J, Borch E, Brunius C, Emanuelsson M, Göransson L, Gunnarsson S, Hamberg L, Hessle A, Kumm K, Lundh Å, Nielsen T, Östergren K, Salomon E, Sindhöj E, Stenberg B, Stenberg M, Sundberg M, Wall H (2016) Paths to a sustainable food sector: integrated design and LCA of future food supply chains: the case of pork production in Sweden. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:664–676CrossRef

Srivastava AK, Goering CE, Robrbacb RP (1993) Engineering principles of agricultural machines. ASAE, Washington D.C.

Taiwo A (2015) Fuel consumption pattern of some selected tillage systems on the Atabadzi soil series of Ghana. Int J Sci Res Agric Sci 2(2):74–78

Van Linden V, Herman L (2014) A fuel consumption model for off-road use of mobile machinery in agriculture. Energy J 77:880–889CrossRef

Weidema BP, Meeusen MJG (2000) Agricultural data for life cycle assessments, vol 1. Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI), The Hague Report 2.00.01

Yalcin H, Cakir E (2006) Tillage effects and energy efficiencies of sub-soiling and direct seeding in light soil on yield of second crop corn for silage in western Turkey. Soil Tillage Res 90:250–255CrossRef

Title: Quantifying life cycle inventories of agricultural field operations by considering different operational parameters
Authors: Giuseppe Tassielli
Pietro A. Renzulli
Seyed Hashem Mousavi-Avval
Bruno Notarnicola
Publication date: 14-11-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment / Issue 6/2019
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1553-6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results and discussion

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 6/2019

Hybrid approach for the evaluation of organizational indirect impacts (AVOID): combining product-related, process-based, and monetary-based methods

Environmental assessment of multi-functional building elements constructed with digital fabrication techniques

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) aspects and strength characteristics of self-compacting mortars (SCMs) incorporating fly ash and waste glass PET

Harmonized rules for future LCAs on pharmaceutical products and processes

Variable impact transportation (VIT) model for energy and environmental impact of hauling truck operation

Estimating human health damage factors related to CO2 emissions by considering updated climate-related relative risks