Conversão e balanço de energia de sistemas de produção com integração lavoura-pecuária sob plantio direto

Santos, H. P. dos; Fontaneli, R. S.; Spera, S. T.; Maldaner, Geórgia Luiza

doi:10.1590/s0100-204x2011001000011

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Santos et al (2011a) found similar results. Santos et al (2011b;, studying grain production systems with plantation + livestock integration, also obtained similar results of conversion and energy balance. The results presentation on energy conversion and energy balance is as it follows.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…In the study by Santos et al (2011b) about production systems with crop + livestock integration, the highest energy balance indexes occurred in the systems: wheat/soybean and vetch/maize; and wheat/soybean and pea/maize, in relation to the wheat/soybean and black oat/maize pasture systems; wheat/soybean and black oat/soybean pasture; wheat/soybean, vetch/soybean and dual-purpose triticale; and wheat/soybeans, dual-purpose white oats/soybeans and dual-purpose wheat/soybeans. Maize had the highest energy return, when compared to other grain-producing crops and winter pastures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The conventional monoculture production system, based on agrochemistry, brings about a reduction in energy efficiency due to the small soil coverage (which induces losses by evaporation and erosion), associated with the great dependence on external inputs (mineral fertilizers and pesticides, both of a higher energy cost) (Teixeira et al, 2007;Souza et al, 2008;Andrea et al, 2014). In this sense, employing practices that reduce said problems can be the alternative in increasing the efficiency of the grain production systems, especially by employing crop rotations and management of species suitable for green manure, soil cover and fixation of carbon and nitrogen (Santos et al, 2011b;Ferreira et al, 2014;Costa et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Energy performance of soil management systems and crop rotation

Santos

Dalmago

Santi

et al. 2020

Agraria

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to evaluate soil management and crop rotation systems. The treatments consisted of four types of soil management: 1) no-tillage, 2) minimum tillage, 3) conventional tillage with disc plows, and 4) conventional tillage with moldboard plows, and three crop rotation systems: system I -wheat/soybean; system II -wheat/soybean and vetch/ sorghum; and system III -wheat/soybean, vetch/sorghum and white oat/soybeans. An experimental design of randomized blocks with split-plots and three replicates was used. The main plot consisted of soil management systems, while the split-plots consisted of crop rotation systems. Maize and sorghum were the crops that showed the highest energy return in relation to the other studied species. No-tillage showed higher energy conversion and balance (12.31 and 45,011 Mcal ha -1 ) than minimum tillage (11.33 and 41,100 Mcal ha -1 ), conventional tillage using disk plow (9.94 and 34,142 Mcal ha -1 ) and conventional tillage using moldboard plow (10.21 and 35,170 Mcal ha -1 ), respectively. Wheat in crop rotation had higher energy efficiency than the monoculture of this cereal.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 58%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Energy performance of soil management systems and crop rotation

Santos

Dalmago

Santi

et al. 2020

Agraria

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…EE was calculated using the ratio of the amount of energy produced (MJ ha -1 ) to the amount of energy consumed (MJ ha -1 ) in each rice production unit. The energy balance was calculated by subtracting the consumed energy (MJ ha -1 ) from the produced energy (MJ ha -1 ) (Santos, Fontaneli, Spera, & Dreon, 2013).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy efficiency and emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O in organic and conventional rice production

Guareschi

Martins

Urquiaga

et al. 2020

SCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rice is the second-most produced cereal worldwide and actively contributes to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, particularly methane, especially under deepwater production. Assessments of energy efficiency (EE) and GHG emissions can indicate the sustainability level of agrosystems and support decisions related to the reduction of production costs and environmental pollution. This study aimed to assess both EE and GHG emissions in organic and conventional rice production in the Southern region of Brazil. For this study, eight rice fields were evaluated. Energy inputs and outputs were calculated by multiplying the production input amounts by their respective calorific values or energy coefficients at each stage of production. EE was determined using the ratio between the total energy output and the total energy consumed during the production process. GHG emissions were estimated using the principles of the lifecycle assessment methodology in addition to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recommendations. Each 1.0 MJ consumed during the production of organic and conventional rice produced renewable energy averages of 10.5 MJ and 7.90 MJ, respectively, as grains. The primary energy expenses for organic rice were represented by seeds, fuel, tractors, and agricultural machinery and implements, and those for conventional rice were seeds, fuel, and fertilizers. Each kilogram of organic and conventional rice produced accounted for the emission of 0.21 and 0.32 kg of CO2eq, respectively, during the production cycles and delivery to the warehouse, with seeds, fuel, and fertilizers being the main sources of CO2eq emissions to the atmosphere.

show abstract

“…Currently, the amount of energy demanded by production processes for transformations has often been higher than its return, in terms of product energy value; providing low efficiency and a negative balance (CAPELLESSO & CAZELLA, 2013;FURLANETO et al, 2013;SANTOS et al, 2011;SCHNEIDER & SMITH, 2009) regardless social costs associated with disruption of traditional economies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energetic sustainability of three arabica coffee growing systems used by family farming units in Espírito Santo state

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three growing systems of Arabica coffee were evaluated under the energy perspective, in the state of Espírito Santo in Brazil. The systems are conventional cultivation (CC), cultivation with good agricultural practices (CGP) and organic farming (OF). It was made a comparison of the energy flows within these three systems to show sustainable levels of each one based on production average data of several family-farming units. Therefore, we analyzed crop yield, total energy efficiency reverse (TEER), energy efficiency of ripe coffee (EERC) and nonrenewable energy efficiency (NREE). OF system had values for TEER, EERC and NREE of 3.3 4.7 and 7.9 respectively. Yet CC showed values of 1.8, 1.9 and 1.6 for TEER, EERC and NREE respectively. Furthermore, CGP presented values for TEER, EERC and NREE of 0.7, 1.3 and 1.4 respectively. The highest yield was observed in CGP, reaching an amount of 1794 kg ha -1 (17,455 MJ); however, this system expends more energy than it converts. Thus, over those points, OF is the most sustainable system.

show abstract

Conversão e balanço de energia de sistemas de produção com integração lavoura-pecuária sob plantio direto

Cited by 5 publications

References 7 publications

Energy performance of soil management systems and crop rotation

Energy performance of soil management systems and crop rotation

Energy efficiency and emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O in organic and conventional rice production

Energetic sustainability of three arabica coffee growing systems used by family farming units in Espírito Santo state

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About