“…The GIS presentation makes possible a direct comparison of nutrient recycling improvement. The reduced N and P surpluses and increased nutrient use efficiency would increase crop production from arable land similarly to previously reported biodigested fertigation reported in the scientific literature for other crops ( Buller et al, 2015 ; Koppelmäki et al, 2019 ). Fig.…”
This study evaluates the benefits of mineral fertilizers replacement for biodigested vinasse. Data from experimental anaerobic digestion (AD) of vinasse were applied to support the analysis. Based on previous experiments, this assessment assumed that vinasse production could reach 2.38 × 10
7
m
3
/year generating around 66,585 MWh/year of electric energy from biogas burning in the Administrative Region of Campinas (ARC). This amount of energy could supply more than 103,000 inhabitants and avoid 35,892 tCO
2eq
/year (from electric energy replacement). The biodigested vinasse might also reduce the total N, P, and K mineral fertilizers demand per hectare of sugarcane crop in 30%, 1%, and 46%, respectively, avoiding additional greenhouse gas emissions of 111,877 tCO
2
eq/year. There is no biodigested vinasse surplus for a moderate fertigation rate of 100 m
3
/ha, complying with local environmental laws related to nutrients excess side effects in areas destined to sugarcane crop. Notwithstanding, a Geographic Information System analysis for a small adjacent area to ARC indicated nine different fertigation rates, ranging from 50 to 100 m
3
/ha. Even though the general analysis for ARC shows high NPK replacement levels, the fertigation practices should be subsidized for robust soil analysis and adequate to safe environmental levels. A management tool can be designed using the results here presented to subsidize investments for AD widespread adoption by the sugarcane industry to catch a reasonable practice from the economic and environmental perspectives.
“…The GIS presentation makes possible a direct comparison of nutrient recycling improvement. The reduced N and P surpluses and increased nutrient use efficiency would increase crop production from arable land similarly to previously reported biodigested fertigation reported in the scientific literature for other crops ( Buller et al, 2015 ; Koppelmäki et al, 2019 ). Fig.…”
This study evaluates the benefits of mineral fertilizers replacement for biodigested vinasse. Data from experimental anaerobic digestion (AD) of vinasse were applied to support the analysis. Based on previous experiments, this assessment assumed that vinasse production could reach 2.38 × 10
7
m
3
/year generating around 66,585 MWh/year of electric energy from biogas burning in the Administrative Region of Campinas (ARC). This amount of energy could supply more than 103,000 inhabitants and avoid 35,892 tCO
2eq
/year (from electric energy replacement). The biodigested vinasse might also reduce the total N, P, and K mineral fertilizers demand per hectare of sugarcane crop in 30%, 1%, and 46%, respectively, avoiding additional greenhouse gas emissions of 111,877 tCO
2
eq/year. There is no biodigested vinasse surplus for a moderate fertigation rate of 100 m
3
/ha, complying with local environmental laws related to nutrients excess side effects in areas destined to sugarcane crop. Notwithstanding, a Geographic Information System analysis for a small adjacent area to ARC indicated nine different fertigation rates, ranging from 50 to 100 m
3
/ha. Even though the general analysis for ARC shows high NPK replacement levels, the fertigation practices should be subsidized for robust soil analysis and adequate to safe environmental levels. A management tool can be designed using the results here presented to subsidize investments for AD widespread adoption by the sugarcane industry to catch a reasonable practice from the economic and environmental perspectives.
“…There are inherent trade‐offs between these soil functions, but we can also search for synergies. One example where such synergies have been found is the concept of Agroecological Symbiosis (AES) (Helenius et al, 2020; Koppelmäki et al, 2019). In the AES‐model, biogas production is integrated into nutrient cycling at the farm scale without competing with food production.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Biogas production allows the farmer to bring all the biomass together, reduce its volume while saving the nutrients in it, and then apply it to the land at rates and in locations where it is most needed. This practice improves nutrient cycling resulting in higher yields, reduced losses, and the conversion of the farm from an energy consumer to an energy producer (Koppelmäki et al, 2019; Stinner et al, 2008; Tuomisto & Helenius, 2008). This concept has produced several positive outcomes, specifically in organic crop production because organic farmers already rely on green manuring.…”
Agriculture is expected to feed an increasing global population while at the same time meeting demands for renewable energy and the supply of ecosystem services such as provision of nutrient cycling and carbon sequestration. However, the current structure of the agricultural system works against meeting these expectations. The spatial separation of crop and livestock farms has created negative environmental consequences, and bioenergy production has created a trade‐off between food and energy production. In this paper, we explore the opportunities for ecological intensification at a regional scale made possible by combining food and energy production. We built three scenarios representing farming systems including biogas production using grass biomass and manure. These scenarios included the following: (a) The current system with energy production (CSE) from non‐edible agricultural biomasses (CSE). (b) Agroecological symbiosis (AES) identical to CSE except with 20% of the arable cropping area converted to clover‐grasses for use in biogas production. (c) Agroecological symbiosis with livestock (AES‐LST) where the available grass biomass (20% as in the AES) is fed to livestock and manure then used as a feedstock in biogas production. In each scenario, nutrients were circulated back to crops in the form of digestate. The supply of soil functions (primary production for food and energy, provision of nutrient cycling, and climate mitigation) and impacts on water quality through nutrient losses in these three scenarios were then compared to the current system. Integrating biogas production into food production resulted in an increased supply of nutrient recycling, reduced nutrient losses, and increased carbon inputs to the soils indicating enhanced climate mitigation. Food production was either not affected (CSE), increased (AES‐LST), or decreased (AES), and biogas was produced in substantial quantities in each scenario. Our study demonstrated potential synergies in integrating food and energy production without compromising other ecosystem services in each scenario.
“…All these parties came together and participated in the development of a food system model that, as we argue, deserves full attention for supportive and enabling policies and governance. In this article, we argue for agroecological symbiosis (AES: see Figure 2) (Koppelmäki et al, 2016(Koppelmäki et al, , 2019Helenius et al, 2017) as a generic model for re-arranging the primary production of food, from the agricultural and processing perspective, toward sustainability. Furthermore, we propose that using AES as the organizing principle to form networks of agroecological symbioses (NAES: Figure 3) would serve sustainable transformation at food system level.…”
Critics of modern food systems argue for the need to shift from a consolidated and concentrated, often monoculture based agro-industrial model toward diversified, post-fossil, and nutrient recycling food systems. The abundance of acute and obvious environmental problems in the agricultural subsystems of the broader food system(s) have resulted in a focus on technological and natural scientific research into "solving" these point of production problems. Yet, there are many facets of food systems that are vital to sustainability which are not addressed even if the environmental problems were solved. In this article, we argue for agroecological symbiosis (AES) as a generic arrangement for re-configuring the primary production of food in agriculture, the processing of food, and development of a food community to work toward system-level sustainability. The guiding principle of this concept was the desire to base farming and food processing on renewable bioenergy, to close nutrient cycles, to break away from the consolidated food chain, to be more transparent and connected with consumers, and to revitalize the rural spaces where farms generally operate. Through a consistent and robust collaboration and co-creative process with transdisciplinary actors, ranging from food producers, and processers to policy actors, we designed a food system model based on networks of AES (NAES). The NAES would form place-based food networks, replacing the consolidated commodity chains. The NAES supports sustainable interactions from a biophysical and socio-cultural perspective. In this paper, we explain the AES concept, give an overview of the process of co-creating the pilot AES, and a proposal for the extension of the AES, as NAES, to create sustainable food systems. Overall, we conclude that the AES model holds potential for creating place-based food systems that further the sustainability agenda.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
