Agricultural systems engineering (greenhouse, fish farming, mushroom production)
L. Behrooznia; M. Khojastehpour; H. Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha
Abstract
IntroductionPomegranate has gained global popularity due to its high vitamin content and antioxidant properties, attracting fans worldwide. The processing of pomegranate into various products, including pomegranate juice, has become a thriving industry. However, this processing requires significant energy ...
Read More
IntroductionPomegranate has gained global popularity due to its high vitamin content and antioxidant properties, attracting fans worldwide. The processing of pomegranate into various products, including pomegranate juice, has become a thriving industry. However, this processing requires significant energy and chemicals—most of which are derived from fossil fuels. The combustion of these fuels releases harmful gases, contributing to global warming, environmental damage, and health risks. The costs tied to these environmental burdens are often overlooked, neglecting the principles of environmental sustainability. Therefore, it is vital to assess the monetary value of the environmental impacts throughout the entire life cycle of pomegranate juice production. This research aims to investigate the costs imposed on society, including the social costs of carbon emissions, damage costs from air pollution, and costs associated with environmental prevention measures related to processing pomegranate juice. Feel free to ask for further changes or adjustments.Materials and MethodsThis study focuses on assessing the environmental impact and associated costs generated during the processing of pomegranate juice in Mashhad, Iran, from 2022 to 2023. The research examines the case study of Saman Bazar Razavi Co. to conduct an environmental impact cost assessment. The study begins by evaluating the environmental impacts associated with the pomegranate juice production process using a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach. The costs related to these impacts are then estimated by multiplying the impact amounts with predetermined monetary coefficients. The study adopts a system boundary that extends from the arrival of the fruit at the factory to the departure of the packaged juice, defining a 160g pack of pomegranate juice as the functional unit (FU). SimaPro software, version 9, is utilized for analyzing the environmental impacts. The evaluation of environmental impact costs encompasses three categories: social costs of carbon emissions, damage costs from air pollution, and costs for environmental prevention measures. Carbon dioxide emissions are considered to assess social costs, while five other gases—nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds, and ammonia vapor—are included in investigating air pollution damage costs. Furthermore, the calculation of environmental prevention costs takes into account seven impact categories: global warming, photochemical oxidation, respiratory inorganic effects, human toxicity, ecotoxicity, eutrophication, and acidification.Results and DiscussionHere’s the edited text with corrections marked: The investigation reveals that the production of pomegranate juice emits approximately 0.12 kg CO2 eq of carbon, with a social cost of $0.0062 per functional unit. The primary contributors to carbon emissions are natural gas and electricity. Furthermore, the evaluation of air-polluting gases indicates a total cost of $0.021 for air pollution damage. Among the five considered gases, ammonia vapor, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides incur the highest damage costs. The assessment of environmental prevention costs demonstrates a total calculated cost of $0.026, with the impact categories of global warming and acidification making the most substantial contributions of 59% and 28%, respectively. This finding suggests that the majority of costs for preventing damage in pomegranate juice production should be focused on mitigating the effects of global warming. The consumption of natural gas and electricity during the pomegranate juice production process is the main source of carbon dioxide emissions and global warming. Additionally, in terms of acidification, the contributions of pomegranate, electricity, apple, natural gas, and sugar are noteworthy. Based on these findings, it is evident that the resources used in pomegranate juice processing, derived from fossil fuels, have the most significant impact on environmental damage. Therefore, one practical method to prevent the creation of these pollutants is the utilization of alternative bioproducts produced from biomass. Considering the substantial amount of pomegranate waste generated after juice processing,which is often not utilized; these wastes can be effectively employed to produce bioenergy, such as biogas. This approach not only prevents waste disposal but also offers economic and environmental benefits.ConclusionThis article provides an overview of the environmental impacts and associated costs of pomegranate juice production in Mashhad. Using the life cycle assessment approach, the study calculates the environmental impacts per functional unit (a 160g juice pack) and estimates the corresponding costs. The results indicate that the social cost of carbon emissions, the total damage costs of air pollution, and the total environmental prevention costs per functional unit are $0.0062, $0.021, and $0.026, respectively. These costs should be allocated to mitigating the environmental damage caused by pomegranate juice production in the region.AcknowledgmentsThe authors express their gratitude to Ferdowsi University of Mashhad for funding this research (Grant No. 54189).
Agricultural systems engineering (greenhouse, fish farming, mushroom production)
R. Fathi; M. Ghasemi-Nejad Raeini; R. Hesampour
Abstract
Introduction: Environmental crises and resource depletion have adversely affected environmental resources and food security in the world. Therefore, with the global population growth in the coming years and the rising need to produce more food, attention must be given to environmental issues, energy ...
Read More
Introduction: Environmental crises and resource depletion have adversely affected environmental resources and food security in the world. Therefore, with the global population growth in the coming years and the rising need to produce more food, attention must be given to environmental issues, energy consumption, and sustainable production. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the pattern of energy consumption, environmental impacts, and optimization of the studied energy indicators in dairy cattle breeding industrial units in Khuzestan province, Iran.Materials and Methods: This research was conducted in Khuzestan province, located in the southwest of Iran. Energy indicators including energy ratio, energy efficiency, specific energy, and net energy were used to determine and analyze the relationships between the output and input energy. Additionally, the life cycle assessment methodology was used to assess the environmental impact. Life cycle assessment includes a goal statement, identification of inputs and outputs, and a system for assessing and interpreting environmental impacts, and can be a good indicator for assessing environmental issues related to production. The life cycle assessment method used in this study was CML-IA baseline V3.05, which includes the four steps of (1) selecting and classifying impact categories, (2) characterizing effects, (3) normalizing, and (4) weighting. Overall, 11 impact groups were studied. The Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) method with the Anderson-Peterson model was used for optimization. This method identifies the most efficient production unit and makes it possible to rank all of the farms in the region. In this study, each production unit (farm) was considered a decision-making unit (DMU), and its production efficiency was determined based on two models. Namely, the Charnes, Cooper, and Rhodes (CCR) model also known as Constant Return to Scale (CRS), and the Banker, Charnes, and Cooper (BCC) model also known as Variable Return to Scale (VRS).Results and Discussion: The results showed that the input and output energies per cow per day were 173.34 and 166 MJ, respectively. Livestock feed and electricity accounted for 65.47% and 27.2% of the input energy, respectively, while the oil used for tiller-scraper lubrication of fertilizer collection accounted for only 0.01%, making it the lowest input energy. Energy efficiency, specific energy, and net energy were calculated as 0.95, 0.13 kg MJ-1, 7.51 MJ kg-1, and -7.20 MJ per cow, respectively. In the abiotic depletion impact group, animal feed, machinery, and livestock equipment had the highest environmental impacts. The results showed that animal feed had the highest environmental emissions in all impact groups except for abiotic depletion of fossil fuels where electricity had the greatest effect. CRS model determined that 7 units were efficient; with an average efficiency of 0.78. In the BCC model, 20 production units were calculated as highly efficient, and the average efficiency was computed to be 0.78.Conclusion: In dairy farms in Khuzestan province, animal feed and electricity were found to have the highest energy consumption. In most impact groups, animal feed had the highest environmental effects. Specifically, in the abiotic depletion impact group, animal feed, livestock machinery, and equipment had the highest environmental effects. Considering the length of the heat period and the intensity of the solar flux, the installation of solar panels on the farm's roof to generate electricity can help reduce the consumption of non-renewable energy and mitigate radiation intensity under the roof.
P. Mohseni; A. M. Borghaee; M. Khanali
Abstract
Introduction Today, grapes are cultivated in a vast zone worldwide. Grapes are among the major horticultural produced in Iran and the country is ranked 10th in the world for the grape production. Therefore, efficient use of energy from this crop is very important. Energy is one of the principal requirements ...
Read More
Introduction Today, grapes are cultivated in a vast zone worldwide. Grapes are among the major horticultural produced in Iran and the country is ranked 10th in the world for the grape production. Therefore, efficient use of energy from this crop is very important. Energy is one of the principal requirements for the economic growth and development of agriculture. Scientific forecasts and analysis of energy consumption will be of great importance for planning the energy strategies and policies. The enhancement of the energy efficiency not only helps in improving competitiveness through cost reduction but also results in minimized greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and environmental impacts. In other hand, energy analysis in the crop production systems enables to identify the effective farming system in different farm size with respect to energy parameters. Based on mentioned points, the objective of this study was to evaluate the energy flow of grape production in three sizes (small, medium and large) of land and then, the life cycle of the production in Hazavah Region of Arak city, Iran. Materials and Methods In this study, data were obtained from 58 growers using face-to-face questionnaires in Arak county of Iran. Orchards were selected using stratified random sampling. Investigation of the energy flow in a production system necessitate calculating input–output energies. In order to deal with this part, energy coefficients were taken into account to convert all agricultural inputs to their energy equivalent. In other words, each input was converted to its energy equivalent by multiplying the application rate of agricultural inputs used within the system by its energy coefficient. In order to evaluate how efficient, the system under study is, some well-known indicators have been introduced and widely applied when a production system is appraised. In this study, a life cycle approach was used for assessment of environment impacts of the grapes production. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) refers to the process of compiling and evaluating the inputs, outputs and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle. Goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, life cycle impact assessment and life cycle interpretation are four mandatory steps, which should be followed in a full LCA study. The characterization factors used in this study were adapted from Simapro software which is linked to EcoInvent database. Results and Discussion On average, the values of consumed and produced energies were 1854 MJ ton−1 and 11800 MJ ton−1, respectively. Among all input energies, chemical fertilizers held the first rank with an amount of about 704 MJ ton−1. It accounted for 38% of the total energy used in the production season. Energy use efficiency, which is a ratio between output and input energy, was calculated as 5.75. Also, the energy productivity was estimated as 0.48, meaning that 0.48 kg grapes is produced when one MJ energy is consumed. The total Global Warming (GW) was calculated as 508.63 kg CO2 eq. ton−1. The farm size had an influential effect on the GW and other impact categories. An increase in the farm size led to reduction in the environment impacts. It means that the value of GW for large farms fell at 498.68 kg CO2 eq. ton−1 and the value of GW for small farms fell at 698.69 kg CO2 eq. ton−1. The upshot was that GW and other impact categories for large farms were significantly less than its counterpart in small farms due to the high value of grapes produced in large farm groups. Impacts of manure played a more important role on GW. Also, direct emissions of chemical fertilizers made high contribution to acidification and eutrophication. Management of using chemical fertilizers can be an appropriate way to reduce the acidification, eutrophication and other environmental impacts on the grape production. Conclusion Chemical fertilizers (38%), demonstrated their pivotal roles in total energy consumption. The direct emissions in the grape production resulted from high application of chemical fertilizers contributed considerably to some environmental impacts. It suggested establishing a sustainable and environmental friendly grape production system in the region with application of efficient fertilizers by integrated nutrient management.
Z. Ramedani; R. Abdi; M. Omid; M. A. Maysami
Abstract
Introduction Life cycle assessment of food products is an appropriate method to understand the energy consumption and production of environmental burdens. Dairy production process has considerable effect on climate change in various ways, and the scale of these effects depends on the practices of dairy ...
Read More
Introduction Life cycle assessment of food products is an appropriate method to understand the energy consumption and production of environmental burdens. Dairy production process has considerable effect on climate change in various ways, and the scale of these effects depends on the practices of dairy industry, dairy farmers and feed growers. This study examined the life cycle of production of dairy products in Kermanshah city. For this purpose, the whole life was divided in two sections: production of raw milk in dairy farm and dairy products in dairy industry. In each section the energy consumption patterns and environmental burdens were evaluated. Based on the results, the consumed energy in dairy farm was 6286.29 MJ for amount of produced milk in month. Also animal feed was the greatest energy consumer with the value of 45.12% that the maximum amount of this value was for concentrate. The minimum consumption of energy was for the machinery with 0.92 MJ in a month. Results of life cycle assessment of dairy products showed that in dairy industry raw milk input causes most of impact categories especially land use, carcinogens and acidification. In dairy farms, concentrate was effective more than 90% in production of impact categories included: land use and carcinogens. Using digesters for production biogas and solar water heaters in dairy farm can decrease fossil recourses. Materials and Methods Based on ISO 14044, standards provide an overview of the steps of an LCA: (1) Goal and Scope Definition; (2) Life Cycle Inventory Analysis; (3) Life Cycle Impact Assessment; and (4) Interpretation (ISO, 2006). In this study there were two sub-systems in the production line: dairy farm sub-system (1) and dairy factory sub-system (2). In the sub-system related to the dairy farm, the main product was milk. Determination of inputs and outputs in each sub-system, energy consumption, transportation and emissions to air and water as well as waste treatment are the requirements of LCI. However each of them has several components. These components are different in both sub-systems. All the detailed data about energy equivalent in dairy farm is shown in Table 1. More detailed data about inventories description of two sub-systems are shown in Tables 3 and 4. The SimaPro 7.3.2 was used for analyzing the collected data for calculating environmental burdens (Pré Consultants, 2012). Results and Discussion Based on the developed models with SimaPro software for dairy products in the factory, various emissions were generated including emissions into the air, soil and water. The most prevalent emissions are summarized in Table 7. In warm season about half of the milk is processed into drinking yoghurt. Since water is one half of the component of this product so more amount of drinking yoghurt can be achieved with lower energy consumption (about 50%). Furthermore, these results indicated that the magnitude of fossil fuels was much greater than all others. It was followed by land use and respiratory inorganics. The most amount of the consumption of the fossil fuels was the production of energy requirements for heating systems at boilers and tractors in dairy factory and farm, respectively. Also the transportation of raw milk to the dairy industry was another source of the pollution. Also the energy consumption pattern in the dairy farm revealed that the concentrate have high contribution in energy consumption. Conclusion Results of the energy consumption pattern showed that the animal feed was the greatest energy consumer with value of 45.12% and followed by electricity (36%). Energy consumption index for the fossil fuel was calculated about 3.8 that is higher than the global index. Production of raw milk in dairy farm is responsible in the production of impact categories especially land use, carcinogenic and acidification with contribution of 97.6%, 78%, and 63%, respectively. Also the amount of CO2-eq was estimated 2.71 kg for the production of 1kg ECM in cold seasons.
