M. Moradi; J. Ghasemi; H. Azimi-Nejadian
Abstract
IntroductionSome unit operations of food process engineering such as drying consumes a high amount of energy. Therefore, analysis of energy and exergy can be a suitable method to manage the energy consumption of the drying. Hence, in the present research, analysis of energy and exergy for the drying ...
Read More
IntroductionSome unit operations of food process engineering such as drying consumes a high amount of energy. Therefore, analysis of energy and exergy can be a suitable method to manage the energy consumption of the drying. Hence, in the present research, analysis of energy and exergy for the drying process of lemon verbena leaves was performed.Materials and MethodsA cabinet solar dryer was employed to investigate the energy consumption of thin layer drying of lemon verbena leaves. The dryer had a galvanized solar plate collector which had a surface area of 0.75 m2 and to absorb the maximum solar energy, the collector painted with the black color. The collector was set at an angle of 45 degrees relative to the horizon and an electric blower was installed in the bottom of the collector to blow the ambient air through the solar collector and hence, hot air entered the drying chamber to dry the lemon verbena leaves. In order to record the air temperature and humidity in different locations of the dryer, an Arduino board with 8 smart sensors (AM2301, with temperature accuracy of 0.5°C and humidity accuracy of 3%) were used. To obtain the initial moisture content of the leaves, they inserted in an electrical oven for 16 hours at a temperature of 70°C. In order to measure the moisture content of the leaves during drying, they weighted at different times using a digital balance (A & D, Japan with accuracy of 0.001 g).Energy consumption rate of the drying was calculated by Equation (1):Where, Ein: energy consumption rate (kW), : mass flow rate of drying air (kg s-1), cp: specific heat of drying air (kJ kg-1 °C-1), Δt: temperature difference between the ambient air and drying air (°C).Also, the specific energy consumption of drying (SEC) was calculated by Equation (2):Where; SEC: Specific energy consumption (MJ kg-1 of removed water) t: drying time (s), and M: mass of removed water from the drying material (kg).Also, useful power can be calculated from Equation (3):Where; Eout: useful power (kW), ms: Evaporation rate (kg s-1), lg: latent heat of vaporization (kJ kg-1 of water)In order to calculate energy efficiency, Equation (4) was used: Also inlet and outlet exergy were calculated by equations (5) and (6), respectively: Where; T1: Inlet air temperature into the drying chamber (°C), T2: Outlet air temperature from the drying chamber (°C), T0: Ambient air temperature (°C).Also, Equations (7) and (8) were used to calculate exergy efficiency and loss, respectively:Results and DiscussionThe results of energy analysis showed specific energy consumption (SEC) increased with increasing of drying temperature and decreasing of air velocity. Accordingly, in the air velocity of 2 m s-1 and the temperatures of 30, 40, and 50 ˚C, SEC were 276.3, 694.7, and 708.0 MJ kg-1 of removed water, respectively. While SEC for an air velocity of 2.5 m s-1 and air temperatures of 30, 40, and 50 ˚C were 266.9, 469.8, and 638.0 MJ kg-1 of removed water, respectively, the corresponded values for air velocity of 3 m s-1 were as 217.0, 391.3, and 501.8 MJ kg-1 of removed water, respectively. Also, the results revealed that with an increase of temperature and a reduction of velocity, energy efficiency reduced, so that the maximum value of energy efficiency observed in an experiment with temperature of 30˚C and velocity of 3 m s-1. Also, the highest value of exergy efficiency obtained in temperature of 50˚C and velocity of 3 m s-1.ConclusionA hot air solar dryer was used for drying lemon verbena leaves. Results of specific energy consumption of drying showed a high amount of fossil fuels can be saved by using this dryer. Also, from the aspect of energy and exergy efficiency, using of the dryer in the lower temperature and higher air velocity is recommended.
A. Vahedi; S. Zarifneshat
Abstract
Introduction Agriculture is an energy conversion process. In this process, solar energy, fossil fuel, and electricity are converted mainly into food and fiber. In the agricultural section, the trend of energy consumption increases rapidly every year. Constraints on agricultural land, population ...
Read More
Introduction Agriculture is an energy conversion process. In this process, solar energy, fossil fuel, and electricity are converted mainly into food and fiber. In the agricultural section, the trend of energy consumption increases rapidly every year. Constraints on agricultural land, population growth, changes in infrastructure, and a trend towards high living standards have contributed to increase energy use in the agricultural sector. Fuel, electricity, machinery, seeds, chemical fertilizers, and chemical pesticides have a significant share in supplying energy sources. Effective use of energy in agriculture reduces environmental problems and prevents the destruction of natural resources and develops sustainable agriculture as an economic production system. Wheat is the most strategic crop in Iran that more than 50.39% of arable land belongs to wheat. Materials and Methods The current study has been done with the objects of evaluation of inputs and crop yield, input and output energy, and energy indices for irrigated wheat for seven provinces such as Alborz, Isfahan, Ardebil, Khorasan-e Razavi, Khuzestan, Golestan, and Hamadan. For this purpose, the required information gathered via study of publications, face to face interview with experts and leading farmers, and questionnaire completion by the irrigated wheat farmers in different cities of each understudy province. Then, with the help of equivalent energy equations, input and output energy and energy indices were calculated. In this research, simple random sampling method was used.Results and DiscussionAccording to the results, total input energies of Alborz, Isfahan, Ardebil, Khorasan-e Razavi, Khuzestan, Golestan, and Hamadan provinces were calculated with 45458.84, 92714.8, 38755.34, 104701, 50971.2, 26198, and 49362. 64 MJ ha-1 respectively, while the output energy for those provinces were 162169.28, 131958.8, 77381.39, 122297, 141901.2, 134106, and 125511.69 MJ ha-1, respectively. The maximum share of energy input for Alborz, Ardebil, Khuzestan, Golestan, and Hamadan provinces were regarding to chemical fertilizers with amounts of 43.06, 43.16, 58.33, 38.05, and 47.57 percent, respectively, while irrigation energy requirement had maximum share in Isfahan and Khorasan-e Razavi with 62.36 and 57.17 percent, respectively. The minimum share of energy input for Alborz, Isfahan, Ardebil, Khorasan-e Razavi, and Golestan provinces was calculated for labor energy requirement with 0.39, 0.29, 0.79, 0.18, and 0.26 percent, respectively, while in Khuzestan and Hamadan, chemicals consumed the lowest energy with 0.55 and 0.89 percent, respectively. Share of direct energies for all understudy provinces were 44.61, 72.13, 41.22, 67.48, 30.75, 39.44, and 39.91 percent, share of indirect energies were 55.39, 27.87, 58.78, 32.52, 69.25, 60.56, and 60.09 percent, share of renewable energies were 27.99, 65.91, 32.35, 60.57, 19.26, 34.92, and 35.16 percent, and share of nonrenewable energies were 72.01, 34.09, 67.65, 39.43, 80.74, 65.08, and 64.84 percent, respectively. Energy ratio for Alborz, Isfahan, Ardebil, Khorasan-e Razavi, Khuzestan, Golestan, and Hamadan provinces were 3.57, 1.42, 3.48, 1.17, 2.78, 5.12, and 2.54, respectively, and energy productivities were 0.26, 0.11, 0.26, 0.08, 0.21, 0.38, and 0.18 kg MJ-1, respectively. Average input energy, output energy, energy ratio, energy productivity, and net energy gain for all provinces were 58308.83 MJ ha-1, 136092.15 MJ ha-1, 2.87, 0.212 kg MJ-1 and 77783. 31 MJ ha-1, respectively. Total input energy cost for irrigated wheat production was 57.966 ×106 Rial ha-1. The Energy intensiveness, Energy intensiveness value, Energy intensity cost, and Energy ratio cost were found as 1.299 MJ (103 Rial)-1, 0.641 MJ (103 Rial)-1, 10853.05 Rial kg-1, and 1.21, respectively.Conclusion In order to reduce the share of indirect energy and non-renewable energy, organic fertilizers should be replaced by chemical fertilizers and plant residues in the field. Minimum tillage should also be used in land preparation operations to reduce fuel consumption, maintain organic matter and soil moisture and reduce soil erosion. To compensate for some of the elements taken from the soil by the plant and the increase of organic matter and fertility of the soil, it is recommended to return part of the plant residues to the soil. The use of combined machines that can perform several simultaneous operations and minimizing and protecting soil tillage to reduce fossil fuel consumption through minimum use of machinery should be investigated as a national necessity.
H. Sadrnia; M. Khojastehpour; H. Aghel; A. Saiedi Rashk Olya
Abstract
Introduction The high energy consumption is one of the serious problems in poultry industry. The poultry industry consume about five percent of total energy sources in different countries, with consideration of losses, it increases up to 16-20%. In the year 2003 also, the Iranian chicken meat consumption ...
Read More
Introduction The high energy consumption is one of the serious problems in poultry industry. The poultry industry consume about five percent of total energy sources in different countries, with consideration of losses, it increases up to 16-20%. In the year 2003 also, the Iranian chicken meat consumption per capita was 13.3 kg, while in the year 2013 it increased to 25.9 kg (FAO, 2014). It shows that in the diet of Iranian people, the chicken meat has become a strategic food. Poultry industry is one of the biggest and most developed industries in Iran. In the past two decays, mainly due to population growth and increase demand of white meats, it is necessary to change and improve energy efficiency in this industry. Technical efficiency of broiler farms in the central region of Saudi Arabia was analyzed through stochastic frontier approach (Alrwis and Francis, 2003). They reported that many farms under study work lower than their total capacity. In the research, the output was chicken meat weight in the term of the kilogram per one period and the inputs were the number of chicks, feed, the total of all variable expenses and fixed input except chicks and feed and the total cost of fixed inputs including building, equipment and machinery used for the broiler houses. They found that the small and large size broiler farms in the Central Region of Saudi Arabia were produced chicken with mean technical efficiency 83 and 88%, respectively (Alrwis and Francis, 2003). Efficiency measurement of broiler production units in Hamadan province was investigated by Fotros and Solgi (2003). They reported that the minimum, maximum and mean technical efficiency under variable return to scale were 12.7, 100 and 64.4%, respectively. Their results showed that technical efficiency at 16.5 (14 units) and 42.35% (24 units) of farms were more than 90 and 70%, respectively (Fotros and Salgi, 2003). Khorasan Razavi province after Esfahan and Mazandaran provinces is the third largest producer of broilers in Iran. This research was performed because it is necessary to have energy consumption status; also there is a few data about broiler’s energy consumption in Mashhad. In this research, the data of Mashhad’s broilers was analyzed by Data Envelopment Analysis Method. The other objectives of this study were to separate efficient and inefficient units to use energy resource efficiently and determine total energy saving. Materials and Methods This study was performed in 2013 in Mashhad, Iran. The data were collected through interviews and questionnaires from 36 poultry farmers for a growing period of April to May. Input energies were the feed, fuel (gas and gas oil), electricity, labor, equipment and chicken, and the output energies were the chicken meat and the manure. The energy consumption for each element was calculated by multiplied amount of inputs/outputs to energy equivalents. Results and Discussion The total of input and output energies were obtained 125.2, 24.9 GJ/1000Birds, respectively. Energy indices such as energy ratio, energy efficiency and specific energy were determined to be 0.2, 0.019 kg/MJ and 52.55 MJ/kg, respectively. The highest share of energy consumption were 50.84 and 42.43%, for fuel (natural gas and diesel fuel) and feed respectively, the lowest share among the input energies were 0.39 and 0.06%, for chicken and labor respectively. Comparison of energy in three levels of farm sizes (≤15000, 15000-30000 and ≥30000 chicks) showed the energy ratio for large farms were higher than the other levels. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) was used to evaluate the poultry efficiency. The results showed that 13 poultry units had average technical efficiency (0.93) in the definition of Constant Returns to Scale (CRS), and 21 poultry units had pure technical efficiency (0.99) in the definition of Variable Returns to Scale (VRS). Conclusion The Fuel (natural gas and diesel fuel) consumption energy had the highest shares of energy consumption; it is because of the low efficient heating equipment in poultry houses and low fuel prices in Iran. Energy efficiency of broiler farms in Mashhad was obtained 0.2 that show low energy efficiency. Improvements in energy efficiency could be achieved by increasing yield or reducing inputs energies.
R. Rahimzadeh; Y. Ajabshirchi; Sh. Abdollahpour; A. Sharifi Malvajerdi; N. Sartipi; A. Mohammadi
Abstract
Introduction
Direct planting becomes more common in the recent years, because it conserves soil and water as well as it saves energy and time. However, this technology needs special implements such as seed planter. Given that direct planting is practiced in undisturbed lands, so it was needed to design ...
Read More
Introduction
Direct planting becomes more common in the recent years, because it conserves soil and water as well as it saves energy and time. However, this technology needs special implements such as seed planter. Given that direct planting is practiced in undisturbed lands, so it was needed to design a special furrow opener. In order to obtain a suitable furrow opener this experiment was conducted in rain-fed Agricultural Research Institute in Maragheh.
Materials and Methods
Most of seed planters that are used for cultivation in rain fed conditions are equipped by hoe-type furrow opener. Hoe-type furrow openers have good penetration in hard and dry soils. However, they do not have the ability for direct planting. Hoe-type furrow opener was chosen as a model. Then by changing the geometric form of the depth to width ratio (d/w), the two openers were designed. In the first design, which was called O1 two wings and a narrow blade acting as a coulter were added in front of the hoe-type furrow opener. In the second design, which was called O2, in addition to the O1 modification, furrow opener width was decreased and a disk blade was added for seed sowing (Fig. 1).
The performance of O1 and O2 openers were compared with the conventional hoe-type furrow opener (check) in soil bin and in field conditions. At three different forward speeds (1, 1.5 and 2 m.s-1) with 3 replications, the effects of the openers designs of vertical and horizontal soil forces were evaluated in soil-bin conditions. In order to evaluate the performance of the furrow opener in field conditions, an experiment was conducted using a split plot design based on RCBD at 4 replications. Furrow openers formed the main plots and forward speeds formed the sub plots. Each plot size was 22 meters long in two rows for each treatment. After germination of wheat crop, the numbers of seedlings in two rows were counted (along a one meter). After crop maturity, all plots were harvested by hand and grain and biological yield was measured. ANOVA test, uniformity test and mean comparison were conducted by using Genstat software.
Results and Discussion
The soil bin test results showed that opener design and forward speed both have significant influences on the horizontal force (p<0.01). Horizontal force was increased with increasing of forward speeds. The same result was reported by Wheeler and Godwin, 1996 and Astafford, 1979. The lowest horizontal force (average 1.66 kN) occurred at 1 m.s-1 and the highest (average 1.94 kN) occurred at 2 m.s-1 forward speeds. Horizontal force increased in O2 (2.8%) and decreased in O1 (3.4%) compared with the control (average 1.77 kN). Moreover, openers had significant influence on the vertical force (p<0.01). Vertical force values were negative in O1 (average -0.05 kN) and O2 (average -0.07 kN) in comparison with positive value in the control (average +0.01 kN). The effect of forward speed on vertical force was not statistically significant. The field results showed that there were significant differences among the openers in the numbers of seedling, grain and biological yield (p<0.01). The O2 opener (with the average of 48 seedlings per one meter row) had 33% and 24% more seedlings in comparison with O1 and check furrow openers, respectively. Probably, using dick bald in O2 design leads to increased seed germination. Increasing of seed germination by using disk furrow opener as an advantage is reported by Kushwaha and Foster, 1993. The O2 furrow opener would also increase grain yield about 36% compared with both O1 and check furrow openers.
Conclusions
It can be concluded that the newly designed furrow opener (O2) could improve the energy efficiency with increasing crop yield. Hence, O2 furrow opener could be recommended for direct planting in rain-fed farming.
B. Emadi; A. Nikkhah; M. Khojastehpour; H. Payman
Abstract
In this study, the energy and economic analysis of peanut production in Guilan province of Iran was studied. Data were collected from questionnaires of 75 farmers. The data were collected from three farm size categories namely: 0.1–0.5 ha, 0.5-1 ha and larger than 1 ha. The results revealed that 19407.36 ...
Read More
In this study, the energy and economic analysis of peanut production in Guilan province of Iran was studied. Data were collected from questionnaires of 75 farmers. The data were collected from three farm size categories namely: 0.1–0.5 ha, 0.5-1 ha and larger than 1 ha. The results revealed that 19407.36 MJ ha-1 energy input was totally consumed. The highest share of energy consumption belonged to diesel fuel (50.05%) followed by chemical fertilizers (19.14%). The mean difference of energy inputs including machinery, diesel fuel and electricity among different sizes of farms was significant at the 5% level. The average energy efficiency in different farm size categories including less than 0.5 ha, 0.5-1 ha and more than 1 ha were 3.67, 4.02 and 4.12, respectively. The energy productivity of these sizes was calculated as 0.155, 0.169 and 0.174 kg MJ-1, respectively. The Cobb-Douglas model results showed that the effects of inputs including human labor, machinery, chemical fertilizers and electricity on the yield were positive, while the effect of inputs including seed, diesel fuel and chemicals on peanut yield were negative. The benefit-cost ratio was calculated as 1.82. Farmers with a farm larger than 1 ha used the least amount of energy and input costs.
M. Taki; Y. Ajabshirchi; R. Abdi; M. Akbarpour
Abstract
In this research energy efficiency for greenhouse cucumber production in Shahreza township located in Esfahan province using data envelopment analysis (DEA) technique was studied. In this study, data were obtained from 25 randomize active vegetable greenhouses from 60 greenhouses in Shahreza township ...
Read More
In this research energy efficiency for greenhouse cucumber production in Shahreza township located in Esfahan province using data envelopment analysis (DEA) technique was studied. In this study, data were obtained from 25 randomize active vegetable greenhouses from 60 greenhouses in Shahreza township and villages environs. The results showed that the highest and lowest consumed energy were related to fuel and water inputs with 47% and 1.2% respectively. The results of data envelopment analysis showed in CCR and BCC models 24% and 36% of farmers were efficient and the others were inefficient. Mean technical efficiency, net technical efficiency and scale efficiency were calculated as 90.37, 95.09 94.6 respectively. Also technical efficiency of inefficiency units in CCR model was 87% that shows13% of total energy input could be saved with upgrade efficiency in these units. In this research, total saved and unsaved energy related to fuel consumption.
Y. Ajabshirchi; M. Taki; R. Abdi; A. Ghobadifar; I. Ranjbar
Abstract
In this research energy efficiency for dry wheat production in three levels including 0.1 up to2, 2.1 up to 5 and over 5.1 hectares for the farming year 2008-2009 in Silakhor plain located in Borujerd and Dorud divisions of Lorestan province was studied using data envelopment analysis (DEA) technique. ...
Read More
In this research energy efficiency for dry wheat production in three levels including 0.1 up to2, 2.1 up to 5 and over 5.1 hectares for the farming year 2008-2009 in Silakhor plain located in Borujerd and Dorud divisions of Lorestan province was studied using data envelopment analysis (DEA) technique. The results showed that the input energy for seed, fertilizer and pesticides had the highest levels of energy consumption and the share of that in each studied level were 63.63, 56 and 54.07 percent respectively. The results of data envelopment analysis showed that the average of energy efficiency levels were 82, 78 and 68 percent, respectively. First level, that consumes more input energy than other two studied levels, had highest energy efficiency, because in this level output yield were more than other levels. Technical efficiency of inefficiency units in CRS model in three levels is 79%, 77% and 66% respectively. This issue indicates that 21, 23 and 34 of total energy input could be saved with upgrade efficiency in these units. All wrong using and also all share of total saved energy in three levels related to grain, fertilizer and pesticides and then fuel consumption.
