Back to Search Start Over

Carbon Footprint and Life-Cycle Costs of Maize Production in Conventional and Non-Inversion Tillage Systems.

Authors :
Holka, Małgorzata
Bieńkowski, Jerzy
Source :
Agronomy; Dec2020, Vol. 10 Issue 12, p1877, 1p
Publication Year :
2020

Abstract

Given the problem of climate change and the requirements laid down by the European Union in the field of gradual decarbonization of production, it is necessary to implement solutions of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions into agricultural practice. This research paper aimed to evaluate the carbon footprint and life-cycle costs of grain maize production in various tillage systems. The material for the analyses was data from 2015–2017 collected on 15 farms located in the Wielkopolska region (Poland) and growing maize for grain in three tillage systems: conventional, reduced, and no-tillage. The life-cycle assessment and life-cycle costing methodologies were applied to assess the GHG emissions and costs associated with the grain maize production in the stages from "cradle-to-farm gate", i.e., from obtaining raw materials and producing means for agricultural production, through the processes of maize cultivation to grain harvesting. The calculated values of the carbon footprint indicator for maize production in conventional, reduced, and no-tillage systems were 2347.4, 2353.4, and 1868.7 CO<subscript>2</subscript> eq. ha<superscript>−1</superscript>, respectively. The largest source of GHG emissions was the use of nitrogen fertilizers. Non-inversion tillage with cover crops and leaving a large amount of crop residues in the field increased the sequestration of organic carbon and contributed to a significant reduction of the carbon footprint in maize production. The conventional tillage system demonstrated the highest overall life-cycle costs per hectare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
20734395
Volume :
10
Issue :
12
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
Agronomy
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
147802895
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10121877