A comparison of energy use in conventional and integrated arable farming systems in the UK

• Published in: Agriculture, ecosystems & environment ecosystems & environment, 2003-07, Vol.97 (1), p.241-253
• Main Authors: Bailey, A.P., Basford, W.D., Penlington, N., Park, J.R., Keatinge, J.D.H., Rehman, T., Tranter, R.B., Yates, C.M.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions; Biological and medical sciences; Efficiency; Energy use; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; General agroecology; General agroecology. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development. Rural area planning. Landscaping; General agronomy. Plant production; Generalities. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development; Integrated arable farming systems
• ISSN: 0167-8809; 1873-2305
• DOI: 10.1016/S0167-8809(03)00115-4

The LINK Integrated Farming Systems (LINK-IFS) Project (1992–1997) was set up to compare conventional and integrated arable farming systems (IAFS), concentrating on practical feasibility and economic viability, but also taking into account the level of inputs used and environmental impact. As part of this, an examination into energy use within the two systems was also undertaken. This paper presents the results from that analysis. The data used is from the six sites within the LINK-IFS Project, spread through the arable production areas of England and from the one site in Scotland, covering the 5 years of the project. The comparison of the energy used is based on the equipment and inputs used to produce 1 kg of each crop within the conventional and integrated rotations, and thereby the overall energy used for each system. The results suggest that, in terms of total energy used, the integrated system appears to be the most efficient. However, in terms of energy efficiency, energy use per kilogram of output, the results are less conclusive.