Loading…
Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional arable crop rotations – using a life cycle assessment approach
Many current organic arable agriculture systems are challenged by a dependency on imported livestock manure from conventional agriculture. At the same time organic agriculture aims at being climate friendly. A life cycle assessment is used in this paper to compare the carbon footprints of different...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of cleaner production 2014-02, Vol.64, p.609-618 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-4aff51b686831febf1e67a394f693edde99174eb14e07fdaa5a6f87db74e5cca3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-4aff51b686831febf1e67a394f693edde99174eb14e07fdaa5a6f87db74e5cca3 |
container_end_page | 618 |
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 609 |
container_title | Journal of cleaner production |
container_volume | 64 |
creator | Knudsen, Marie Trydeman Meyer-Aurich, Andreas Olesen, Jørgen E. Chirinda, Ngonidzashe Hermansen, John E. |
description | Many current organic arable agriculture systems are challenged by a dependency on imported livestock manure from conventional agriculture. At the same time organic agriculture aims at being climate friendly. A life cycle assessment is used in this paper to compare the carbon footprints of different organic arable crop rotations with different sources of N supply. Data from long-term field experiments at three different locations in Denmark were used to analyse three different organic cropping systems (‘Slurry’, ‘Biogas’ and ‘Mulching’), one conventional cropping system (‘Conventional’) and a “No input” system as reference systems. The ‘Slurry’ and ‘Conventional’ rotations received slurry and mineral fertilizer, respectively, whereas the ‘No input’ was unfertilized. The ‘Mulching’ and ‘Biogas’ rotations had one year of grass-clover instead of a faba bean crop. The grass-clover biomass was incorporated in the soil in the ‘Mulching’ rotation and removed and used for biogas production in the ‘Biogas’ rotation (and residues from biogas production were simulated to be returned to the field).
A method was suggested for allocating effects of fertility building crops in life cycle assessments. The results showed significantly lower carbon footprint of the crops from the ‘Biogas’ rotation (assuming that biogas replaces fossil gas) whereas the remaining crop rotations had comparable carbon footprints per kg cash crop. The study showed considerable contributions caused by the green manure crop (grass-clover) and highlights the importance of analysing the whole crop rotation and including soil carbon changes when estimating carbon footprints of organic crops especially where green manure crops are included.
•Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional crop rotations were assessed.•The contributions caused by the green manure crop were considerable.•Highlights the importance of analysing the whole crop rotation and to include soil carbon changes.•Carbon footprint of organic compared to conventional varied depending on production practice.•Indicates a potential for improving the carbon footprint of organic produce. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.009 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1500787243</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0959652613004708</els_id><sourcerecordid>1500787243</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-4aff51b686831febf1e67a394f693edde99174eb14e07fdaa5a6f87db74e5cca3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1qHDEQhUVwIGMnRwhoE8imO1L_SOqVMYPzAwZvkrWoVpccDT3SWNVjmF3ukBvmJNF4Bm-9Kqh6r17Vx9hHKWoppPqyqTduxl1OdSNkWwtdCzG8YStp9FBJbdQFW4mhHyrVN-oduyTaCCG10N2KHdaQxxS5T2nZ5RAX4slzl9OOuM9py1N-gBgchzhxl-ITxiWkCDOHDOOMz1Ke0wLHNvF_f_7yPYX4wIHPwZf5odzGgQiJtsXMYVcuBff7PXvrYSb8cK5X7NfX25_r79Xd_bcf65u7ynWtWaoOvO_lqIwyrfQ4eolKQzt0Xg0tThMOg9QdjrJDof0E0IPyRk9jafbOQXvFPp_2ltjHPdJit4EczjNETHuyshdCG910bZH2J2l5iiijtwXJFvLBSmGPqO3GnlHbI2ortC2oi-_TOQLIwewzRBfoxdyYtjFCH3XXJx2Wf58CZksuYHQ4hYxusVMKryT9B8_mm6c</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1500787243</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional arable crop rotations – using a life cycle assessment approach</title><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Knudsen, Marie Trydeman ; Meyer-Aurich, Andreas ; Olesen, Jørgen E. ; Chirinda, Ngonidzashe ; Hermansen, John E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Knudsen, Marie Trydeman ; Meyer-Aurich, Andreas ; Olesen, Jørgen E. ; Chirinda, Ngonidzashe ; Hermansen, John E.</creatorcontrib><description>Many current organic arable agriculture systems are challenged by a dependency on imported livestock manure from conventional agriculture. At the same time organic agriculture aims at being climate friendly. A life cycle assessment is used in this paper to compare the carbon footprints of different organic arable crop rotations with different sources of N supply. Data from long-term field experiments at three different locations in Denmark were used to analyse three different organic cropping systems (‘Slurry’, ‘Biogas’ and ‘Mulching’), one conventional cropping system (‘Conventional’) and a “No input” system as reference systems. The ‘Slurry’ and ‘Conventional’ rotations received slurry and mineral fertilizer, respectively, whereas the ‘No input’ was unfertilized. The ‘Mulching’ and ‘Biogas’ rotations had one year of grass-clover instead of a faba bean crop. The grass-clover biomass was incorporated in the soil in the ‘Mulching’ rotation and removed and used for biogas production in the ‘Biogas’ rotation (and residues from biogas production were simulated to be returned to the field).
A method was suggested for allocating effects of fertility building crops in life cycle assessments. The results showed significantly lower carbon footprint of the crops from the ‘Biogas’ rotation (assuming that biogas replaces fossil gas) whereas the remaining crop rotations had comparable carbon footprints per kg cash crop. The study showed considerable contributions caused by the green manure crop (grass-clover) and highlights the importance of analysing the whole crop rotation and including soil carbon changes when estimating carbon footprints of organic crops especially where green manure crops are included.
•Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional crop rotations were assessed.•The contributions caused by the green manure crop were considerable.•Highlights the importance of analysing the whole crop rotation and to include soil carbon changes.•Carbon footprint of organic compared to conventional varied depending on production practice.•Indicates a potential for improving the carbon footprint of organic produce.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0959-6526</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1786</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.009</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Agricultural and farming systems ; Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Applied ecology ; Biogas ; Biological and medical sciences ; Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife ; Conventional ; Crop rotations ; Cropping systems. Cultivation. Soil tillage ; Environment and sustainable development ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General agroecology. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development. Rural area planning. Landscaping ; General agronomy. Plant production ; Generalities. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development ; Generalities. Cropping systems and patterns ; Greenhouse gas emissions ; LCA ; Organic</subject><ispartof>Journal of cleaner production, 2014-02, Vol.64, p.609-618</ispartof><rights>2013 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-4aff51b686831febf1e67a394f693edde99174eb14e07fdaa5a6f87db74e5cca3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-4aff51b686831febf1e67a394f693edde99174eb14e07fdaa5a6f87db74e5cca3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=28328079$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Knudsen, Marie Trydeman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meyer-Aurich, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olesen, Jørgen E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chirinda, Ngonidzashe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hermansen, John E.</creatorcontrib><title>Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional arable crop rotations – using a life cycle assessment approach</title><title>Journal of cleaner production</title><description>Many current organic arable agriculture systems are challenged by a dependency on imported livestock manure from conventional agriculture. At the same time organic agriculture aims at being climate friendly. A life cycle assessment is used in this paper to compare the carbon footprints of different organic arable crop rotations with different sources of N supply. Data from long-term field experiments at three different locations in Denmark were used to analyse three different organic cropping systems (‘Slurry’, ‘Biogas’ and ‘Mulching’), one conventional cropping system (‘Conventional’) and a “No input” system as reference systems. The ‘Slurry’ and ‘Conventional’ rotations received slurry and mineral fertilizer, respectively, whereas the ‘No input’ was unfertilized. The ‘Mulching’ and ‘Biogas’ rotations had one year of grass-clover instead of a faba bean crop. The grass-clover biomass was incorporated in the soil in the ‘Mulching’ rotation and removed and used for biogas production in the ‘Biogas’ rotation (and residues from biogas production were simulated to be returned to the field).
A method was suggested for allocating effects of fertility building crops in life cycle assessments. The results showed significantly lower carbon footprint of the crops from the ‘Biogas’ rotation (assuming that biogas replaces fossil gas) whereas the remaining crop rotations had comparable carbon footprints per kg cash crop. The study showed considerable contributions caused by the green manure crop (grass-clover) and highlights the importance of analysing the whole crop rotation and including soil carbon changes when estimating carbon footprints of organic crops especially where green manure crops are included.
•Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional crop rotations were assessed.•The contributions caused by the green manure crop were considerable.•Highlights the importance of analysing the whole crop rotation and to include soil carbon changes.•Carbon footprint of organic compared to conventional varied depending on production practice.•Indicates a potential for improving the carbon footprint of organic produce.</description><subject>Agricultural and farming systems</subject><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</subject><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Biogas</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</subject><subject>Conventional</subject><subject>Crop rotations</subject><subject>Cropping systems. Cultivation. Soil tillage</subject><subject>Environment and sustainable development</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General agroecology. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development. Rural area planning. Landscaping</subject><subject>General agronomy. Plant production</subject><subject>Generalities. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development</subject><subject>Generalities. Cropping systems and patterns</subject><subject>Greenhouse gas emissions</subject><subject>LCA</subject><subject>Organic</subject><issn>0959-6526</issn><issn>1879-1786</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkE1qHDEQhUVwIGMnRwhoE8imO1L_SOqVMYPzAwZvkrWoVpccDT3SWNVjmF3ukBvmJNF4Bm-9Kqh6r17Vx9hHKWoppPqyqTduxl1OdSNkWwtdCzG8YStp9FBJbdQFW4mhHyrVN-oduyTaCCG10N2KHdaQxxS5T2nZ5RAX4slzl9OOuM9py1N-gBgchzhxl-ITxiWkCDOHDOOMz1Ke0wLHNvF_f_7yPYX4wIHPwZf5odzGgQiJtsXMYVcuBff7PXvrYSb8cK5X7NfX25_r79Xd_bcf65u7ynWtWaoOvO_lqIwyrfQ4eolKQzt0Xg0tThMOg9QdjrJDof0E0IPyRk9jafbOQXvFPp_2ltjHPdJit4EczjNETHuyshdCG910bZH2J2l5iiijtwXJFvLBSmGPqO3GnlHbI2ortC2oi-_TOQLIwewzRBfoxdyYtjFCH3XXJx2Wf58CZksuYHQ4hYxusVMKryT9B8_mm6c</recordid><startdate>20140201</startdate><enddate>20140201</enddate><creator>Knudsen, Marie Trydeman</creator><creator>Meyer-Aurich, Andreas</creator><creator>Olesen, Jørgen E.</creator><creator>Chirinda, Ngonidzashe</creator><creator>Hermansen, John E.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140201</creationdate><title>Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional arable crop rotations – using a life cycle assessment approach</title><author>Knudsen, Marie Trydeman ; Meyer-Aurich, Andreas ; Olesen, Jørgen E. ; Chirinda, Ngonidzashe ; Hermansen, John E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-4aff51b686831febf1e67a394f693edde99174eb14e07fdaa5a6f87db74e5cca3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Agricultural and farming systems</topic><topic>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</topic><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Biogas</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</topic><topic>Conventional</topic><topic>Crop rotations</topic><topic>Cropping systems. Cultivation. Soil tillage</topic><topic>Environment and sustainable development</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General agroecology. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development. Rural area planning. Landscaping</topic><topic>General agronomy. Plant production</topic><topic>Generalities. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development</topic><topic>Generalities. Cropping systems and patterns</topic><topic>Greenhouse gas emissions</topic><topic>LCA</topic><topic>Organic</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Knudsen, Marie Trydeman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meyer-Aurich, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olesen, Jørgen E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chirinda, Ngonidzashe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hermansen, John E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of cleaner production</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Knudsen, Marie Trydeman</au><au>Meyer-Aurich, Andreas</au><au>Olesen, Jørgen E.</au><au>Chirinda, Ngonidzashe</au><au>Hermansen, John E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional arable crop rotations – using a life cycle assessment approach</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cleaner production</jtitle><date>2014-02-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>64</volume><spage>609</spage><epage>618</epage><pages>609-618</pages><issn>0959-6526</issn><eissn>1879-1786</eissn><abstract>Many current organic arable agriculture systems are challenged by a dependency on imported livestock manure from conventional agriculture. At the same time organic agriculture aims at being climate friendly. A life cycle assessment is used in this paper to compare the carbon footprints of different organic arable crop rotations with different sources of N supply. Data from long-term field experiments at three different locations in Denmark were used to analyse three different organic cropping systems (‘Slurry’, ‘Biogas’ and ‘Mulching’), one conventional cropping system (‘Conventional’) and a “No input” system as reference systems. The ‘Slurry’ and ‘Conventional’ rotations received slurry and mineral fertilizer, respectively, whereas the ‘No input’ was unfertilized. The ‘Mulching’ and ‘Biogas’ rotations had one year of grass-clover instead of a faba bean crop. The grass-clover biomass was incorporated in the soil in the ‘Mulching’ rotation and removed and used for biogas production in the ‘Biogas’ rotation (and residues from biogas production were simulated to be returned to the field).
A method was suggested for allocating effects of fertility building crops in life cycle assessments. The results showed significantly lower carbon footprint of the crops from the ‘Biogas’ rotation (assuming that biogas replaces fossil gas) whereas the remaining crop rotations had comparable carbon footprints per kg cash crop. The study showed considerable contributions caused by the green manure crop (grass-clover) and highlights the importance of analysing the whole crop rotation and including soil carbon changes when estimating carbon footprints of organic crops especially where green manure crops are included.
•Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional crop rotations were assessed.•The contributions caused by the green manure crop were considerable.•Highlights the importance of analysing the whole crop rotation and to include soil carbon changes.•Carbon footprint of organic compared to conventional varied depending on production practice.•Indicates a potential for improving the carbon footprint of organic produce.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.009</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0959-6526 |
ispartof | Journal of cleaner production, 2014-02, Vol.64, p.609-618 |
issn | 0959-6526 1879-1786 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1500787243 |
source | Elsevier |
subjects | Agricultural and farming systems Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions Animal, plant and microbial ecology Applied ecology Biogas Biological and medical sciences Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife Conventional Crop rotations Cropping systems. Cultivation. Soil tillage Environment and sustainable development Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology General agroecology. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development. Rural area planning. Landscaping General agronomy. Plant production Generalities. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development Generalities. Cropping systems and patterns Greenhouse gas emissions LCA Organic |
title | Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional arable crop rotations – using a life cycle assessment approach |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T18%3A28%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Carbon%20footprints%20of%20crops%20from%20organic%20and%20conventional%20arable%20crop%20rotations%20%E2%80%93%20using%20a%20life%20cycle%20assessment%20approach&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cleaner%20production&rft.au=Knudsen,%20Marie%20Trydeman&rft.date=2014-02-01&rft.volume=64&rft.spage=609&rft.epage=618&rft.pages=609-618&rft.issn=0959-6526&rft.eissn=1879-1786&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1500787243%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-4aff51b686831febf1e67a394f693edde99174eb14e07fdaa5a6f87db74e5cca3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1500787243&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |