Cup plant, an alternative to conventional silage from a LCA perspective

被引:14
作者
Bernas, Jaroslav [1 ]
Bernasova, Tereza [1 ]
Gerstberger, Pedro [2 ]
Moudry, Jan [1 ]
Konvalina, Petr [1 ]
Moudry Jr, Jan Jr [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ South Bohemia, Fac Agr, Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic
[2] Univ Bayreuth, Dept Plant Ecol, Bayreuth, Bavaria, Germany
关键词
Agricultural LCA; Environmental aspects; Cup plant; Silage maize; Lucerne; Perennial cropping system; SILPHIUM-PERFOLIATUM L; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; HELIANTHUS-TUBEROSUS L; SOIL-EROSION; SUSTAINABLE INTENSIFICATION; BIOGAS PRODUCTION; RISK-ASSESSMENT; ENERGY CROPS; MAIZE; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1007/s11367-020-01858-x
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Purpose The growing awareness of the importance of biodiversity in agroecosystems in increasing and ensuring the supply of biomass has led to heightened interest from governments and farmers in alternative crops. This article assesses one such alternative crop, cup plant (Silphium perfoliatum L.), in terms of the environmental aspects of cultivation for forage production. Many studies have previously focused on cup plant, but so far, this plant has not been assessed using the life cycle assessment (LCA) method. Materials and methods This study compares the environmental load of cup plant with the most commonly grown silage crops in Central European conditions-maize-and with another common forage crop-lucerne using LCA. The system boundaries include all the processes from cradle to farm gate and both mass-based (1 ton of dry matter) and area-based (1 ha of monoculture) functional units were chosen for the purposes of this study. The results cover the impact categories related to the agricultural LCAs, and the ReCiPe Midpoint (H) characterization model was used for the data expression, by using SimaPro 9.0.0.40 software. Results This study compares the cultivation of cup plant with the most commonly grown silage crop in Central European conditions-maize-and with another common forage crop-lucerne. The paper shows the potential of cup plant to replace conventional silage (maize and lucerne silage mix) with certain environmental savings in selected impact categories, and importantly, while still maintaining the same performance levels in dairy farming as with conventional silage, as already reported in previous publications. For the Czech Republic alone, this would, in practice, mean replacing up to 50,000 ha of silage maize and reducing the environmental load by about tens of percent or more within the various impact categories and years of cultivation. Conclusion Cup plant can replace the yield and quality of silage maize, represents a lower environmental load per unit of production and unit of area and generally carries many other benefits. Thus, cup plant is a recommendable option for dairy farming. Given the recent experience and knowledge of the issue, the cup plant can be considered an effective alternative to conventional silage.
引用
收藏
页码:311 / 326
页数:16
相关论文
共 73 条
[11]   LCA applied to perennial cropping systems: a review focused on the farm stage [J].
Bessou, Cecile ;
Basset-Mens, Claudine ;
Tran, Thierry ;
Benoist, Anthony .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2013, 18 (02) :340-361
[12]   Adaptation to Climate Change: Evidence from US Agriculture [J].
Burke, Marshall ;
Emerick, Kyle .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC JOURNAL-ECONOMIC POLICY, 2016, 8 (03) :106-140
[13]   Sustainable intensification: What is its role in climate smart agriculture? [J].
Campbell, Bruce M. ;
Thornton, Philip ;
Zougmore, Robert ;
van Asten, Piet ;
Lipper, Leslie .
CURRENT OPINION IN ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY, 2014, 8 :39-43
[14]   Effects of total replacement of corn silage with sorghum silage on milk yield, composition, and quality [J].
Cattani, M. ;
Guzzo, N. ;
Mantovani, R. ;
Bailoni, L. .
Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2017, 8
[15]   Carbon sequestration potential in perennial bioenergy crops: the importance of organic matter inputs and its physical protection [J].
Chimento, Carlo ;
Almagro, Maria ;
Amaducci, Stefano .
GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY BIOENERGY, 2016, 8 (01) :111-121
[16]  
CZSO (The Czech Statistical Office), 2020, PRAG INT OP PROGR
[17]  
de Klein C., 2006, IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use IGES, V4, P1
[18]   European biomass resource potential and costs [J].
de Wit, Marc ;
Faaij, Andre .
BIOMASS & BIOENERGY, 2010, 34 (02) :188-202
[19]  
Dijkman T.J., 2018, Life cycle assessment: theory and practice, P723, DOI [10.1007/978-3-319-56475-329, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-56475-329, 10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_29]
[20]   Life cycle assessment of the supply and use of bioenergy: impact of regional factors on biogas production [J].
Dressler, Daniela ;
Loewen, Achim ;
Nelles, Michael .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2012, 17 (09) :1104-1115