=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper79
|storemode=property
|title=Environmental Impact in Process Tomato Integrated Production
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper79.pdf
|volume=Vol-1498
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/haicta/RodiasESNAB15
}}
==Environmental Impact in Process Tomato Integrated Production==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper79.pdf
Environmental Impact in Process Tomato Integrated
Production
Efthymios Rodias1, Eleftherios Evangelou2, Vagis Samathrakis3, Ourania Notta4,
Dimitrios Aidonis5, Dionysis Bochtis6
1
Technological Educational Institute of Central Macedonia, Department of Logistics, Katerini,
Greece, e-mail: efthimisr@yahoo.gr
2
Hellenic Agricultural Organization “DEMETER”, Institute of Soil Mapping and
Classification, e-mail: levagel@gmail.com
3
Department of Accounting & Finance, Alexander Technological Educational Institute of
Thessaloniki, Greece, e-mail: sbagis@acc.teithe.gr
4
Department of Agricultural Technology, Alexander Technological Educational Institute of
Thessaloniki, Greece, e-mail: ournotta@farm.teithe.gr
5
Technological Educational Institute of Central Macedonia, Department of Logistics, Katerini,
Greece
6
Aarhus University, Department of Engineering - Operations Management, Inge Lehmanns
Gade 10, 8000, Aarhus, Denmark, e-mail: dionysis.bochtis@eng.au.dk
Abstract. In modern agriculture, the energy that is consumed in every stage of
production can be divided in direct (e.g. fuels and lubricants) and indirect (e.g.
machinery embodied energy, materials and agrochemicals etc). This energy
consumption can be examined further in environmental level as environmental
impact. Environmental impact regards to the CO2 that is emitted during the
production process and contributes in a negative way to the environment. CO2
can be emitted directly by fuels and lubricants that are used from tractors or
other farm machinery and indirectly by any material application, machinery
embedded energy and many other field inputs. In this paper, the environmental
impact of industrial tomato production in kg of CO2 per kg of product is
analyzed and estimated. There is a range in the environmental impact in the 9
different case studies from 0.0606 to 0.1256 kg CO2/kg of tomato.
Keywords: energy, environment, CO2, carbon footprint.
1 Introduction
It is crucial before the establishment of a perspective crop to evaluate the energy
consumption and/or the environmental impact. The environmental impact can be
estimated either as carbon footprint or as CO2 emissions. Carbon emissions are
connected directly to the energy consumption. Barber suggested that there is a direct
relationship between energy and carbon content. Furthermore, analyses the main
carbon indicators that are involved in agriculture process from different inputs
(Barber A, 2004). Lal has estimated the carbon emission from different field
operations (Lal R., 2004).
699
It is important to evaluate crops regarding their carbon emissions and the
environmental impact. Karakaya et al. are assessed the carbon dioxide emission
during production of the fresh and the processed tomatoes (paste, peeled, diced, and
juiced) (Karakaya and Özilgen, 2011).
In this paper, an estimation of the carbon dioxide emissions in industrial tomato
integrated production process is examined, including both in-field and logistics
operations in 5 case studies. Furthermore, the main carbon inputs are determined and
assessed.
2 Materials and Methods
The main parameters-inputs to the examined system correspond to machinery,
materials and fuels. Regarding the operations that taken into account in the presented
system are the main operations implemented in the cycle farm-field, the in-field
operations and those in the cycle field-factory. As computational tool, MatLab
Mathworks© was used. A computational model was created to include and calculate
all the carbon inputs with high accuracy. The model based on literature data,
commercial sources and real farmers’ data. The operations that implemented can be
divided into the in-field operations and the logistics operations.
2.1 In-field operations
In-field operations can be divided depending on whether there is a material that is
held (e.g. fertilization) or not (e.g. disk-harrow). In both cases, the input carbon
elements that have to be estimated are the fuel and lubricants factor, the labor factor,
and the machinery embodied factor, while in the case of material handling operations
the material carbon factor has also to be estimated. The key factor for the former case
is the working time in the field under question while for the latter case the key factor
is the quantity of the material that is applied or placed in the field.
For each individual operation the estimation of the working time takes place. The
working time of a field operation includes the effective in-field operation time (the
time that a machine produce work) and the non-effective time (that includes times for
loading/unloading - in the case of the material-handling operations, machinery
adjustment and time that is allocated for headland turns). The relation between the
effective and non-effective time is described by the term of “time efficiency”, which
represents the ratio of the time a machine is effectively operating to the total time the
machine is committed to the operation (Hunt, 1995). Based on the time efficiency the
field capacity (ha/h) can be estimated by taking into account also is calculated by
using the operating speed (Km/h), the rated width of the implement (m), and a unit
conversion factor. For the calculation of operational capacity data from ASABE
standards for the field efficiency for each operation and the average operational
speed are used (ASAE 2003).
For the fuel consumption estimation the equation provided in ASABE standards
for the typical fuel consumption of an agricultural machine is used:
700
2.64 + 3.91 − 0.203 738 X + 173 (l/KW h) (where X is the ratio of equivalent PTO
power required by an operation to that maximum available from the PTO (ASAE
2003)). Using the fuel energy content (diesel for the particular case), the working
time, the tractor power and the fuel emissions factor, the fuel emissions input is
calculated for the particular field operation.
The lubricants consumption is estimated using the equation provided in ASABE
standards for typical agricultural machinery diesel engines: 0.00059 P + 0.02169
(l/h) (ASAE 2003). Using the appropriate lubricants energy content, the working
time, the power of the tractor and the lubricant emissions factor, the lubricants
emissions input is calculated for the particular field operation.
Labor factor is taken into account that does not contribute to the total emissions
calculation.
Embodied emissions factor regards the emissions that have been produced during
the whole production process of each machinery system, tractor and implement. This
factor, multiplied by each corresponding machinery weight, the total consumed
emissions for the construction, transportation and maintenance of each farm
implement’s whole lifetime (from ASABE standards) will be extracted and using the
working time the proportional embodied machinery emissions input for each field
operation is calculated.
In the case of field operations involving material handling, beyond the above
mentioned inputs, the material emission inputs (propagation means/ fertilizers/
agrochemicals) should be calculated also given their necessary quantity for each case
and the emissions factor for the material production.
2.2 Farm-field transportation
The transportation cycle farm-field-field is taken into account in every field
operation. The calculation of emissions produced for this transport varies if the
operation that is going to be implemented includes material application (fertilizer,
agrochemical, etc.) or not. In both cases the main inputs correspond to fuels,
lubricants and embodied energy even though the parameters that are taken into
account are different.
For material operations, in fuels emissions input estimation contribute the fuel
energy content, the fuel consumption/trip, the number of trips, the wagon maximum
volume (in case of planting), the tanker maximum weight (in case of fertilization and
agrochemicals spreading) and the fuel emissions factor. In lubricants energy input
estimation, the lubricant energy content, the tractor power, the number of trips, the
distance farm-field, the average road speed are taken into account and the lubricant
emissions factor. In embodied energy input contribute the embodied energy of tractor
and wagon/tanker, their estimated lifetime, their weights, the number of trips, the
distance farm-field, the average road speed and the embodied emissions factors.
On the other hand, regarding farm-to-field logistics operations that correspond to
only machinery transportation, only one return trip per operation is taken into
account in the cycle farm-field-farm and there is no material emissions input.
701
2.3 Field-Factory transportation
This transport regards the energy inputs during the transport of the harvested
product from field to storage-processing facilities. In fuels emissions input
calculation are taken into account the fuel energy content, the factor X, the tractor
power, the in-field capacity of harvesting, the field area, the fuel consumption per
trip, the number of trips the wagon full volume and the fuel emissions factor.
Lubricants energy input calculation depends on the lubricant energy content, the
tractor power, the in-field capacity of harvesting, the field area, the number of trips,
the cycle time, the time needed to fill a wagon and the lubricant emissions factor.
Regarding the embodied emissions inputs calculation is based on the embodied
energy of tractor and wagon, their estimated lifetime, their weights, the cycle time,
the time needed to fill a wagon, the in-field capacity of harvesting, the field area and
the embodied emissions factor.
3 Results
Five case studies of industrial tomato farmers from Thessaly area in a whole
production period were selected. The main figures of each case studies are shown in
Table 1.
Table 1. Main figures in 5 case studies
Emissions
Distance Distance
Rate (kg
Area (ha) Farm-Field Field-Factory
CO2/kg
(km) (km)
product)
1 6.83 4 43.5 0.0606
2 3.24 4 57.1 0.0926
3 3.00 4.4 84.8 0.0910
4 2.48 6 14.3 0.0995
5 1.65 4.5 78.9 0.1256
Each field operation that is implemented from every farmer is examined and
analyzed. It’s taken into account that tomato is planted in small seedlings. The
system boundary determined from the moment that tomato plants are planted until
the final tomato product will be harvested and transported to the processing factory.
In Fig. 1 the total emissions consumption for the whole production process in 5
case studies is presented.
702
4
x 10
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1 2 3 4 5
Fig. 1. Total emissions in kg CO2 per ha for the 5 fields regarding the whole production
process
In Fig. 2 the emissions produced for the different field operations in case study 1
is shown.
Ploughing - 2%
Irrigation - 0.01%
Garret application - 1%
Disk-harrow - 0.4%
Agrochemicals application - 4%
Fertilization - 8%
Planting - 5%
Transport - 73%
Harvesting - 7%
Fig. 2. Emissions per field operation in case study 1
703
4 Discussion
In this paper the assessment of CO2 emissions produced during a whole
production period in industrial integrated tomato fields was presented. Every field
operation was analyzed under specific mathematical models in order that these field
systems will be optimized in future. Finally, the total produced emissions per kg of
produced product were extracted.
These results can be used in a wider research in emissions rate assessment for the
total supply chain production - transport - industrial tomato processing - transport.
Acknowledgments. This research has been co-financed by the European Union
(European Social Fund – ESF) and Greek national funds through the Operational
Program "Education and Lifelong Learning" of the National Strategic Reference
Framework (NSRF) - Research Funding Program: THALES. Investing in knowledge
society through the European Social Fund.
References
1. Barber, Andrew. Seven Case Study Farms: Total Energy & Carbon Indicators for
New Zealand Arable & Outdoor Vegetable Production. AgriLINK New Zealand
Ltd, 2004.
2. Hunt, D. 1995. Farm Power and Machinery Management, 9th Ed. Ames, Iowa:
Iowa State University Press.
3. ASAE, D497.4. Agricultural machinery management data. American Society of
Agricultural and Biological Engineers, MI, USA: ASAE STANDARD 2003,
2003, 373-380.
4. Karakaya Ahmet and Mustafa Ozilgen. Energy utilization and carbon dioxide
emission in the fresh, paste, whole-peeled, diced, and juiced tomato production
processes. Energy, 2011, 5101-5110.
704