• صفحه اصلی
  • ارزیابی اثرات محیط زیستی و ردپای آب گیاه زراعی سویا در مزارع اردبیل

اشتراک گذاری

آدرس مقاله


کد مقاله : JEST-1609-3011 (R1) بازدید : 156 صفحه: 175 - 184

10.22034/jest.2020.21113.3011

نوع مقاله: پژوهشی

ارزیابی اثرات محیط زیستی و ردپای آب گیاه زراعی سویا در مزارع اردبیل

محورهای موضوعی : ارزیابی پی آمدهای محیط زیستی

مجید دکامین 1 , مرتضی برمکی 2 , امین کانونی 3 , سیدرضا موسوی مشکینی 4

1 - استادیار گروه تولید و ژنتیک گیاهی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه ملایر، همدان، ایران *(مسوول مکاتبات).
2 - استادیار گروه زراعت دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل، ایران.
3 - استادیار گروه مهندسی آب، دانشکده علوم پایه، دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل، ایران.
4 - دکترای مدیریت محیط زیست، مدیر کل اداره حفاظت محیط زیست استان قم، قم، ایران.

تاریخ دریافت : 1399/04/31 تاریخ پذیرش : 1399/04/31 تاریخ انتشار : 1398/08/01

کلید واژه: بهره‌وری, اردبیل, بار محیط‌زیستی, سویا, مدیریت,

چکیده مقاله :

زمینه و هدف: محاسبه ارزیابی اثرات محیط‌زیستی در طی چرخه حیات یک محصول از اهمیت زیادی برخوردار است. از این رو هدف از این پژوهش ارزیابی اثرات محیط‌زیستی تولید گیاه روغنی سویا (Glycine max) در استان اردبیل است. روش بررسی: ارزیابی چرخه حیات به منظور ارزیابی مقایسه بارهای محیط‌زیستی، تقاضای آب سویا به کار گرفته شد. چهار طبقه اثر شامل پرغذایی، اسیدی شدن،گرمایش جهانی و اکسیداسیون فتوشیمیایی بررسی شد. سیاهه‌برداری در سال 1393 جمع‌آوری شد. یافته‌ها: نتایج نشان داد برای تولید یک تن سویا در شرایط اردبیل در طبقه اثرهای پرغذایی، اسیدی شدن، اکسیداسیون فتوشیمیایی و گرمایش جهانی به ترتیب 671/13 کیلوگرم معادل فسفات، 680/13 کیلوگرم SO2، 093/0 کیلوگرم C2H4، 128/857 کیلوگرم دی‌اکسید کربن به محیط منتشر می‌شود. این نتایج نشان می‌دهد اثرات محیط‌زیستی سویا عمدتاً از کودهای شیمیایی، کود دامی، سوخت دیزل و الکتریسته برای آبیاری حاصل می‌شود. بحث و نتیجه گیری: اثرات مرتبط با این نهاده‌ها مربوط به تولید و فرآوری آن‌ها قبل از استفاده در مزرعه هستند. نتایج نشان داد، بهره‌وری استفاده از نهاده برای تولید یک تن سویا پایین است. با افزایش تولید به ازای نهاده مصرفی می‌توان از بارهای محیط‌زیستی کاست.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Background and Objective: Calculating the environmental impact assessment during a product's life cycle is very important. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the environmental effects of soybean oil production (Glycine max) in Ardabil province. Method: Lifecycle assessment was conducted to compare environmental burdens of this crop. Four categories (eutrophication, acidification, global warming potential and photochemical oxidation) of environmental impacts were used to define in this method. Inventory phase was conducted in 1393. Findings: The production of one-ton soybean in Ardabil in eutrophication potential, acidification potential, photochemical oxidation and global warming are 13.671 kg PO4eq, 13.680 kg SO2eq, 0.093 kg C2H4 eq and 857.128 kg CO2eq respectively. Discussion and Conclusion: It was found that the effects from the three crops comes generally from manufactured fertilizer, manure, diesel combustion, agricultural practices, and electricity for irrigation. It can be said that the indirect effects associated with these inputs are related to producing and processing, which had negative impacts. Result indicated that input performance of production of one-ton soybean is low. With increasing crop yield per input can decrease environmental burdens.

منابع و مأخذ:


  1. Ruviaro, C.F., Gianezini, M., Brandão, F.S., Winck, C.A. and Dewes, H., 2012. Life cycle assessment in Brazilian agriculture facing worldwide trends. Journal of Cleaner Production, 28, pp.9-24.
    2.
  2. Thomassen, M.A., van Calker, K.J., Smits, M.C., Iepema, G.L. and de Boer, I.J., 2008. Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands. Agricultural systems, 96(1-3), pp.95-107.
    3.
  3. Brentrup, F., Küsters, J., Kuhlmann, H. and Lammel, J., 2001. Application of the Life Cycle Assessment methodology to agricultural production: an example of sugar beet production with different forms of nitrogen fertilisers. European Journal of Agronomy, 14(3), pp.221-233.
    4.
  4. Cellura, M., Longo, S. and Mistretta, M., 2012. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of protected crops: an Italian case study. Journal of cleaner production, 28, pp.56-62. Ingwersen, W.W., 2012. Life cycle assessment of fresh pineapple from Costa Rica. Journal of Cleaner Production, 35, pp.152-163.
    5.
  5. Rajaeifar, M.A., Akram, A., Ghobadian, B., Rafiee, S. and Heidari, M.D., 2014. Energy-economic life cycle assessment (LCA) and greenhouse gas emissions analysis of olive oil production in Iran. Energy, 66, pp.139-149. http://www.fao.org/countryprofiles/index/en/?iso3=IRN
    6.
  6. Organización Internacional de Normalización, 2006. ISO 14044: Environmental Management, Life Cycle Assessment, Requirements and Guidelines. ISO.
    7.
  7. Roy, P., Nei, D., Orikasa, T., Xu, Q., Okadome, H., Nakamura, N. and Shiina, T., 2009. A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food products. Journal of food engineering, 90(1), pp.1-10.
    8.
  8. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D. and Smith, M., 1998. Crop evapotranspiration-Guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. Fao, Rome, 300(9), p.D05109.
    9.
  9. Abeliotis, K., Detsis, V. and Pappia, C., 2013. Life cycle assessment of bean production in the Prespa National Park, Greece. Journal of Cleaner Production, 41, pp.89-96.
    10.
  10. Blengini, G.A. and Busto, M., 2009. The life cycle of rice: LCA of alternative agri-food chain management systems in Vercelli (Italy). Journal of environmental management, 90(3), pp.1512-1522.
    11.
  11. Khoshnevisan, B., Rafiee, S., Omid, M., Mousazadeh, H. and Clark, S., 2014. Environmental impact assessment of tomato and cucumber cultivation in greenhouses using life cycle assessment and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. Journal of Cleaner Production, 73, pp.183-192.
    12.
  12. Sahle, A. and Potting, J., 2013. Environmental life cycle assessment of Ethiopian rose cultivation. Science of the total environment, 443, pp.163-172.
    13.
  13. Robertson, G.P. and Vitousek, P.M., 2009. Nitrogen in agriculture: balancing the cost of an essential resource. Annual review of environment and resources, 34, pp.97-125.
    14.
  14. i Canals, L.M., Burnip, G.M. and Cowell, S.J., 2006. Evaluation of the environmental impacts of apple production using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): case study in New Zealand. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 114(2-4), pp.226-238.
    15.
  15. Mogensen, L., Hermansen, J.E., Halberg, N., Dalgaard, R., Vis, J.C. and Smith, B.G., 2009. Life cycle assessment across the food supply chain. Sustainability in the food industry, pp.115-144.
    16.
  16. Notarnicola, B.R.U.N.O., Tassielli, G. and Nicoletti, G.M., 2004. Environmental and economical analysis of the organic and conventional extra-virgin olive oil. New Medit., 3, pp.28-34.
    17.
  17. Engström, R., Wadeskog, A. and Finnveden, G., 2007. Environmental assessment of Swedish agriculture. Ecological Economics, 60(3), pp.550-563.
    18.
  18. Khoshnevisan, B., Rafiee, S. and Mousazadeh, H., 2013. Environmental impact assessment of open field and greenhouse strawberry production. European journal of Agronomy, 50, pp.29-37.
    19.
  19. Requena, J.S., Guimaraes, A.C., Alpera, S.Q., Gangas, E.R., Hernandez-Navarro, S., Gracia, L.N., Martin-Gil, J. and Cuesta, H.F., 2011. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of the biofuel production process from sunflower oil, rapeseed oil and soybean oil. Fuel Processing Technology, 92(2), pp.190-199.
    20.
  20. Castanheira, É.G., Grisoli, R., Coelho, S., da Silva, G.A. and Freire, F., 2015. Life-cycle assessment of soybean-based biodiesel in Europe: comparing grain, oil and biodiesel import from Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 102, pp.188-201.
    21.

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

_||_

  1. Ruviaro, C.F., Gianezini, M., Brandão, F.S., Winck, C.A. and Dewes, H., 2012. Life cycle assessment in Brazilian agriculture facing worldwide trends. Journal of Cleaner Production, 28, pp.9-24.
    2.
  2. Thomassen, M.A., van Calker, K.J., Smits, M.C., Iepema, G.L. and de Boer, I.J., 2008. Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands. Agricultural systems, 96(1-3), pp.95-107.
    3.
  3. Brentrup, F., Küsters, J., Kuhlmann, H. and Lammel, J., 2001. Application of the Life Cycle Assessment methodology to agricultural production: an example of sugar beet production with different forms of nitrogen fertilisers. European Journal of Agronomy, 14(3), pp.221-233.
    4.
  4. Cellura, M., Longo, S. and Mistretta, M., 2012. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of protected crops: an Italian case study. Journal of cleaner production, 28, pp.56-62. Ingwersen, W.W., 2012. Life cycle assessment of fresh pineapple from Costa Rica. Journal of Cleaner Production, 35, pp.152-163.
    5.
  5. Rajaeifar, M.A., Akram, A., Ghobadian, B., Rafiee, S. and Heidari, M.D., 2014. Energy-economic life cycle assessment (LCA) and greenhouse gas emissions analysis of olive oil production in Iran. Energy, 66, pp.139-149. http://www.fao.org/countryprofiles/index/en/?iso3=IRN
    6.
  6. Organización Internacional de Normalización, 2006. ISO 14044: Environmental Management, Life Cycle Assessment, Requirements and Guidelines. ISO.
    7.
  7. Roy, P., Nei, D., Orikasa, T., Xu, Q., Okadome, H., Nakamura, N. and Shiina, T., 2009. A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food products. Journal of food engineering, 90(1), pp.1-10.
    8.
  8. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D. and Smith, M., 1998. Crop evapotranspiration-Guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. Fao, Rome, 300(9), p.D05109.
    9.
  9. Abeliotis, K., Detsis, V. and Pappia, C., 2013. Life cycle assessment of bean production in the Prespa National Park, Greece. Journal of Cleaner Production, 41, pp.89-96.
    10.
  10. Blengini, G.A. and Busto, M., 2009. The life cycle of rice: LCA of alternative agri-food chain management systems in Vercelli (Italy). Journal of environmental management, 90(3), pp.1512-1522.
    11.
  11. Khoshnevisan, B., Rafiee, S., Omid, M., Mousazadeh, H. and Clark, S., 2014. Environmental impact assessment of tomato and cucumber cultivation in greenhouses using life cycle assessment and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. Journal of Cleaner Production, 73, pp.183-192.
    12.
  12. Sahle, A. and Potting, J., 2013. Environmental life cycle assessment of Ethiopian rose cultivation. Science of the total environment, 443, pp.163-172.
    13.
  13. Robertson, G.P. and Vitousek, P.M., 2009. Nitrogen in agriculture: balancing the cost of an essential resource. Annual review of environment and resources, 34, pp.97-125.
    14.
  14. i Canals, L.M., Burnip, G.M. and Cowell, S.J., 2006. Evaluation of the environmental impacts of apple production using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): case study in New Zealand. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 114(2-4), pp.226-238.
    15.
  15. Mogensen, L., Hermansen, J.E., Halberg, N., Dalgaard, R., Vis, J.C. and Smith, B.G., 2009. Life cycle assessment across the food supply chain. Sustainability in the food industry, pp.115-144.
    16.
  16. Notarnicola, B.R.U.N.O., Tassielli, G. and Nicoletti, G.M., 2004. Environmental and economical analysis of the organic and conventional extra-virgin olive oil. New Medit., 3, pp.28-34.
    17.
  17. Engström, R., Wadeskog, A. and Finnveden, G., 2007. Environmental assessment of Swedish agriculture. Ecological Economics, 60(3), pp.550-563.
    18.
  18. Khoshnevisan, B., Rafiee, S. and Mousazadeh, H., 2013. Environmental impact assessment of open field and greenhouse strawberry production. European journal of Agronomy, 50, pp.29-37.
    19.
  19. Requena, J.S., Guimaraes, A.C., Alpera, S.Q., Gangas, E.R., Hernandez-Navarro, S., Gracia, L.N., Martin-Gil, J. and Cuesta, H.F., 2011. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of the biofuel production process from sunflower oil, rapeseed oil and soybean oil. Fuel Processing Technology, 92(2), pp.190-199.
    20.
  20. Castanheira, É.G., Grisoli, R., Coelho, S., da Silva, G.A. and Freire, F., 2015. Life-cycle assessment of soybean-based biodiesel in Europe: comparing grain, oil and biodiesel import from Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 102, pp.188-201.
    21.

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

مقالات مرتبط

حقوق این وب‌سایت متعلق به سامانه مدیریت نشریات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی است.
حق نشر © 1403-1400

صفحه اصلی| عضویت/ ورود| درباره سند| تماس با ما|
[English] [العربية] [en] [ar]