Evaluation of agricultural systems across time and spatial scales. An extended LCA approach. Amalia...

Evaluation of agricultural systems

across time and spatial scales. An

extended LCA approach.

Amalia Zucaro, Silvio Viglia and Sergio Ulgiati

IntroductionIntroduction

In times of depletion of fossil fuels and

minerals reservoirs, agriculture is a potential

source of food, fibers, energy, chemicals,

materials, jobs and landscape protection

(multifunctional role).

Problems and Challenges

1. Introduction

Focus is placed on agricultural systems in

order to implement opportunities and

synergies and suggest different scenarios at

different scales, from local to regional and

national.

The concept of multifunctionality expresses

the inescapable link of roles and functions

of agriculture with social, economic and

environmental aspects.

Materials and MethodsMaterials and Methods

Life Cycle Assessment- LCA

2. Materials and

Methods

LCA - Life Cycle Assessment

Processes &

Products

Processes, Products,

&Complex Systems

Extended LCA: SUMMA SUstainability Multimethod Multiscale Approach

2. Materials and

Methods

SYSTEM BOUNDARY

SUstainability Multimethod Multiscale Approach

SUstainability Multimethod Multiscale Approach

Case studies

Urban System

Agricultural System

[. . .]

Catalonia

Finland

Forestry

Italy

Scotland

Lao Ulgiati et al.,

2010“Material, energy and

environmental performance of technological and socialsystems under a Life Cycle

Assessment perspective” Ecological Modelling.

SUMMA Application: SMILE project

3. Case studies

The Italian agricultural sector across time and hierarchical levels:Country-Region-FarmCountry-Region-Farm

(from 1985 to 2006)

The Italian agricultural sector across time and hierarchical levels:Country-Region-FarmCountry-Region-Farm

(from 1985 to 2006)

3. Case studies

Italian case study

3. Case studies

System diagram at National scales

3. Case studies

System diagram of agricultural sector

3. Case studies

System diagram of Farm

3. Case studies

Data collection: National scale Flows Unit 1985 1993 2002 2006

Rainfall g/yr 1.19E+17 9.71E+16 1.09E+17 1.03E+17Total land cropped ha/yr 1.70E+07 1.50E+07 1.45E+07 1.37E+07Fertilizers (N + PO4 + K2O) g/yr 1.96E+12 1.98E+12 1.60E+12 1.48E+12

Nitrogen (N) g/yr 1.01E+12 9.45E+11 8.51E+11 8.27E+11Phosphate (PO4) g/yr 6.10E+11 6.39E+11 4.27E+11 3.61E+11Potassium (K2O) g/yr 3.40E+11 3.91E+11 3.19E+11 2.94E+11

Electricity J/yr 1.18E+16 1.66E+16 1.76E+16 1.98E+16Water for irrigation g/yr 7.89E+15 4.64E+15 3.41E+15 2.35E+15Liquid fuels J/yr 7.92E+16 1.04E+17 8.46E+16 9.60E+16Machinery kg/yr 2.58E+08 2.32E+08 2.25E+08 2.17E+08Direct Labor hours/yr 2.19E+09 2.00E+09 1.88E+09 1.75E+09Direct Labor €/yr 4.58E+09 8.31E+09 1.61E+10 1.75E+10Indirect labor (services) €/yr 3.43E+09 5.54E+09 6.46E+09 8.11E+09Products Mass of agricultural production (dry matter) g d. m/yr 1.25E+14 1.12E+14 1.03E+14 9.63E+13Energy content of agricultural production J/yr 2.02E+18 1.81E+18 1.66E+18 1.55E+18Economic value of agricultural production €/yr 1.85E+10 2.26E+10 2.73E+10 2.53E+10Agricultural residues t d.m./yr 7.81E+06 7.01E+06 6.42E+06 6.02E+06

3. Case studies

Data collection: Regional scaleFlows Unit 1985 1993 2002 2006

Rainfall g/yr 7.59E+15 5.56E+15 5.17E+15 4.88E+15Total land cropped ha/yr 9.49E+05 7.42E+05 6.15E+05 6.03E+05Fertilizers (N + PO4 + K2O), TOTAL g/yr 9.36E+10 7.80E+10 8.94E+10 7.29E+10

Nitrogen (N) g/yr 5.95E+10 4.41E+10 5.25E+10 4.25E+10Phosphate (PO4) g/yr 2.53E+10 2.38E+10 2.53E+10 2.01E+10Potassium (K2O) g/yr 8.83E+09 1.01E+10 1.17E+10 1.03E+10

Electricity J/yr 4.61E+14 7.49E+14 7.99E+14 8.87E+14Water for irrigation g/yr 4.42E+14 2.30E+14 1.53E+14 1.04E+14Liquid fuels J/yr 4.10E+15 5.37E+15 5.73E+15 6.74E+15Machinery kg/yr 1.42E+07 1.15E+07 8.94E+06 9.07E+06Direct Labor hours/yr 1.46E+08 1.11E+08 8.93E+07 8.10E+07Direct Labor €/yr 3.07E+08 4.61E+08 7.68E+08 8.10E+08Indirect labor (services) €/yr 1.99E+08 5.09E+08 3.20E+08 4.26E+08Products Mass of agricultural production (dry matter) g d.m./yr 1.19E+13 1.30E+13 5.27E+12 5.09E+12Energy content of agricultural production J/yr 1.98E+17 2.16E+17 8.54E+16 7.99E+16Economic value of agricultural production €/yr 1.53E+09 1.72E+09 2.46E+09 2.22E+09Agricultural residues t d.m.//yr 7.44E+05 8.13E+05 3.30E+05 3.18E+05

3. Case studies

Data collection: Local scale Unit Lemon Farm Olive Farm Grape Farm

Rainfall g/yr 9.11E+09 6.67E+09 8.54E+09Total land cropped ha/yr 1.00E+00 1.00E+00 1.00E+00Fertilizers (N + PO4 + K2O), TOTAL g/yr 1.98E+05 1.40E+05 1.85E+05

Nitrogen (N) g/yr 8.00E+04 1.40E+05 7.50E+04Phosphate (PO4) g/yr 4.50E+04 0.00E+00 5.50E+04Potassium (K2O) g/yr 7.25E+04 0.00E+00 5.50E+04

Electricity J/yr 1.33E+09 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Water for irrigation g/yr 1.31E+09 2.00E+06 0.00E+00Liquid fuels J/yr 6.02E+09 6.19E+09 7.34E+09Machinery kg/yr 1.46E+04 2.55E+04 1.50E+04Direct Labor hours/yr 7.00E+02 6.56E+02 7.57E+02Direct Labor €/yr 7.00E+03 6.56E+03 7.57E+03Indirect Labor (services) €/yr 4.18E+03 1.33E+03 1.78E+03Products Mass of agricultural production (dry matter) g dry matter/yr 3.15E+06 2.32E+06 2.96E+06Energy content of agricultural production J/yr 1.38E+10 5.94E+10 3.87E+10Economic value of agricultural production €/yr 1.65E+04 3.50E+03 3.60E+03Agricultural residues t dry matter/yr 1.80E+00 3.60E+00 1.48E+00

Year 2006

3. Case studies

Data comparison: National-Regional-LocalFlows Unit Italia Campania Lemon Olive Grape

Rainfall g/yr 7.50E+09 8.10E+09 9.11E+09 6.67E+09 8.54E+09Total land cropped ha/yr 1.00E+00 1.00E+00 1.00E+00 1.00E+00 1.00E+00Fertilizers (N + PO4 + K2O), TOTAL g/yr 1.08E+05 1.21E+05 1.98E+05 1.40E+05 1.85E+05

Nitrogen (N) g/yr 6.03E+04 7.05E+04 8.00E+04 1.40E+05 7.50E+04Phosphate (PO4) g/yr 2.63E+04 3.34E+04 4.50E+04 0.00E+00 5.50E+04Potassium (K2O) g/yr 2.14E+04 1.71E+04 7.25E+04 0.00E+00 5.50E+04

Electricity J/yr 1.45E+09 1.47E+09 1.33E+09 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Water for irrigation g/yr 1.72E+08 1.73E+08 1.31E+09 2.00E+06 0.00E+00Liquid fuels J/yr 7.00E+09 1.12E+10 6.02E+09 6.19E+09 7.34E+09Machinery kg/yr 1.58E+01 1.46E+01 1.46E+04 2.55E+04 1.50E+04Direct Labor hours/yr 1.28E+02 1.34E+02 7.00E+02 6.56E+02 7.57E+02Direct Labor €/yr 1.28E+03 1.34E+03 7.00E+03 6.56E+03 7.57E+03Indirect labor (services) €/yr 5.92E+02 7.07E+02 4.18E+03 1.33E+03 1.78E+03Products Mass of agricultural production (dry matter) g d.m./yr 7.03E+06 8.45E+06 3.15E+06 2.32E+06 2.96E+06Energy content of agricultural production J/yr 1.14E+11 1.33E+11 1.38E+10 5.94E+10 3.87E+10Economic value of agricultural production €/yr 1.85E+03 3.68E+03 1.65E+04 3.50E+03 3.60E+03Agricultural residues t d.m.//yr 4.39E-01 5.28E-01 1.80E+00 3.60E+00 1.48E+00

Year 2006

3. Case studies

Results & Discussion

Results and Performance IndicatorsItaly: National case study

4. Results and

Discussion

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

MIabiot per unit of mass (g/gd.m.)

GER per unit of mass (J/g d.m.)

Oil equivalent intensity per unit mass (g/g d.m.)

1/EROI

Specific emergy (with L&S) (seJ/g d.m.)

1/EYR

ELR (with L&S)

Global warming per unit mass (CO2-equiv, g/gd.m.)

Acidification per unit mass (SO2-equiv, g/gd.m.)

1985 1993 2002 2006National scale over time

Results and Performance Indicators

4. Results and

Discussion

Results and Performance IndicatorsRegional scale over time

4. Results and

Discussion

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

MIabiot per unit mass (g/gd.m.)

Miwater per unit mass (g/gd.m.)

1/EYR

ELR

Specific emergy (seJ/ gd.m.)

GER per unit mass (J/ gd.m.)

Oil equivalent intensity per unit mass (g/g d.m.)

1/EROI

Global warming per unit mass (CO2-equiv, g/gd.m.)


1985 1993 2002 2006

Comparison across

scales

Results and Performance Indicators

4. Results and

Discussion

-1.50-1.00-0.500.000.501.001.502.00

MIabiot per unit mass (g/gd.m.)

Miwater per unit mass (g/gd.m.)

GER per unit mass (J/g d.m.)

1/EROI

Specific emergy (seJ/g d.m.)

1/EYR

ELR

Global warming per unit mass(CO2-equiv, g/gd.m.)


Italy Campania Lemon Olive Winegard

Synergies

SUMMA MSI ASEM ASAInvesti-gatedSystem

ScenariosPerformanceparameters

Cross-scaleconstraints

Environmental stress

Economic production

Social welfareA

B


Economic production

Social welfareA

BB

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

% o

f 198

0 D

E

DE

DM

GRbPRb(GDP/POP)

PRb(POP)

DE





Economic production

Social welfareA

B


Economic production

Social welfareA

BB

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

% o

f 198

0 D

E

DE

DM

GRbPRb(GDP/POP)

PRb(POP)

DE





Economic production

Social welfareA

B


Economic production

Social welfareA

BB

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

% o

f 198

0 D

E

DE

DM

GRbPRb(GDP/POP)

PRb(POP)

DE





Economic production

Social welfareA

B


Economic production

Social welfareA

BB

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

% o

f 198

0 D

E

DE

DM

GRbPRb(GDP/POP)

PRb(POP)

DE

DECOIN Toolkit

ITALYITALYLevel Level n+2n+2

Level Level n+1n+1

Level Level nn

Level Level n-1 n-1

Other Sectors Other Sectors in Italyin Italy

Agricultural Agricultural Sector in ItalySector in Italy

Other Other Agricultural Agricultural

AreasAreas

Agricultural Agricultural Sector in CampaniaSector in Campania

OlivesOlives VineyarVineyardd

LemonsLemonsOther Other CropsCrops

Integration SUMMA - MuSIASEM(Multi-Scale Integrated Analysis Societal Ecosystem Metabolism)

5. Synergies

Agricultural sector year 2006

€

MJTETGDP

=

TETTHA

GDPTHA

Campania (regional scale)= 6.28 MJ/€

Campania = 186 MJ/hr

Campania = 27 €/hr

€

MJTETGDP

=

TETTHA

GDPTHA

Italy (National scale) = 10.48 MJ/€

Italy = 152 MJ/hr

Italy = 14 €/hr

5. Synergies

€

MJTETGDP

=

TETTHA

GDPTHA

Lemon (local scale) = 3.06 MJ/€

Lemon = 72 MJ/hr

Lemon= 24 €/hr

Agricultural sector year 2006

€

MJTETGDP

=

TETTHA

GDPTHA

Olive (local scale) = 7.76 MJ/€

Olive = 41 MJ/hr

Olive = 5 €/hr

€

MJTETGDP

=

TETTHA

GDPTHA

Grape (local scale) = 8.69 MJ/€

Grape = 41 MJ/hr

Grape = 5 €/hr

5. Synergies

Integration SUMMA-ASA (Advanced Sustainability Analysis)

Decomposition

CO2 emissions are determined by

CO2 intensity of the economy (CO2/GDP) economic activity (GDP)

GDPGDP

COCO 2

2

5. Synergies

ASA decomposition ASA decomposition can be

deepened

TPES is primary energy supply

FEC is final energy

consumption

CO2/TPES is CO2 intensity of

primary energy use

TPES/FEC is intensity of

energy system

FEC/GDP is energy intensity

of production

GDPGDP

COCO 2

2

GDPGDP

TPES

TPES

COCO 2

2

GDPGDP

FEC

FEC

TPES

TPES

COCO 2

2

POPPOP

GDP

GDP

FEC

FEC

TPES

TPES

COCO 2

2

5. Synergies

AAAA

labor

labor

GDP

GDP

U

U

R

R

NFNF

)()(

Change in nonrenewable emergy in agricultural sector of Campania as % of 1985 value

29,8

58,6

97,4

-62,5

-19,8

-35,0

2,6 1,2

41,4

95,3

64,0

-26,3

-54,3-62,8

4,310,9

39,2

-70,2

-32,0

-11,2

38,0

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1993

2002

2006

%

F+N / R

R / U

U / GDP

GDP / labor

labor / AA

AA

Total effect onnonrenewable emergy

ASA decomposition of emergy indicators from Campania region

6. Synergies

Conclusion

SUMMAry of results The conventional LCA approach was improved (SUMMA) for

Complex Systems assessment (firms, farms, production

sectors, economies)

Focus can be placed on different steps, time & spatial

scales, and development levels

Quantitative and qualitative performance indicators

are designed, as a basis for policy choices

Identification of bottlenecks and limiting factors is

made easier

Integration with MuSIASEM and ASA allows societal

constraints investigation, identification of drivers

of change, and finally allows alternative scenario

designs.

6. Conclusion

Thank you for your attention!

[email protected]

Evaluation of agricultural systems across time and spatial scales. An extended LCA approach. Amalia...

Documents

Transcript of Evaluation of agricultural systems across time and spatial scales. An extended LCA approach. Amalia...