| |
|
|
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Las Brujas. |
|
Fecha : |
22/04/2016 |
|
Actualizado : |
22/04/2016 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Informes Agroclimáticos |
|
Autor : |
GIMÉNEZ, A.; CASTAÑO, J.; CAL, A.; TISCORNIA, G.; SCHIAVI, C. |
|
Afiliación : |
AGUSTIN EDUARDO GIMÉNEZ FUREST, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; JOSE PEDRO CASTAÑO SANCHEZ, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; ADRIAN TABARE CAL ALVAREZ, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; GUADALUPE TISCORNIA TOSAR, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; CARLOS IGNACIO SCHIAVI RAMPELBERG, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay. |
|
Título : |
Informe Agroclimático 2016 - Situación a Enero. |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2016 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Montevideo (Uruguay): INIA, 2016 |
|
Páginas : |
4 p. |
|
Idioma : |
Español |
|
Palabras claves : |
AGROCLIMA; AGROCLIMATOLOGÍA; BOLETIN AGROCLIMÁTICO; CARACTERIZACIÓN AGROCLIMÁTICA; DIRECCION VIENTO; ESTACIONES AGROMETEOROLOGICAS; ESTACIONES AUTOMATICAS; ESTACIONES INIA; ESTADO DEL TIEMPO; ESTRÉS HÍDRICO; GRAFICAS AGROCLIMATICOS; GRAS; HELIOFANOGRAFO; INFORMACION SATELITAL; INUNDACIONES; LLUVIAS DIARIAS; MAXIMA; MEDIA; MINIMA; PANEL SOLAR; PERSPECTIVAS CLIMATICAS; PLUVIOMETRO; PRECIPITACION NACIONAL; PREVENCION HELADAS; PRONOSTICO; SENSOR; SIMETRICO; TANQUE A; TERMOCUPLAS; TERMOHIDROGRAFO; VARIABLES AGROCLIMATICAS; VELETA. |
|
Thesagro : |
AGROCLIMATOLOGIA; CAMBIO CLIMATICO; CLIMA; CLIMATOLOGIA; ESTACIONES METEOROLOGICAS; ESTRES HIDRICO; EVAPORACION; EVAPOTRANSPIRACION; HUMEDAD; HUMEDAD RELATIVA; LLUVIA; METEOROLOGIA; PERSPECTIVAS; PLUVIOMETROS; PRONOSTICO DEL TIEMPO; SENSORES; SISTEMAS; SISTEMAS DE INFORMACION; SUELO; TEMPERATURA; TERMOMETROS. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
P40 Meteorología y climatología |
|
URL : |
http://www.ainfo.inia.uy/digital/bitstream/item/5694/1/Informe-agroclimatico-INIA-GRAS-Enero-de-2016.pdf
|
|
Marc : |
LEADER 02065nam a2200793 a 4500
001 1054710
005 2016-04-22
008 2016 bl uuuu u0uu1 u #d
100 1 $aGIMÉNEZ, A.
245 $aInforme Agroclimático 2016 - Situación a Enero.$h[electronic resource]
260 $aMontevideo (Uruguay): INIA$c2016
300 $a4 p.
650 $aAGROCLIMATOLOGIA
650 $aCAMBIO CLIMATICO
650 $aCLIMA
650 $aCLIMATOLOGIA
650 $aESTACIONES METEOROLOGICAS
650 $aESTRES HIDRICO
650 $aEVAPORACION
650 $aEVAPOTRANSPIRACION
650 $aHUMEDAD
650 $aHUMEDAD RELATIVA
650 $aLLUVIA
650 $aMETEOROLOGIA
650 $aPERSPECTIVAS
650 $aPLUVIOMETROS
650 $aPRONOSTICO DEL TIEMPO
650 $aSENSORES
650 $aSISTEMAS
650 $aSISTEMAS DE INFORMACION
650 $aSUELO
650 $aTEMPERATURA
650 $aTERMOMETROS
653 $aAGROCLIMA
653 $aAGROCLIMATOLOGÍA
653 $aBOLETIN AGROCLIMÁTICO
653 $aCARACTERIZACIÓN AGROCLIMÁTICA
653 $aDIRECCION VIENTO
653 $aESTACIONES AGROMETEOROLOGICAS
653 $aESTACIONES AUTOMATICAS
653 $aESTACIONES INIA
653 $aESTADO DEL TIEMPO
653 $aESTRÉS HÍDRICO
653 $aGRAFICAS AGROCLIMATICOS
653 $aGRAS
653 $aHELIOFANOGRAFO
653 $aINFORMACION SATELITAL
653 $aINUNDACIONES
653 $aLLUVIAS DIARIAS
653 $aMAXIMA
653 $aMEDIA
653 $aMINIMA
653 $aPANEL SOLAR
653 $aPERSPECTIVAS CLIMATICAS
653 $aPLUVIOMETRO
653 $aPRECIPITACION NACIONAL
653 $aPREVENCION HELADAS
653 $aPRONOSTICO
653 $aSENSOR
653 $aSIMETRICO
653 $aTANQUE A
653 $aTERMOCUPLAS
653 $aTERMOHIDROGRAFO
653 $aVARIABLES AGROCLIMATICAS
653 $aVELETA
700 1 $aCASTAÑO, J.
700 1 $aCAL, A.
700 1 $aTISCORNIA, G.
700 1 $aSCHIAVI, C.
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA Las Brujas (LB) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
|
|
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Las Brujas. |
|
Fecha actual : |
21/06/2023 |
|
Actualizado : |
21/06/2023 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Artículos en Revistas Indexadas Internacionales |
|
Circulación / Nivel : |
Internacional - -- |
|
Autor : |
BUSTAMANTE-SILVEIRA, M.; SIRI-PRIETO, G.; MAZZILLI, R.; CARRASCO-LETELIER, L. |
|
Afiliación : |
MAURICIO BUSTAMANTE-SILVEIRA, Estación Experimental Mario Cassinoni (EEMAC), Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de la República, Ruta 3 Km 363, Paysandú, Uruguay; GUILLERMO SIRI?PRIETO, Estación Experimental Mario Cassinoni (EEMAC), Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de la República, Ruta 3 Km 363, Paysandú, Uruguay; SEBASTIÁN R. MAZZILLI, Estación Experimental Mario Cassinoni (EEMAC), Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de la República, Ruta 3 Km 363, Paysandú, Uruguay; LEONIDAS CARRASCO-LETELIER, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay. |
|
Título : |
Carbon footprint of four bioethanol cropping systems in a temperate region. [preprint article]. |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2023 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4484823 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4484823 |
|
Páginas : |
46 p. |
|
DOI : |
10.2139/ssrn.4484823 |
|
Idioma : |
Inglés |
|
Notas : |
Article history: Posted 19 Jun 2023. -- This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4484823. Preprint submitted to Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, May 20, 2023. -- Corresponding author: Mauricio Bustamante-Silveira, mauriciobs_22@hotmail.com . -- |
|
Contenido : |
ABSTRACT.- The production of ethanol from biomass pursuant to the EU Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) requires an estimation of the levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from biofuels to assess the emissions savings in comparison to fossil fuels. Within this framework, the carbon footprint was estimated for four bioethanol cropping systems: a maize-wheat-sorghum rotation without the harvest of crop residues (MWS), a maize-wheat-sorghum rotation with harvested crop residues (MWS-R), switchgrass (Sw), and continuous sweet sorghum (Ss). The estimation followed a life-cycle analysis strategy, considering the relevant inputs and processes for the emission of GHG from the crop management phases of soil preparation, planting, post-planting operations, harvesting, and transport. The carbon footprint varied between 0.04 and 3.68 kgCO2-eqL-1ethanol. Switchgrass had the smallest footprint and the highest ethanol yield per hectare (4,263 L [ha yr]-1). However, for annual systems, Ss had the highest emissions (3.68 kg CO2-eq L ethanol-1), 2 and 4 times larger than MWS-R and MWS systems. The soil preparation, planting, and post-planting emissions were 80% of the mean emissions in the annual cropping systems. By comparison, in Sw, 60% of the total GHG emissions came from post-planting and 46% from fertilizers. In Sw, soil erosion by water accounted for 35% of the soil organic carbon lost in the MWS-R and Ss systems. In addition, Sw was the system with the most significant carbon sequestration (1,957 kg CO2-eq [ha yr-1]), a value that corresponded to 94% of the overall emissions of this bioethanol cropping system. MenosABSTRACT.- The production of ethanol from biomass pursuant to the EU Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) requires an estimation of the levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from biofuels to assess the emissions savings in comparison to fossil fuels. Within this framework, the carbon footprint was estimated for four bioethanol cropping systems: a maize-wheat-sorghum rotation without the harvest of crop residues (MWS), a maize-wheat-sorghum rotation with harvested crop residues (MWS-R), switchgrass (Sw), and continuous sweet sorghum (Ss). The estimation followed a life-cycle analysis strategy, considering the relevant inputs and processes for the emission of GHG from the crop management phases of soil preparation, planting, post-planting operations, harvesting, and transport. The carbon footprint varied between 0.04 and 3.68 kgCO2-eqL-1ethanol. Switchgrass had the smallest footprint and the highest ethanol yield per hectare (4,263 L [ha yr]-1). However, for annual systems, Ss had the highest emissions (3.68 kg CO2-eq L ethanol-1), 2 and 4 times larger than MWS-R and MWS systems. The soil preparation, planting, and post-planting emissions were 80% of the mean emissions in the annual cropping systems. By comparison, in Sw, 60% of the total GHG emissions came from post-planting and 46% from fertilizers. In Sw, soil erosion by water accounted for 35% of the soil organic carbon lost in the MWS-R and Ss systems. In addition, Sw was the system with the most significant carbon ... Presentar Todo |
|
Palabras claves : |
Biofuel; Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Life Cycle Assessment; SOC; Soil erosion. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
P01 Conservación de la naturaleza y recursos de La tierra |
|
URL : |
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4484823
|
|
Marc : |
LEADER 02738naa a2200253 a 4500
001 1064206
005 2023-06-21
008 2023 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $a10.2139/ssrn.4484823$2DOI
100 1 $aBUSTAMANTE-SILVEIRA, M.
245 $aCarbon footprint of four bioethanol cropping systems in a temperate region. [preprint article].$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2023
300 $a46 p.
500 $aArticle history: Posted 19 Jun 2023. -- This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4484823. Preprint submitted to Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, May 20, 2023. -- Corresponding author: Mauricio Bustamante-Silveira, mauriciobs_22@hotmail.com . --
520 $aABSTRACT.- The production of ethanol from biomass pursuant to the EU Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) requires an estimation of the levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from biofuels to assess the emissions savings in comparison to fossil fuels. Within this framework, the carbon footprint was estimated for four bioethanol cropping systems: a maize-wheat-sorghum rotation without the harvest of crop residues (MWS), a maize-wheat-sorghum rotation with harvested crop residues (MWS-R), switchgrass (Sw), and continuous sweet sorghum (Ss). The estimation followed a life-cycle analysis strategy, considering the relevant inputs and processes for the emission of GHG from the crop management phases of soil preparation, planting, post-planting operations, harvesting, and transport. The carbon footprint varied between 0.04 and 3.68 kgCO2-eqL-1ethanol. Switchgrass had the smallest footprint and the highest ethanol yield per hectare (4,263 L [ha yr]-1). However, for annual systems, Ss had the highest emissions (3.68 kg CO2-eq L ethanol-1), 2 and 4 times larger than MWS-R and MWS systems. The soil preparation, planting, and post-planting emissions were 80% of the mean emissions in the annual cropping systems. By comparison, in Sw, 60% of the total GHG emissions came from post-planting and 46% from fertilizers. In Sw, soil erosion by water accounted for 35% of the soil organic carbon lost in the MWS-R and Ss systems. In addition, Sw was the system with the most significant carbon sequestration (1,957 kg CO2-eq [ha yr-1]), a value that corresponded to 94% of the overall emissions of this bioethanol cropping system.
653 $aBiofuel
653 $aGreenhouse Gas Emissions
653 $aLife Cycle Assessment
653 $aSOC
653 $aSoil erosion
700 1 $aSIRI-PRIETO, G.
700 1 $aMAZZILLI, R.
700 1 $aCARRASCO-LETELIER, L.
773 $tAvailable at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4484823 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4484823
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA Las Brujas (LB) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
| Expresión de búsqueda válido. Check! |
|
|
