Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment
The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GH...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Houshyar, Ehsan [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2015transfer abstract |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Umfang: |
11 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO - Rajendiran, Rajmohan ELSEVIER, 2020, Amsterdam [u.a.] |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:89 ; year:2015 ; day:15 ; month:02 ; pages:99-109 ; extent:11 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV018705421 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV018705421 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230625124506.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 180602s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a GBVA2015016000024.pica |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV018705421 | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0959-6526(14)01202-5 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | |a 690 |a 330 | |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 690 |q DE-600 |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 330 |q DE-600 |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 540 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 35.18 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Houshyar, Ehsan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2015transfer abstract | |
| 300 | |a 11 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. | ||
| 520 | |a The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. | ||
| 650 | 7 | |a Energy use efficiency |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a GHG emissions |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Green economy |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Econometric models |2 Elsevier | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Dalgaard, Tommy |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jørgensen, Uffe |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |n Elsevier Science |a Rajendiran, Rajmohan ELSEVIER |t Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO |d 2020 |g Amsterdam [u.a.] |w (DE-627)ELV003750353 |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:89 |g year:2015 |g day:15 |g month:02 |g pages:99-109 |g extent:11 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 35.18 |j Kolloidchemie |j Grenzflächenchemie |q VZ |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 89 |j 2015 |b 15 |c 0215 |h 99-109 |g 11 | ||
| 953 | |2 045F |a 690 | ||
| author_variant |
e h eh |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
houshyarehsandalgaardtommytarazkarmohamm:2015----:nrynufroaordcinhtcnmsyadhts |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2015transfer abstract |
| bklnumber |
35.18 |
| publishDate |
2015 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 doi GBVA2015016000024.pica (DE-627)ELV018705421 (ELSEVIER)S0959-6526(14)01202-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 690 330 690 DE-600 330 DE-600 540 VZ 35.18 bkl Houshyar, Ehsan verfasserin aut Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment 2015transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. Energy use efficiency Elsevier GHG emissions Elsevier Green economy Elsevier Econometric models Elsevier Dalgaard, Tommy oth Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan oth Jørgensen, Uffe oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Rajendiran, Rajmohan ELSEVIER Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO 2020 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV003750353 volume:89 year:2015 day:15 month:02 pages:99-109 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U 35.18 Kolloidchemie Grenzflächenchemie VZ AR 89 2015 15 0215 99-109 11 045F 690 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 doi GBVA2015016000024.pica (DE-627)ELV018705421 (ELSEVIER)S0959-6526(14)01202-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 690 330 690 DE-600 330 DE-600 540 VZ 35.18 bkl Houshyar, Ehsan verfasserin aut Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment 2015transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. Energy use efficiency Elsevier GHG emissions Elsevier Green economy Elsevier Econometric models Elsevier Dalgaard, Tommy oth Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan oth Jørgensen, Uffe oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Rajendiran, Rajmohan ELSEVIER Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO 2020 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV003750353 volume:89 year:2015 day:15 month:02 pages:99-109 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U 35.18 Kolloidchemie Grenzflächenchemie VZ AR 89 2015 15 0215 99-109 11 045F 690 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 doi GBVA2015016000024.pica (DE-627)ELV018705421 (ELSEVIER)S0959-6526(14)01202-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 690 330 690 DE-600 330 DE-600 540 VZ 35.18 bkl Houshyar, Ehsan verfasserin aut Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment 2015transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. Energy use efficiency Elsevier GHG emissions Elsevier Green economy Elsevier Econometric models Elsevier Dalgaard, Tommy oth Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan oth Jørgensen, Uffe oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Rajendiran, Rajmohan ELSEVIER Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO 2020 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV003750353 volume:89 year:2015 day:15 month:02 pages:99-109 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U 35.18 Kolloidchemie Grenzflächenchemie VZ AR 89 2015 15 0215 99-109 11 045F 690 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 doi GBVA2015016000024.pica (DE-627)ELV018705421 (ELSEVIER)S0959-6526(14)01202-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 690 330 690 DE-600 330 DE-600 540 VZ 35.18 bkl Houshyar, Ehsan verfasserin aut Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment 2015transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. Energy use efficiency Elsevier GHG emissions Elsevier Green economy Elsevier Econometric models Elsevier Dalgaard, Tommy oth Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan oth Jørgensen, Uffe oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Rajendiran, Rajmohan ELSEVIER Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO 2020 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV003750353 volume:89 year:2015 day:15 month:02 pages:99-109 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U 35.18 Kolloidchemie Grenzflächenchemie VZ AR 89 2015 15 0215 99-109 11 045F 690 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 doi GBVA2015016000024.pica (DE-627)ELV018705421 (ELSEVIER)S0959-6526(14)01202-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 690 330 690 DE-600 330 DE-600 540 VZ 35.18 bkl Houshyar, Ehsan verfasserin aut Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment 2015transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. Energy use efficiency Elsevier GHG emissions Elsevier Green economy Elsevier Econometric models Elsevier Dalgaard, Tommy oth Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan oth Jørgensen, Uffe oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Rajendiran, Rajmohan ELSEVIER Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO 2020 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV003750353 volume:89 year:2015 day:15 month:02 pages:99-109 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U 35.18 Kolloidchemie Grenzflächenchemie VZ AR 89 2015 15 0215 99-109 11 045F 690 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:89 year:2015 day:15 month:02 pages:99-109 extent:11 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:89 year:2015 day:15 month:02 pages:99-109 extent:11 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Kolloidchemie Grenzflächenchemie |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Energy use efficiency GHG emissions Green economy Econometric models |
| dewey-raw |
690 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Houshyar, Ehsan @@aut@@ Dalgaard, Tommy @@oth@@ Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan @@oth@@ Jørgensen, Uffe @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2015-01-15T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
ELV003750353 |
| dewey-sort |
3690 |
| id |
ELV018705421 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV018705421</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230625124506.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180602s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBVA2015016000024.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV018705421</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0959-6526(14)01202-5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">690</subfield><subfield code="a">330</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">690</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">330</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">540</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">35.18</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Houshyar, Ehsan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Energy use efficiency</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">GHG emissions</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Green economy</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Econometric models</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dalgaard, Tommy</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jørgensen, Uffe</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Rajendiran, Rajmohan ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO</subfield><subfield code="d">2020</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV003750353</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:89</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield><subfield code="g">day:15</subfield><subfield code="g">month:02</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:99-109</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">35.18</subfield><subfield code="j">Kolloidchemie</subfield><subfield code="j">Grenzflächenchemie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">89</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield><subfield code="b">15</subfield><subfield code="c">0215</subfield><subfield code="h">99-109</subfield><subfield code="g">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="953" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">045F</subfield><subfield code="a">690</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Houshyar, Ehsan |
| spellingShingle |
Houshyar, Ehsan ddc 690 ddc 330 ddc 540 bkl 35.18 Elsevier Energy use efficiency Elsevier GHG emissions Elsevier Green economy Elsevier Econometric models Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment |
| authorStr |
Houshyar, Ehsan |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)ELV003750353 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
690 - Buildings 330 - Economics 540 - Chemistry & allied sciences |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
690 330 690 DE-600 330 DE-600 540 VZ 35.18 bkl Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment Energy use efficiency Elsevier GHG emissions Elsevier Green economy Elsevier Econometric models Elsevier |
| topic |
ddc 690 ddc 330 ddc 540 bkl 35.18 Elsevier Energy use efficiency Elsevier GHG emissions Elsevier Green economy Elsevier Econometric models |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 690 ddc 330 ddc 540 bkl 35.18 Elsevier Energy use efficiency Elsevier GHG emissions Elsevier Green economy Elsevier Econometric models |
| topic_browse |
ddc 690 ddc 330 ddc 540 bkl 35.18 Elsevier Energy use efficiency Elsevier GHG emissions Elsevier Green economy Elsevier Econometric models |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
t d td m h t mh mht u j uj |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
ELV003750353 |
| dewey-tens |
690 - Building & construction 330 - Economics 540 - Chemistry |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)ELV003750353 |
| title |
Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV018705421 (ELSEVIER)S0959-6526(14)01202-5 |
| title_full |
Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment |
| author_sort |
Houshyar, Ehsan |
| journal |
Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO |
| journalStr |
Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology 300 - Social sciences 500 - Science |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2015 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
99 |
| author_browse |
Houshyar, Ehsan |
| container_volume |
89 |
| physical |
11 |
| class |
690 330 690 DE-600 330 DE-600 540 VZ 35.18 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Houshyar, Ehsan |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 |
| dewey-full |
690 330 540 |
| title_sort |
energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment |
| title_auth |
Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment |
| abstract |
The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. |
| abstractGer |
The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U |
| title_short |
Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Dalgaard, Tommy Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan Jørgensen, Uffe |
| author2Str |
Dalgaard, Tommy Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan Jørgensen, Uffe |
| ppnlink |
ELV003750353 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T19:29:55.030Z |
| _version_ |
1803859205848825856 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV018705421</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230625124506.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180602s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBVA2015016000024.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV018705421</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0959-6526(14)01202-5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">690</subfield><subfield code="a">330</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">690</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">330</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">540</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">35.18</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Houshyar, Ehsan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Energy input for tomato production what economy says, and what is good for the environment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The central Fars province is the main tomato producer region in Southwest Iran. This study was undertaken to evaluate the energy consumption patterns of tomato production, corresponding GHG emissions, and relationships between inputs and output by a Cobb–Douglass econometric model. The changes in GHG emissions were also investigated to display if the result is in favor of the environment as well as economy. The non-hierarchical cluster analysis determined three groups of tomato farmers with respect to the energy inputs and tomato yield; C1, C2 and C3 including 90, 46 and 20 farmers, respectively. The findings showed that around 40–60 GJ/ha energy is needed to produce 54–70 ton/ha tomato. Although, the C1 farmers consumed around 20 GJ/ha higher energy than C3, they also had a higher output–input energy ratio; 1.15 and 1.12, respectively. The GHG emission index (IGHG) disclosed that energy efficiency indices cannot represent the environmental risks of energy inputs since some higher energy efficient groups also emitted higher carbon. The econometric analysis revealed that some energy inputs significantly correlates with the yields of C1 and C2 farmers. The highest marginal physical productivities (MPPs), however, indicated that tomato yield is most sensitive to machinery and chemicals energy inputs in the C1 and C2, respectively, which should be considered first to increase in order to achieve productivity enhancement. The result displayed that higher energy consumption according to the econometric models and MPPs may lead to much higher CO2 emissions compared to the current average emissions particularly when MPP is low. Hence, it is suggested that production types with the highest MPPs should be considered if change in energy inputs is desired. In addition, it is recommended that “green econometric” models are needed to evaluate balanced energy use consumption together with other agronomical, economical and the environmental sustainability impact assessment criteria.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Energy use efficiency</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">GHG emissions</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Green economy</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Econometric models</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dalgaard, Tommy</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jørgensen, Uffe</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Rajendiran, Rajmohan ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Self-assembled 3D hierarchical MnCO</subfield><subfield code="d">2020</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV003750353</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:89</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield><subfield code="g">day:15</subfield><subfield code="g">month:02</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:99-109</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.022</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">35.18</subfield><subfield code="j">Kolloidchemie</subfield><subfield code="j">Grenzflächenchemie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">89</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield><subfield code="b">15</subfield><subfield code="c">0215</subfield><subfield code="h">99-109</subfield><subfield code="g">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="953" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">045F</subfield><subfield code="a">690</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4005327 |