Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 2 – uploaded by Damian Śliwiński

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Table 3. Selected elements characteristic for silage maize cultivation. developed by breaking down the inputs and incomes in reference energy units (MJ) and reference grain units (JZ) [10]. The efficiency is a quotient of the outcome to the input [56]. The research was performed on 13 farms in the Podlaskie voivodeship (in south- eastern Poland). The climate of this region is moderate with huge continental influence. This voivodeship is dominated by agriculture, which is the main branch of the region’s economy. The fodder area is approx. 55% of the agricultural area. Over 31% stands for sown area on the arable land are fodder plants. In the studied farms the silage maize was grown in real farming conditions. The crop acreage ranged from 2.0 to 13.0 ha. The fields were 0.05 to 2.5 km away from the habitation. The yields varied and ranged from 45 to 80 t-ha~! (Table 3).

Table 3 Selected elements characteristic for silage maize cultivation. developed by breaking down the inputs and incomes in reference energy units (MJ) and reference grain units (JZ) [10]. The efficiency is a quotient of the outcome to the input [56]. The research was performed on 13 farms in the Podlaskie voivodeship (in south- eastern Poland). The climate of this region is moderate with huge continental influence. This voivodeship is dominated by agriculture, which is the main branch of the region’s economy. The fodder area is approx. 55% of the agricultural area. Over 31% stands for sown area on the arable land are fodder plants. In the studied farms the silage maize was grown in real farming conditions. The crop acreage ranged from 2.0 to 13.0 ha. The fields were 0.05 to 2.5 km away from the habitation. The yields varied and ranged from 45 to 80 t-ha~! (Table 3).

Related Figures (11)

Silage maize is a roughage used for cattle feeding. In fact, for the entire year of the fodder crop field harvest structure, maize shows the highest acreage, in 2016 the green maize yields accounted for 73.5% of the total fodder crop yields (Figure 2). Next to the silage allocation to animal feed for livestock or milk production, there also appeared a possibility of using it for energy purposes, as a valuable substrate for methane fermentation bacteria for biogas production. One of the most frequently applied substrates of agricultural origin is slurry, with varied properties depending on the feeding method or the animal species. A relatively low content of dry weight requires supplementation with substrates, e.g., plant substrates. An excellent supplement for the fermentation mass in terms of technology is maize silage which, according to the National Centre for Agriculture Support (KOWR), in 2018, accounted for 12% of the total substrates used in agricultural biogas plants (Figure 3).
Silage maize is a roughage used for cattle feeding. In fact, for the entire year of the fodder crop field harvest structure, maize shows the highest acreage, in 2016 the green maize yields accounted for 73.5% of the total fodder crop yields (Figure 2). Next to the silage allocation to animal feed for livestock or milk production, there also appeared a possibility of using it for energy purposes, as a valuable substrate for methane fermentation bacteria for biogas production. One of the most frequently applied substrates of agricultural origin is slurry, with varied properties depending on the feeding method or the animal species. A relatively low content of dry weight requires supplementation with substrates, e.g., plant substrates. An excellent supplement for the fermentation mass in terms of technology is maize silage which, according to the National Centre for Agriculture Support (KOWR), in 2018, accounted for 12% of the total substrates used in agricultural biogas plants (Figure 3).
Figure 2. Structure of field green fodder crops production (Total production of field green fodder crops = 100. Source: own elaboration based on [36].
Figure 2. Structure of field green fodder crops production (Total production of field green fodder crops = 100. Source: own elaboration based on [36].
Figure 3. Share of substrates used for agricultural biogas production in 2018. Source: own elaboration based on [37]. The key criterion of the applicability of maize silage for biogas production is the share of dry weight from 28 to 35%, to much extent dependent on the right harvest date [38]. One of the biggest assets of maize is its high yields (photosynthesis C4); most frequently from 30 to 50 t/ha. For comparison, the average rye yield under Poland’s conditions is 2.8 t per hectare, wheat—4.7 t per hectare for winter wheat and 3.6 t per hectare for spring wheat; the 2011-2015 means. One hectare of silage maize can produce from 4050 to 6750 m? of biogas, which can generate from 87 to 145 GJ of energy (Table 1). Biogas production from 1 ton of silage can reach 200 m%, and from 1 ton of dry weight of silage the average of 550-650 m3 of biogas is produced. The amount of methane production ranges from 300 to 400 m$ per ton of dry silage weight [39-41].
Figure 3. Share of substrates used for agricultural biogas production in 2018. Source: own elaboration based on [37]. The key criterion of the applicability of maize silage for biogas production is the share of dry weight from 28 to 35%, to much extent dependent on the right harvest date [38]. One of the biggest assets of maize is its high yields (photosynthesis C4); most frequently from 30 to 50 t/ha. For comparison, the average rye yield under Poland’s conditions is 2.8 t per hectare, wheat—4.7 t per hectare for winter wheat and 3.6 t per hectare for spring wheat; the 2011-2015 means. One hectare of silage maize can produce from 4050 to 6750 m? of biogas, which can generate from 87 to 145 GJ of energy (Table 1). Biogas production from 1 ton of silage can reach 200 m%, and from 1 ton of dry weight of silage the average of 550-650 m3 of biogas is produced. The amount of methane production ranges from 300 to 400 m$ per ton of dry silage weight [39-41].
Table 2. Maize adaptation and response to an anticipated climate change. 3. Materials and Methods and the stand [39,51]. The basic principles for making maize silage are accurate crushing, adding a preservative, fast placing of the heap or filling the silo, hermetic coverage, and the adequate pick-up, which affects the silage quality and limiting losses [52]. As for an inaccurate packing, the remaining oxygen makes ensilaging longer, it can lead to the devel- opment of undesired aerobic microorganisms. The hermetic coverage of the heap with foi prevents from the rainwater penetrating into the silage, and the load—the right ensilage straw deposition [53-55]. The tillage system and the dependent material and energy inputs, the frequency of practices, the dates of the agrotechnical practices performed, the harvest at the optimal date with a minimum level of losses during the practices are the key factors of the production energy efficiency.
Table 2. Maize adaptation and response to an anticipated climate change. 3. Materials and Methods and the stand [39,51]. The basic principles for making maize silage are accurate crushing, adding a preservative, fast placing of the heap or filling the silo, hermetic coverage, and the adequate pick-up, which affects the silage quality and limiting losses [52]. As for an inaccurate packing, the remaining oxygen makes ensilaging longer, it can lead to the devel- opment of undesired aerobic microorganisms. The hermetic coverage of the heap with foi prevents from the rainwater penetrating into the silage, and the load—the right ensilage straw deposition [53-55]. The tillage system and the dependent material and energy inputs, the frequency of practices, the dates of the agrotechnical practices performed, the harvest at the optimal date with a minimum level of losses during the practices are the key factors of the production energy efficiency.
Figure 4. Total energy for the diesel oil consumed [MJ-ha~!]. Source: own study. The accumulated energy consumption of the energy carriers in a form of diesel oil for the technologies studied varied. In extreme cases the differences were more than double. The data provided in Figure 4 show that the accumulated energy consumption of energy carriers ranged from 4684.11 (technology 7) to 17,162.61 MJ-ha~! (technology 10). The average value of accumulated energy consumption of the energy carriers for the silage maize cultivation technologies was 10,561.90 MJ-ha~!.
Figure 4. Total energy for the diesel oil consumed [MJ-ha~!]. Source: own study. The accumulated energy consumption of the energy carriers in a form of diesel oil for the technologies studied varied. In extreme cases the differences were more than double. The data provided in Figure 4 show that the accumulated energy consumption of energy carriers ranged from 4684.11 (technology 7) to 17,162.61 MJ-ha~! (technology 10). The average value of accumulated energy consumption of the energy carriers for the silage maize cultivation technologies was 10,561.90 MJ-ha~!.
Figure 5. Total energy accumulated in the tractors, machines and tools used [MJ-ha~!]. Source: own study. The energy consum ated energy rela which accounted technology 5). 1 human labor is s for 1% tractors, machinery, and ption for the cultivation technology is also affected by the accumu- ed to the use of tractors, machinery, and tools for silage maize production Figure 5). The calculations show that the share of the input of energy accumulated in tractors, machinery, and ools in the total accumulated energy ranged from 524.26 MJ-ha“!, (technology 1), to 12,196.21 MJ-ha~!, which accounted for 23.4% [he mean value for the calculated accumulated energy consumption in tools was 3886.28 MJ-ha~!. The share of energy generated by hown in Figure 6.
Figure 5. Total energy accumulated in the tractors, machines and tools used [MJ-ha~!]. Source: own study. The energy consum ated energy rela which accounted technology 5). 1 human labor is s for 1% tractors, machinery, and ption for the cultivation technology is also affected by the accumu- ed to the use of tractors, machinery, and tools for silage maize production Figure 5). The calculations show that the share of the input of energy accumulated in tractors, machinery, and ools in the total accumulated energy ranged from 524.26 MJ-ha“!, (technology 1), to 12,196.21 MJ-ha~!, which accounted for 23.4% [he mean value for the calculated accumulated energy consumption in tools was 3886.28 MJ-ha~!. The share of energy generated by hown in Figure 6.
Figure 6. Amount of energy generated by human labor [MJ-ha~!]. Source: own study.
Figure 6. Amount of energy generated by human labor [MJ-ha~!]. Source: own study.
Figure 7. Total energy accumulated in the natural and mineral fertilizers, plant protection products, and seeds used [MJ-ha~!]. Source: own study.
Figure 7. Total energy accumulated in the natural and mineral fertilizers, plant protection products, and seeds used [MJ-ha~!]. Source: own study.
Figure 8. Energy intensity accumulated in the technologies of maize silage from individual energy inputs. [MJ-ha~!] Source: own study.
Figure 8. Energy intensity accumulated in the technologies of maize silage from individual energy inputs. [MJ-ha~!] Source: own study.
Table 5. Energy expenditure in means of production, energy accumulated in yield, and energy efficiency index. The most favorable technological variant in terms of energy efficiency was variant 13 for which, assuming as the reference 100% to be the mean value of the inputs of energy accumu. ated in the consumables and raw materia s (20,847.75 MJ-ha~'); the energy ac- cumulated in that input was 81.2% lower than the average value, which had the greatest effect on the result despite a considerably low yield of the in account for 100% (3886.28 MJ-ha~'), for technology 45 t-ha~!). Assuming the mean value puts of energy accumulated in tractors, machinery, and tools for the technologies to 3 those inputs were 53.6% lower than the average. The analysis of the human labor inputs made for production demonstrated that, as gated. As compared with the mean value of the in of energy; diesel oil (10,561.90 MJ-ha~!, assumed as 100%) for the technologies tudy the inputs of the accumulated energy from that input in technology 13 were sources under s for technology 13, they are 61% lower than 51.1% lower than the mean value. the mean for the technologies investi- puts of energy accumulated in direct
Table 5. Energy expenditure in means of production, energy accumulated in yield, and energy efficiency index. The most favorable technological variant in terms of energy efficiency was variant 13 for which, assuming as the reference 100% to be the mean value of the inputs of energy accumu. ated in the consumables and raw materia s (20,847.75 MJ-ha~'); the energy ac- cumulated in that input was 81.2% lower than the average value, which had the greatest effect on the result despite a considerably low yield of the in account for 100% (3886.28 MJ-ha~'), for technology 45 t-ha~!). Assuming the mean value puts of energy accumulated in tractors, machinery, and tools for the technologies to 3 those inputs were 53.6% lower than the average. The analysis of the human labor inputs made for production demonstrated that, as gated. As compared with the mean value of the in of energy; diesel oil (10,561.90 MJ-ha~!, assumed as 100%) for the technologies tudy the inputs of the accumulated energy from that input in technology 13 were sources under s for technology 13, they are 61% lower than 51.1% lower than the mean value. the mean for the technologies investi- puts of energy accumulated in direct
Table A1. Value of accumulated energy consumption and the percentage share of accumulated energy in individual energy inputs for the technologies studied.
Table A1. Value of accumulated energy consumption and the percentage share of accumulated energy in individual energy inputs for the technologies studied.
Related topics:
Engineering
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved