An econometric analysis of energy input–output in Turkish agriculture

Hatırlı, Selim Adem; Özkan, Burhan; Fert, Cemal

doi:10.1016/j.rser.2004.07.001

Cited by 159 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There have been many studies related to energy use in agriculture (Swanton et al 1996;Pimentel et al 1999;Uhlin 1999;Ozkan et al 2004;Hatirli et al 2005;Karkacier & Goktolga 2005;Kempen & Kraenzlein 2008;Kizilaslan 2009;Bekhet & Abdullah 2010;Unakitan et al 2010;Banaeian & Zangeneh 2011;Asgharipoura et al 2012;Tabatabaie et al 2013). Moreover, many researchers worldwide have studied EUE in the poultry production sector, including broiler (Sibbald 1982;Andrews & Zimmermann 1990;Grobas et al 1999;Atilgan & Koknaroglu 2006;Jekayinfa 2007;Heidari et al 2011a) and laying hens (Ojo 2003;Yusuf & Malomo 2007;Ashagidigbi et al 2011, Sefeedpari et al 2012.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the energy efficiency of poultry houses in the Bursa region of Turkey

Kılıç

2015

Journal of Applied Animal Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy use in the poultry sector has grown with increasing population and standard of living. The aim of this study was to determine energy use, energy efficiency and energy consumption for broiler and laying farms in the Bursa region of western Turkey. The data were collected using surveys with an interview-based questionnaire, which were administered at 29 broiler farms and 48 layer farms. An energy input-output analysis was performed, and the significance of energy consumption differences between broiler and layer farms was determined by an analysis of variance. The energy consumption of broiler and layer farms was found to be 438.568 and 516.848 MJ(1000 bird) −1 , respectively, whereas energy output was 250.401 MJ(1000 bird) −1 for broiler farms and 384.690 MJ(1000 bird) −1 for layer farms. The forms of indirect energy and renewable energy in the total average energy inputs were higher than the direct and nonrenewable energy forms for all the surveyed poultry farms. It was found that feed had the highest share among the energy inputs for both types of poultry farms. The results of energy use efficiency illustrate that energy in broiler farms was efficiently used, whereas energy use in layer farms was not efficient.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the energy efficiency of poultry houses in the Bursa region of Turkey

Kılıç

2015

Journal of Applied Animal Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To validate Model 1 of CobbDouglas function, Durbin Watson test was performed (Hatirli et al, 2005). Model 1 analysis resulted 1.97 for Durbin Watson value i.e., there was no autocorrelation in the estimated model (P>0.05).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Energy budget is the numerical comparison of the relationship between inputs and out-put of a system in terms of energy (Gezer et al, 2003). Substantial research has been conducted on energy and economic analysis to determine the energy efficiency of different crop production practices in the developed countries (Singh and Mittal, 1992;Kuesters and Lammel, 1999;Mandal et al, 2002;Ozkan et al, 2004;Canakci et al, 2005;Hatirli et al, 2005;Jianbo, 2006;Çetin and Vardar, 2008). However, very few studies have been published on energy and economic analysis of rice crop with respect to Iran.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy use pattern and sensitivity analysis of rice production: A case study of Guilane province of Iran

Pishgar¹,

Rafiee²,

Sefeedpari³

2011

African Crop Science Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rice is one of the most important crop supplying the world's population's food. Because of the direct links between energy and crop yields, and food supplies, rice energy analysis is essential. The objective of this study was to evaluate the energy balance between inputs and outputs of rice production in Guilane Province of Iran. Data were collected from 105 rice farmers with face to face questionnaire. A total energy input and output of 39.3 and 60.3 G J ha -1 was observed. Fertiliser and fuel were the highest energy inputs with amount of 14.1 and 11.6 G J ha -1 , followed by electricity and seed with 5.2 and 3.1 G J ha -1 , respectively. Energy use efficiency, energy productivity, specific energy and net energy were 1.57, 0.09, 11.20 and 21 G J ha -1 , respectively. The share of non-renewable energy was almost 89%, while the direct and indirect energy usage based on inputs was approximately equal (49 and 51%, respectively). The econometric model showed that fuel and machinery had a significant effect on rice yield. The marginal physical productivity (MPP) value of fuel and machinery was 0.93 and 0.23, respectively. The total cost of production, gross and net returns were 3156, 1629 and 927 US$ ha -1 , respectively. The benefit-cost ratio was calculated to be 1.29.

show abstract

“…Agricultural productions are intensively dependent on the energy resources directly or indirectly (Hatirli et al, 2005;Pimentel & Pimentel, 2006). Diesel engines have commonly used diesel directly for farm operations and water pumping.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental impacts of irrigated and rain-fed barley production in Iran using life cycle assessment (LCA)

Houshyar

2017

Span. j. agric. res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current intensive grain crops production is often associated with environmental burdens. However, very few studies deal with the environmental performance of both current and alternative systems of barley production. This study was undertaken to evaluate energy consumption and environmental impacts of irrigated and rain-fed barley production. Additionally, three alternative scenarios were examined for irrigated barley fields including conservation tillage and biomass utilization policies. The findings showed that around 25 GJ/ha energy is needed in order to produce 2300 kg/ha irrigated barley and 13 GJ/ha for 1100 kg/ha rain-fed barley. Life cycle assessment (LCA) results indicated that irrigated farms had more environmental impacts than rain-fed farms. Electricity generation and consumption had the highest effect on the abiotic depletion potential, human toxicity potential, freshwater and marine aquatic ecotoxicity potential. However, alternative scenarios revealed that using soil conservation tillage systems and biomass consumption vs. gas for electricity generation at power plants can significantly mitigate environmental impacts of irrigated barley production similar to the rain-fed conditions while higher yield is obtained.Additional keywords: Hordeum vulgare L.; energy use efficiency; energy productivity; global warming potential.

show abstract

An econometric analysis of energy input–output in Turkish agriculture

Cited by 159 publications

References 1 publication

Analysis of the energy efficiency of poultry houses in the Bursa region of Turkey

Analysis of the energy efficiency of poultry houses in the Bursa region of Turkey

Energy use pattern and sensitivity analysis of rice production: A case study of Guilane province of Iran

Environmental impacts of irrigated and rain-fed barley production in Iran using life cycle assessment (LCA)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About