Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Intensification of Dryland Cropping Systems for Bio-feedstock Production: Energy Analysis of Camelina

  • Published:
BioEnergy Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Camelina (Camelina sativa L. Crantz), as a bioenergy and bio-product feedstock, may be grown as a rotation crop in the wheat-based cropping system to increase land use efficiency in the Northern Great Plains (NGP). In this study, which was conducted from 2008 to 2011 in central Montana, we evaluated the energy balance of three 2-year cop rotational sequences that included camelina-winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) (CAM-WW) and barley (Hordeum vulgare L.)-winter wheat (BAR-WW) compared with a traditional fallow-winter wheat (FAL-WW) rotation. Results indicated that 52 and 57 % more energy input was invested in CAM-WW and BAR-WW compared to FAL-WW system (9182 MJ ha−1), respectively. In all rotations, nitrogen fertilizer was the most energy-consuming input and accounted for 76, 68, and 69 % of the total energy used in wheat, barley, and camelina production, respectively. Averaged over 3 years, CAM-WW and BAR-WW systems yielded 34 and 29 % greater gross energy output compared with FAL-WW. The CAM-WW and BAR-WW also outperformed FAL-WW by 30 and 6 % in terms of net energy output. No significant differences in energy efficiency were found between the FAL-WW and CAM-WW systems. Taking into account of the greater net energy as well as similar values of energy use efficiency, the CAM-WW system performed better than the traditional FAL-WW system under rainfed conditions in central Montana. There is a good potential to improve the energy efficiency of the CAM-WW cropping system (by more than 26 %) through refinement of agronomic practices, mainly nitrogen fertilization and herbicide application, which can further enhance the sustainability of camelina feedstock production.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CAM-WW:

Camelina-winter wheat

BAR-WW:

Barley-winter wheat

FAL-WW:

Fallow-winter wheat

NGP:

Northern Great Plains

References

  1. Afshar RK, Chaichi MR, Alipour A, Ansari M, Dashtaki M, Hashemi M (2015) Potential of milk thistle for biomass production in semi-arid regions. Crop Sci (Accepted)

  2. Alluvione F, Moretti B, Sacco D, Grignani C (2011) EUE (energy use efficiency) of cropping systems for a sustainable agriculture. Energy 36:4468–4481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Angelini LG, Ceccarini L, Di Nasso NN, Bonari E (2009) Long-term evaluation of biomass production and quality of two cardoon (Cynara cardunculus L.) cultivars for energy use. Biomass Bioenerg 33:810–816

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bailey AP, Basford WD, Penlington N, Park JR, Keatinge JDH, Rehman T et al (2003) A comparison of energy use in conventional and integrated arable farming systems in the UK. Agric Ecosyst Environ 97:241–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Burgess MH, Miller PR, Jones CA (2012) Pulse crops improve energy intensity and productivity of cereal production in Montana, USA. J Sustain Agric 36:699–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen C, Bekkerman A, Keshavarz Afshar R, Neill K (2015) Intensification of dryland cropping systems for bio-feedstock production: evaluation of agronomic and economic benefits of Camelina sativa. Ind Crops Prod (accepted)

  7. Cosentino SL, Copani V, D’Agosta GM, Sanzone E, Mantineo M (2005) First results on evaluation of Arundo donax L. clones collected in Southern Italy. Ind Crop Prod 23:212–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fluck RC, Baird CD (1980) Agricultural energetics. Westport: CT: AVI

  9. Fore SR, Porter P, Lazarus W (2011) Net energy balance of small-scale on-farm biodiesel production from canola and soybean. Biomass Bioenerg 35:2234–2244

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gesch RW (2014) Influence of genotype and sowing date on camelina growth and yield in the north central US. Ind Crop Prod 54:209–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gugel RK, Falk KC (2006) Agronomic and seed quality evaluation of Camelina sativa in western Canada. Can J Plant Sci 86:1047–1058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hülsbergen K, Feil B, Diepenbrock W (2002) Rates of nitrogen application required to achieve maximum energy efficiency for various crops: results of a long-term experiment. Field Crop Res 77:61–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Khakbazan M, Mohr RM, Derksen DA, Monreal MA, Grant CA, Zentner RP, Moulin AP, McLaren DL et al (2009) Effects of alternative management practices on the economics, energy and GHG emissions of a wheat-pea cropping system in the Canadian Prairies. Soil Till Res 104:30–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Krohn BJ, Fripp M (2012) A life cycle assessment of biodiesel derived from the “niche filling” energy crop camelina in the USA. Appl Energy 92:92–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lavigne A, Powers SE (2007) Evaluating fuel ethanol feedstocks from energy policy perspectives: a comparative energy assessment of corn and corn stover. Energ Policy 35:5918–5930

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ledda L, Deligios PA, Farci R, Sulas L (2013) Biomass supply for energetic purposes from some Cardueae species grown in Mediterranean farming systems. Ind Crop Prod 47:218–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lewandowski I, Schmidt U (2006) Nitrogen, energy and land use efficiencies of miscanthus, reed canary grass and triticale as determined by the boundary line approach. Agric Ecosyst Environ 112:335–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Liska AJ, Cassman KG (2008) Towards standardization of life-cycle metrics for biofuels: greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and net energy yield. J Biobased Mater Bio 2:187–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mandal KG, Hati KM, Misra AK (2009) Biomass yield and energy analysis of soybean production in relation to fertilizer-NPK and organic manure. Biomass Bioenerg 33:1670–1679

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. McVay KA, Khan QA (2011) Camelina yield response to different plant populations under dryland conditions. Agron J 103:1265–1269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. McLaughlin NB, Hiba A, Wall GJ, King DJ (2000) Comparison of energy inputs for inorganic fertilizer and manure based corn production. Can Agric Eng 42:9–18

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mousavi-Avval SH, Rafiee S, Jafari A, Mohammadi A (2011) Improving energy use efficiency of canola production using data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach. Energy 36:2765–2772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Patzek TW (2004) Thermodynamics of the corn-ethanol biofuel cycle. Crit Rev Plant Sci 23:519–567

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Pervanchon F, Bockstaller C, Girardin P (2002) Assessment of energy use in arable farming systems by means of an agro-ecological indicator: the energy indicator. Agric Syst 72:149–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Petre SM, Jurcoane S, Dobre P, Petcu R, Dimitriu D (2012) Life cycle assessment: by-products in biofuels production battle; rapeseed vs. Camelina sativa L. AgroLife Sci J 2:58–65

    Google Scholar 

  26. Pimentel D, Patzek TW (2005) Ethanol production using corn, switchgrass and wood; biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower. Nat Resour Res 14:65–76

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Piringer G, Steinberg LJ (2006) Reevaluation of energy use in wheat production in the United States. J Ind Ecol 10:149–167

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Pradhan A, Shrestha DS, Van Gerpen J, Duffield J (2008) The energy balance of soybean oil biodiesel production: a review of past studies. Am Soc Agric Biol Eng 5:185–194

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rathke G, Diepenbrock W (2006) Energy balance of winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) cropping as related to nitrogen supply and preceding crop. Eur J Agron 24:35–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Smith EG, Janzen HH, Newlands NK (2007) Energy balances of biodiesel production from soybean and canola in Canada. Can J Plant Sci 87:793–801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shonnard DR, Williams L, Kalnes TN (2010) Camelina‐derived jet fuel and diesel: sustainable advanced biofuels. Environ Prog Sustain Energy 29:382–392

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Unakitan G, Hurma H, Yilmaz F (2010) An analysis of energy use efficiency of canola production in Turkey. Energy 35:3623–3627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vollmann J, Moritz T, Kargl C, Baumgartner S, Wagentristl H (2007) Agronomic evaluation of C. sativa genotypes selected for seed quality characteristics. Ind Crop Prod 26:270–277

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Zentner RP, Lafond GP, Derksen DA, Nagy CN, Wall DD, May WE (2004) Effects of tillage method and crop rotation on non-renewable energy use efficiency for a thin Black Chernozem in the Canadian prairies. Soil Tillage Res 77:125–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors like to thank Karnes Neill, Johnna Heser, and Kelly Arnold for the technical support in the field and laboratory. The funding support of this project came from USDA Western Sustainable Research and Education grant, No. 080019002; Montana Agricultural Experiment Station; and USDA-NIFA BRDI grant, No. 2012-10006-20230.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

We declare that:

- The data presented in this paper is original and have not been manipulated

- The manuscript has not been submitted to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration

- The manuscript has not been published previously (partly or in full)

- Proper acknowledgments and citations to other works are given

- The manuscript has been approved by all the authors and consent to submit has been received explicitly from all co-authors, as well as from the responsible authorities

- Authors whose names appear on the submission have contributed sufficiently to the scientific work

- Chengci Chen, and Reza Keshavarz-Afshar declare that they have no conflict of interest (financial or non-financial).

- This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Eastern Agricultural Research Center, Montana State University, Sidney, MT, 59270, USA

    Reza Keshavarz-Afshar & Chengci Chen

Authors
  1. Reza Keshavarz-Afshar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chengci Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chengci Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Keshavarz-Afshar, R., Chen, C. Intensification of Dryland Cropping Systems for Bio-feedstock Production: Energy Analysis of Camelina. Bioenerg. Res. 8, 1877–1884 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-015-9644-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-015-9644-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation