Pietro Goglio

Impact of management strategies on the global warming potential at the cropping system level

Estimating the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agricultural systems is important in order to assess the impact of agriculture on climate change. In this study experimental data supplemented with results from a biophysical model (DNDC) were combined with life cycle assessment (LCA) to investigate the impact of management strategies on global warming potential of long-term cropping systems at two locations (Breton and Ellerslie) in Alberta, Canada. The aim was to estimate the difference in global warming potential (GWP) of cropping systems due to N fertilizer reduction and residue removal. Reducing the nitrogen fertilizer rate from 75 to 50 kg N ha(-1) decreased on average the emissions of N2O by 39%, NO by 59% and ammonia volatilisation by 57%. No clear trend for soil CO2 emissions was determined among cropping systems. When evaluated on a per hectare basis, cropping systems with residue removal required 6% more energy and had a little change in GWP. Conversely, when evaluated on the basis of gigajoules of harvestable biomass, residue removal resulted in 28% less energy requirement and 33% lower GWP. Reducing nitrogen fertilizer rate resulted in 18% less GWP on average for both functional units at Breton and 39% less GWP at Ellerslie. Nitrous oxide emissions contributed on average 67% to the overall GWP per ha. This study demonstrated that small changes in N fertilizer have a minimal impact on the productivity of the cropping systems but can still have a substantial environmental impact.

Addressing crop interactions within cropping systems in LCA

PurposeThe focus of the life-cycle assessment (LCA) of an agricultural plant product is typically on one crop. However, isolating one crop from the cropping system that it belongs to is often challenging because the crops are often interlinked with the other crops in the cropping system. The main objectives of this discussion article are as follows: (i) to discuss the characteristics of cropping systems which might affect the LCA methodology, (ii) to discuss the advantages and the disadvantages of the current available methods for the life-cycle assessment of cropping systems, and (iii) to offer a framework to carry out LCA of crops and cropping systems.MethodsThe definition of cropping systems is provided together with a description of two types of LCA: product LCA and system LCA. The LCA issues related to cropping system characteristics have been classified as (1) crop interrelationship, (2) crop management and emissions, and (3) functional unit issues. The LCA approaches presented are as follows: cropping system, allocation approaches, crop-by-crop approach, and combined approaches. The various approaches are described together with their advantages and disadvantages, applicability, comprehensiveness, and accuracy.Results and discussionThe cropping system approach is best suited for system LCA. For product LCA, none of the methods is fully exhaustive and accurate. The crop sequence approach takes into consideration the cropping system issues, if they happen within the year or season, and cannot be applied for intercropping and agroforestry systems. The allocation approaches take into account the cropping system effects by establishing a mathematical relationship between crops present in the cropping systems. The model for integrative life-cycle assessment in agriculture (MiLA) approach considers cropping system issues if they are related to multiproduct and nutrient cycling, while the crop-by-crop approach is highly affected by assumptions and considers cropping system issues only if they are related to the analyzed crop.ConclusionsEach LCA approach presents advantages and disadvantages. For system LCA, the cropping system approach is recommended. For product LCA, environmental burdens should be attributed applying the following hierarchy: (1) attributed to the crop if based on a clear causality, (2) attributed with combined approaches and specific criteria, and (3) attributed with allocation approaches and generic criteria. These approaches should be combined with the cropping system approach..