IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v287y2014icp1-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of time scale on accounting for renewable emergy in ecosystems located in humid and arid climates

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Linjun
  • Lu, Hongfang
  • Tilley, David R.
  • Qiu, Guoyu

Abstract

Based on emergy accounting rules, only the greater number between emergy inputs from the same source, e.g., solar radiation and rainfall, should be accounted in emergy analysis to avoid double-counting. Using a year or a season as time scale, the rainfall emergy is usually larger than that of solar energy and thus taken as the renewable emergy input to the ecosystem. However, using a day as time scale, on sunny days with no rain only the solar energy would be counted as the renewable emergy. Therefore, different time scales may affect renewable emergy accounting. In this paper, we explored the effects of four time scales (year, season, month, and day) on renewable emergy accounting of forest ecosystems in Southeast China, a humid area, and the Minqin Oasis in Northwest China, an arid area. The results show that annual renewable emergy increased with the decrease of time scale but were close to each other in Southeast China (i.e., 2.5% difference at most), but were up to 30% different in arid Northwest China. However, the water which is actually used by forests for ecological productivity is evapotranspiration (ET), which can be less than precipitation in humid areas, but higher than rainfall in arid areas where groundwater compensates. Thus, it is ET rather than the available rainfall which should be counted as the renewable emergy input to ecological productivity. Otherwise the emergy contribution of renewable natural resources to ecosystems may be overestimated or underestimated, e.g., 0.33–7.33 times to the forests in Southeast China, and 0.36 times to the oasis system in Northwest China. Furthermore, despite whether or not it rains, ET emergy is often larger than solar emergy in most cases. Therefore, the use of ET emergy not only improves the estimate of emergy input, but also helps avoid the effect of time scale on renewable emergy accounting.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Linjun & Lu, Hongfang & Tilley, David R. & Qiu, Guoyu, 2014. "Effect of time scale on accounting for renewable emergy in ecosystems located in humid and arid climates," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 287(C), pages 1-8.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:287:y:2014:i:c:p:1-8
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380014002166
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.05.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Felix, Erika & Tilley, David R., 2009. "Integrated energy, environmental and financial analysis of ethanol production from cellulosic switchgrass," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 410-436.
    2. Tilley, David R., 2014. "Exploration of Odum's dynamic emergy accounting rules for suggested refinements," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 279(C), pages 36-44.
    3. Lu, Hongfang & Lin, Bin-Le & Campbell, Daniel E. & Sagisaka, Masayuki & Ren, Hai, 2012. "Biofuel vs. biodiversity? Integrated emergy and economic cost-benefit evaluation of rice-ethanol production in Japan," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 442-450.
    4. Ju, L.P. & Chen, B., 2011. "Embodied energy and emergy evaluation of a typical biodiesel production chain in China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(14), pages 2385-2392.
    5. Bastianoni, S. & Facchini, A. & Susani, L. & Tiezzi, E., 2007. "Emergy as a function of exergy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1158-1162.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lu, Hongfang & Campbell, Elliott T. & Campbell, Daniel E. & Wang, Changwei & Ren, Hai, 2017. "Dynamics of ecosystem services provided by subtropical forests in Southeast China during succession as measured by donor and receiver value," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 248-258.
    2. Yiyao Wang & Caizhi Sun & Wei Zou, 2021. "Study on the Interactive Relationship Between Marine Economic Growth and Marine Environmental Pressure in China," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(1), pages 117-133, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li, Linjun & Lu, Hongfang & Tilley, David R. & Qiu, Guoyu, 2015. "Reprint of “Effect of time scale on accounting for renewable emergy in ecosystems located in humid and arid climates”," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 315(C), pages 88-95.
    2. Saladini, Fabrizio & Patrizi, Nicoletta & Pulselli, Federico M. & Marchettini, Nadia & Bastianoni, Simone, 2016. "Guidelines for emergy evaluation of first, second and third generation biofuels," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 221-227.
    3. Chen, Shaoqing & Chen, Bin, 2012. "Sustainability and future alternatives of biogas-linked agrosystem (BLAS) in China: An emergy synthesis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 3948-3959.
    4. Lu, Hongfang & Xu, FengYing & Liu, Hongxiao & Wang, Jun & Campbell, Daniel E. & Ren, Hai, 2019. "Emergy-based analysis of the energy security of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 123-135.
    5. Khoo, Hsien H., 2015. "Review of bio-conversion pathways of lignocellulose-to-ethanol: Sustainability assessment based on land footprint projections," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 100-119.
    6. Tilley, David R., 2014. "Exploration of Odum's dynamic emergy accounting rules for suggested refinements," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 279(C), pages 36-44.
    7. Melts, Indrek & Heinsoo, Katrin & Nurk, Liina & Pärn, Linnar, 2013. "Comparison of two different bioenergy production options from late harvested biomass of Estonian semi-natural grasslands," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 6-12.
    8. Xiaoxian Zhang & Fang Ma, 2015. "Emergy Evaluation of Different Straw Reuse Technologies in Northeast China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-18, August.
    9. Zhang, Xiaohong & Wu, Liqian & Zhang, Rong & Deng, Shihuai & Zhang, Yanzong & Wu, Jun & Li, Yuanwei & Lin, Lili & Li, Li & Wang, Yinjun & Wang, Lilin, 2013. "Evaluating the relationships among economic growth, energy consumption, air emissions and air environmental protection investment in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 259-270.
    10. Dutta, Kasturi & Daverey, Achlesh & Lin, Jih-Gaw, 2014. "Evolution retrospective for alternative fuels: First to fourth generation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 114-122.
    11. Nimmanterdwong, Prathana & Chalermsinsuwan, Benjapon & Piumsomboon, Pornpote, 2017. "Emergy analysis of three alternative carbon dioxide capture processes," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 101-108.
    12. Lu, Hong-fang & Lin, Bin-le & Campbell, Daniel E. & Sagisaka, Masayuki & Ren, Hai, 2016. "Interactions among energy consumption, economic development and greenhouse gas emissions in Japan after World War II," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1060-1072.
    13. Baral, Nawa Raj & Wituszynski, David M. & Martin, Jay F. & Shah, Ajay, 2016. "Sustainability assessment of cellulosic biorefinery stillage utilization methods using emergy analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 13-28.
    14. Dias, Marina O.S. & Junqueira, Tassia L. & Jesus, Charles D.F. & Rossell, Carlos E.V. & Maciel Filho, Rubens & Bonomi, Antonio, 2012. "Improving second generation ethanol production through optimization of first generation production process from sugarcane," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 246-252.
    15. Zhang, Xiao Hong & Deng, ShiHuai & Jiang, WenJu & Zhang, YanZong & Peng, Hong & Li, Li & Yang, Gang & Li, YuanWei, 2010. "Emergy evaluation of the sustainability of two industrial systems based on wastes exchanges," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 182-195.
    16. Chen, Shaoqing & Chen, Bin, 2014. "Energy efficiency and sustainability of complex biogas systems: A 3-level emergetic evaluation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 151-163.
    17. Martin Nwodo & Chimay J. Anumba, 2021. "Exergy-Based Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings: Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-15, October.
    18. Berrios, Fernando & Campbell, Daniel E. & Ortiz, Marco, 2017. "Emergy evaluation of benthic ecosystems influenced by upwelling in northern Chile: Contributions of the ecosystems to the regional economy," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 359(C), pages 146-164.
    19. Feng, Jingxuan & Feng, Lianyong & Wang, Jianliang & King, Carey W., 2018. "Modeling the point of use EROI and its implications for economic growth in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 232-242.
    20. Ling Yang & Lin Wang, 2022. "An Improved Emergy Analysis of the Environmental and Economic Benefits of Reclaimed Water Reuse System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-12, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Time scale; Renewable emergy; ET;
    All these keywords.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:287:y:2014:i:c:p:1-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.