IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i14p5828-d387030.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Utilization of Crop Residues as Forest Protection: Predicting the Production of Wheat and Rapeseed Residues

Author

Listed:
  • Petra Hýsková

    (Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 6-Suchdol, 165 00 Praha, Czech Republic)

  • Štěpán Hýsek

    (Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 6-Suchdol, 165 00 Praha, Czech Republic)

  • Vilém Jarský

    (Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 6-Suchdol, 165 00 Praha, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Deforestation is a global threat in the form of the reduction of all of the ecosystem services provided to humans by forest ecosystems. For this reason, this article deals with the protection of forest ecosystem services by searching for a substitute for wood biomass. In recent years, the post-harvest residues of agricultural crops have been used mainly for energy and material uses. If this raw material is to be used industrially in the long term, we must have an idea of its future production. In most studies, predictions of future post-harvest residue productions are resolved in terms of the availability for energy sectors. This paper deals with the total amount of produced post-harvest residues that can be taken from the field; the post-harvest residue production for selected sectors is not subtracted from the overall prediction. Post-harvest residue production was estimated using the residue to product ratio (RPR), wherein the RPR coefficient was calculated for the monitored crops in each year, and the post-harvest residue production was subsequently calculated in each year according to the conversion rate characteristic for each year. The production of two widespread agricultural crops—wheat and rapeseed—was predicted. Linear regression models were used for the estimations. Based on these models, we predict the production of 58.3 million tonnes of post-harvest wheat residues and 22.4 million tonnes of post-harvest rapeseed residues in 2030 in the European Union. In the Czech Republic, we predict the production of 1.8 million tonnes of post-harvest wheat residues and 1.3 million tonnes of post-harvest rapeseed residues. The presented results can be used as the basis for further considerations of the material use of post-harvest residues and for the substitution of wood with these residues.

Suggested Citation

  • Petra Hýsková & Štěpán Hýsek & Vilém Jarský, 2020. "The Utilization of Crop Residues as Forest Protection: Predicting the Production of Wheat and Rapeseed Residues," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-10, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:14:p:5828-:d:387030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5828/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5828/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jiang, Dong & Zhuang, Dafang & Fu, Jinying & Huang, Yaohuan & Wen, Kege, 2012. "Bioenergy potential from crop residues in China: Availability and distribution," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 1377-1382.
    2. Jie-Sheng Tan-Soo & Norliyana Adnan & Ismariah Ahmad & Subhrendu Pattanayak & Jeffrey Vincent, 2016. "Econometric Evidence on Forest Ecosystem Services: Deforestation and Flooding in Malaysia," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(1), pages 25-44, January.
    3. Lucie Michel & David Makowski, 2013. "Comparison of Statistical Models for Analyzing Wheat Yield Time Series," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-11, October.
    4. Finger, Robert, 2010. "Evidence of slowing yield growth - The example of Swiss cereal yields," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 175-182, April.
    5. Kluts, Ingeborg & Wicke, Birka & Leemans, Rik & Faaij, André, 2017. "Sustainability constraints in determining European bioenergy potential: A review of existing studies and steps forward," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 719-734.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Shirzad, Mohammad & Kazemi Shariat Panahi, Hamed & Dashti, Behrouz B. & Rajaeifar, Mohammad Ali & Aghbashlo, Mortaza & Tabatabaei, Meisam, 2019. "A comprehensive review on electricity generation and GHG emission reduction potentials through anaerobic digestion of agricultural and livestock/slaughterhouse wastes in Iran," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 571-594.
    2. Agnieszka Kuś & Dorota Grego-Planer, 2021. "A Model of Innovation Activity in Small Enterprises in the Context of Selected Financial Factors: The Example of the Renewable Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-17, May.
    3. Bardsley, Douglas K. & Bardsley, Annette M., 2014. "Organising for socio-ecological resilience: The roles of the mountain farmer cooperative Genossenschaft Gran Alpin in Graubünden, Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 11-21.
    4. Mohsen Jamali & Esmaeil Bakhshandeh & Mohammad Yaghoubi Khanghahi & Carmine Crecchio, 2021. "Metadata Analysis to Evaluate Environmental Impacts of Wheat Residues Burning on Soil Quality in Developing and Developed Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-13, June.
    5. Zhao, Xiqiang & Zhou, Xing & Wang, Guoxiu & Zhou, Ping & Wang, Wenlong & Song, Zhanlong, 2022. "Evaluating the effect of torrefaction on the pyrolysis of biomass and the biochar catalytic performance on dry reforming of methane," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 313-325.
    6. Yang, Jing & Song, Kaihui & Hou, Jian & Zhang, Peidong & Wu, Jinhu, 2017. "Temporal and spacial dynamics of bioenergy-related CO2 emissions and underlying forces analysis in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1323-1330.
    7. Lohan, Shiv Kumar & Jat, H.S. & Yadav, Arvind Kumar & Sidhu, H.S. & Jat, M.L. & Choudhary, Madhu & Peter, Jyotsna Kiran & Sharma, P.C., 2018. "Burning issues of paddy residue management in north-west states of India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 693-706.
    8. El Benni, Nadja & Finger, Robert, 2014. "Where is the risk? Price, yield and cost risk in Swiss crop production," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 95(3).
    9. Zhang, XiaoHong & Pan, HengYu & Cao, Jun & Li, JinRong, 2015. "Energy consumption of China’s crop production system and the related emissions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 111-125.
    10. Finger, Robert, 2012. "Biases in Farm-Level Yield Risk Analysis due to Data Aggregation," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 61(01), pages 1-14, February.
    11. Li, Mo & Fu, Qiang & Singh, Vijay P. & Liu, Dong & Li, Jiang, 2020. "Optimization of sustainable bioenergy production considering energy-food-water-land nexus and livestock manure under uncertainty," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Qun'ou Jiang & Yuwei Cheng & Qiutong Jin & Xiangzheng Deng & Yuanjing Qi, 2015. "Simulation of Forestland Dynamics in a Typical Deforestation and Afforestation Area under Climate Scenarios," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-26, September.
    13. Abbas, Yasir & Yun, Sining & Wang, Ziqi & Zhang, Yongwei & Zhang, Xianmei & Wang, Kaijun, 2021. "Recent advances in bio-based carbon materials for anaerobic digestion: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    14. Ji, Li-Qun, 2015. "An assessment of agricultural residue resources for liquid biofuel production in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 561-575.
    15. Robert Czubaszek & Agnieszka Wysocka-Czubaszek & Piotr Banaszuk, 2020. "GHG Emissions and Efficiency of Energy Generation through Anaerobic Fermentation of Wetland Biomass," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-25, December.
    16. Chen, Xiaoguang, 2016. "Economic potential of biomass supply from crop residues in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 141-149.
    17. Nadja El Benni & Robert Finger & Stefan Mann & Bernard Lehmann, 2012. "The distributional effects of agricultural policy reforms in Switzerland," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 58(11), pages 497-509.
    18. Song, Guobao & Song, Jie & Zhang, Shushen, 2016. "Modelling the policies of optimal straw use for maximum mitigation of climate change in China from a system perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 789-810.
    19. Laura Villalobos & Juan Robalino & Catalina Sandoval & Francisco Alpízar, 2023. "Local Effects of Payments for Ecosystem Services on Rural Poverty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(3), pages 753-774, March.
    20. Ru Fang, Yan & Zhang, Silu & Zhou, Ziqiao & Shi, Wenjun & Hui Xie, Guang, 2022. "Sustainable development in China: Valuation of bioenergy potential and CO2 reduction from crop straw," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:14:p:5828-:d:387030. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.