IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i4p1481-d321427.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Machine Learning Approaches for Predicting Spatially Explicit Life Cycle Global Warming and Eutrophication Impacts from Corn Production

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaobo Xue Romeiko

    (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, University at Albany, State University of New York, One University Place, George Education Center, Rensselaer, NY 12144, USA)

  • Zhijian Guo

    (Department of Mathematics, University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, NY 12222, USA)

  • Yulei Pang

    (Department of Mathematics, Southern Connecticut State University, 501 Crescent Street, New Haven, CT 06515, USA)

  • Eun Kyung Lee

    (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, University at Albany, State University of New York, One University Place, George Education Center, Rensselaer, NY 12144, USA)

  • Xuesong Zhang

    (Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20740, USA)

Abstract

Agriculture ranks as one of the top contributors to global warming and nutrient pollution. Quantifying life cycle environmental impacts from agricultural production serves as a scientific foundation for forming effective remediation strategies. However, methods capable of accurately and efficiently calculating spatially explicit life cycle global warming (GW) and eutrophication (EU) impacts at the county scale over a geographic region are lacking. The objective of this study was to determine the most efficient and accurate model for estimating spatially explicit life cycle GW and EU impacts at the county scale, with corn production in the U.S.’s Midwest region as a case study. This study compared the predictive accuracies and efficiencies of five distinct supervised machine learning (ML) algorithms, testing various sample sizes and feature selections. The results indicated that the gradient boosting regression tree model built with approximately 4000 records of monthly weather features yielded the highest predictive accuracy with cross-validation (CV) values of 0.8 for the life cycle GW impacts. The gradient boosting regression tree model built with nearly 6000 records of monthly weather features showed the highest predictive accuracy with CV values of 0.87 for the life cycle EU impacts based on all modeling scenarios. Moreover, predictive accuracy was improved at the cost of simulation time. The gradient boosting regression tree model required the longest training time. ML algorithms demonstrated to be one million times faster than the traditional process-based model with high predictive accuracy. This indicates that ML can serve as an alternative surrogate of process-based models to estimate life-cycle environmental impacts, capturing large geographic areas and timeframes.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaobo Xue Romeiko & Zhijian Guo & Yulei Pang & Eun Kyung Lee & Xuesong Zhang, 2020. "Comparing Machine Learning Approaches for Predicting Spatially Explicit Life Cycle Global Warming and Eutrophication Impacts from Corn Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-19, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:1481-:d:321427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1481/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1481/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefan Giljum & Hanspeter Wieland & Stephan Lutter & Nina Eisenmenger & Heinz Schandl & Anne Owen, 2019. "The impacts of data deviations between MRIO models on material footprints: A comparison of EXIOBASE, Eora, and ICIO," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(4), pages 946-958, August.
    2. Xue, Xiaobo & Collinge, William O. & Shrake, Scott O. & Bilec, Melissa M. & Landis, Amy E., 2012. "Regional life cycle assessment of soybean derived biodiesel for transportation fleets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 295-303.
    3. Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Rafiee, Shahin & Omid, Mahmoud & Yousefi, Marziye & Movahedi, Mehran, 2013. "Modeling of energy consumption and GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions in wheat production in Esfahan province of Iran using artificial neural networks," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 333-338.
    4. Charalampos Bratsas & Kleanthis Koupidis & Josep-Maria Salanova & Konstantinos Giannakopoulos & Aristeidis Kaloudis & Georgia Aifadopoulou, 2019. "A Comparison of Machine Learning Methods for the Prediction of Traffic Speed in Urban Places," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, December.
    5. Xiaobo Xue Romeiko, 2019. "A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Crop Systems Irrigated with the Groundwater and Reclaimed Water in Northern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, May.
    6. Gilhespy, Sarah L. & Anthony, Steven & Cardenas, Laura & Chadwick, David & del Prado, Agustin & Li, Changsheng & Misselbrook, Thomas & Rees, Robert M. & Salas, William & Sanz-Cobena, Alberto & Smith, , 2014. "First 20 years of DNDC (DeNitrification DeComposition): Model evolution," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 292(C), pages 51-62.
    7. Nguyen, Trung H. & Nong, Duy & Paustian, Keith, 2019. "Surrogate-based multi-objective optimization of management options for agricultural landscapes using artificial neural networks," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 400(C), pages 1-13.
    8. Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Rafiee, Shahin & Omid, Mahmoud & Mousazadeh, Hossein & Rajaeifar, Mohammad Ali, 2014. "Application of artificial neural networks for prediction of output energy and GHG emissions in potato production in Iran," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 120-127.
    9. Pahlavan, Reza & Omid, Mahmoud & Akram, Asadollah, 2012. "Energy input–output analysis and application of artificial neural networks for predicting greenhouse basil production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 171-176.
    10. Xue, Xiaobo & Pang, YuLei & Landis, Amy E., 2014. "Evaluating agricultural management practices to improve the environmental footprint of corn-derived ethanol," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 454-460.
    11. Raghu Garg & Himanshu Aggarwal & Piera Centobelli & Roberto Cerchione, 2019. "Extracting Knowledge from Big Data for Sustainability: A Comparison of Machine Learning Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-17, November.
    12. Zaher, U. & Stöckle, C. & Painter, K. & Higgins, S., 2013. "Life cycle assessment of the potential carbon credit from no- and reduced-tillage winter wheat-based cropping systems in Eastern Washington State," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 73-78.
    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. Faezeh Mohammadi Kashka & Zeinolabedin Tahmasebi Sarvestani & Hemmatollah Pirdashti & Ali Motevali & Mehdi Nadi & Mohammad Valipour, 2023. "Sustainable Systems Engineering Using Life Cycle Assessment: Application of Artificial Intelligence for Predicting Agro-Environmental Footprint," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-26, April.
    2. Gustavo Larrea‐Gallegos & Ian Vázquez‐Rowe, 2022. "Exploring machine learning techniques to predict deforestation to enhance the decision‐making of road construction projects," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(1), pages 225-239, February.
    3. Shiva Zargar & Yuan Yao & Qingshi Tu, 2022. "A review of inventory modeling methods for missing data in life cycle assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(5), pages 1676-1689, October.

    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. Soltanali, Hamzeh & Nikkhah, Amin & Rohani, Abbas, 2017. "Energy audit of Iranian kiwifruit production using intelligent systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 646-654.
    2. Elsoragaby, Suha & Yahya, Azmi & Mahadi, Muhammad Razif & Nawi, Nazmi Mat & Mairghany, Modather, 2019. "Energy utilization in major crop cultivation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 1285-1303.
    3. Vlontzos, G. & Pardalos, P.M., 2017. "Assess and prognosticate green house gas emissions from agricultural production of EU countries, by implementing, DEA Window analysis and artificial neural networks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 155-162.
    4. Heidari, Mohammad Davoud & Turner, Ian & Ardestani-Jaafari, Amir & Pelletier, Nathan, 2021. "Operations research for environmental assessment of crop-livestock production systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    5. Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Rafiee, Shahin & Omid, Mahmoud & Mousazadeh, Hossein & Shamshirband, Shahaboddin & Hamid, Siti Hafizah Ab, 2015. "Developing a fuzzy clustering model for better energy use in farm management systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 27-34.
    6. John M. Antle & Seojin Cho & S. M. Hossein Tabatabaie & Roberto O. Valdivia, 2019. "Economic and environmental performance of dryland wheat-based farming systems in a 1.5 °C world," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 165-180, February.
    7. Rajaeifar, Mohammad Ali & Akram, Asadolah & Ghobadian, Barat & Rafiee, Shahin & Heijungs, Reinout & Tabatabaei, Meisam, 2016. "Environmental impact assessment of olive pomace oil biodiesel production and consumption: A comparative lifecycle assessment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 87-102.
    8. Elsoragaby, Suha & Yahya, Azmi & Mahadi, Muhammad Razif & Nawi, Nazmi Mat & Mairghany, Modather, 2019. "Analysis of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) of transplanting and broadcast seeding wetland rice cultivation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    9. Morteza Zangeneh & Narges Banaeian & Sean Clark, 2021. "Meta-Analysis on Energy-Use Patterns of Cropping Systems in Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-28, March.
    10. Javad Zare Derakhshan & Saeed Firouzi & Armaghan Kosari-Moghaddam, 2022. "Energy audit of tobacco production agro-system based on different farm size levels in northern Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 2715-2735, February.
    11. Kledja Canaj & Andi Mehmeti & Julio Berbel, 2021. "The Economics of Fruit and Vegetable Production Irrigated with Reclaimed Water Incorporating the Hidden Costs of Life Cycle Environmental Impacts," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-13, September.
    12. Rose A Graves & Ryan D Haugo & Andrés Holz & Max Nielsen-Pincus & Aaron Jones & Bryce Kellogg & Cathy Macdonald & Kenneth Popper & Michael Schindel, 2020. "Potential greenhouse gas reductions from Natural Climate Solutions in Oregon, USA," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-30, April.
    13. Mack, Sarah K. & Lane, Robert R. & Deng, Jia & Morris, James T. & Bauer, Julian J., 2023. "Wetland carbon models: Applications for wetland carbon commercialization," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 476(C).
    14. Bruckner, Martin & Wood, Richard & Moran, Daniel & Kuschnig, Nikolas & Wieland, Hanspeter & Maus, Victor & Börner, Jan, 2019. "FABIO - The Construction of the Food and Agriculture Biomass Input-Output Model," Ecological Economic Papers 27, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    15. Nittaya Cha-un & Amnat Chidthaisong & Kazuyuki Yagi & Sirintornthep Towprayoon, 2021. "Simulating the Long-Term Effects of Fertilizer and Water Management on Grain Yield and Methane Emissions of Paddy Rice in Thailand," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-22, November.
    16. Elahi, Ehsan & Zhang, Zhixin & Khalid, Zainab & Xu, Haiyun, 2022. "Application of an artificial neural network to optimise energy inputs: An energy- and cost-saving strategy for commercial poultry farms," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 244(PB).
    17. Dinesh Shrestha & Jesslyn F. Brown & Trenton D. Benedict & Daniel M. Howard, 2021. "Exploring the Regional Dynamics of U.S. Irrigated Agriculture from 2002 to 2017," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, April.
    18. Alireza Taghdisian & Sandra G. F. Bukkens & Mario Giampietro, 2022. "A Societal Metabolism Approach to Effectively Analyze the Water–Energy–Food Nexus in an Agricultural Transboundary River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-25, July.
    19. Han, Huanhao & Gao, Rong & Cui, Yuanlai & Gu, Shixiang, 2022. "A semi-empirical semi-process model of ammonia volatilization from paddy fields under different irrigation modes and urea application regimes," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    20. Hyun-Jun Choi & Sewon Kim & YoungSeok Kim & Jongmuk Won, 2022. "Predicting Frost Depth of Soils in South Korea Using Machine Learning Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-14, August.

    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:4:p:1481-:d:321427. 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.