Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions from crop production using the farm energy analysis tool
Abstract
Using the Farm Energy Analysis Tool (FEAT), we compare energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the cultivation of different crops, highlight the role of sustainable management practices, and discuss the impact of soil nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions and the uncertainty associated with denitrification estimates in the northeastern United States. FEAT is a transparent, open-source model that allows users to choose parameter estimates from an evolving database. The results show that nitrogen fertilizer and N2O emissions accounted for the majority of differences between crop energy use and GHG emissions, respectively. Integrating sustainable practices such as no tillage and a legume cover crop reduced energy use and GHG emissions from corn production by 37% and 42%, respectively. Our comparisons of diverse crops and management practices illustrate important trade-offs and can inform decisions about agriculture. We also compared methods of estimating N2O emissions and suggest additional research on this potent GHG.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Because emissions data from cultivation of feed ingredients and manufacture of feed were not available for the study region except for dried distillers grains with solubles, the Farm Energy Analysis Tool was used, an open-source database greenhouse gas emission model calibrated with an extensive crop production literature database.
“Because emissions data from cultivation of feed ingredients and manufacture of feed were not available for our study region (except for DDGS), we used the Farm Energy Analysis Tool, an open-source database GHG emission model calibrated with an extensive crop production literature database”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Camargo et al., 2013
The LCA model of Camargo et al. (2013) included production of inputs and processes not included in conventional beef production LCAs, such as feed-associated pest management and transportation of inputs.
“Additionally, the LCA model of Camargo et al. (2013) included production of inputs and processes not included in conventional beef production LCAs, such as feed-associated pest management and transportation of inputs.”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Camargo et al. (2013)
The slightly greater feed production emissions were likely because the FL ration included only a small proportion of legume forages and a larger proportion of DDGS and corn grain which have greater emissions per kg than other feedstuffs.
“Feed production emissions in the FL finishing scenario were slightly greater than those reported by Lupo et al. (2013) and Pelletier et al. (2010), likely because our FL ration included only a small proportion of legume forages and a larger proportion of DDGS and corn grain which have greater emissions per kg than other feedstuffs (Camargo et al., 2013).”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Camargo et al., 2013
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 53 · Cited by 180
- Authors
- Camargo, G. G. T., Ryan, M. R., & Richard, T. L.
- Affiliations
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- Cornell University (US)
- Venue
- BioScience
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-04
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 263-273
- ISSN
- 0006-3568 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-3244
- OpenAlex
- W2106466314
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 2.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- BioScience (publishedVersion)
- BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Transportation
- Morgan Family Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Energy, Environment, Agriculture Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Keywords
- greenhouse gas emissions, nitrous oxide emissions, nitrogen fertilization, denitrification, no-tillage, legume cover crops, maize production, sustainable agricultural management, northeastern United States
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review