| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Casimir, Justin, et al.
(författare)
-
Färdplan för effektivisering och egenförsörjning av energi i lantbruket
- 2018
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The greenhouse gas emissions connected to energy use in the Swedish agriculture (excluding greenhouse cultures) represents 0,6 Mton CO2eq which is about 4% of the agriculture greenhouse gas emission in Sweden (Jordbruksverket, 2018). The “All Party Committee for environmental objectives” (miljömålsberedning) suggested that by 2045 Sweden should has a zero-net-emission of greenhouse gases. The parliament (Riksdag) adopted this political framework for climate issues which entered into force the 1st of January 2018. To reach this ambitious goal, all sectors including agriculture must undertake measures.The project developed a roadmap in the form of a list of measures leading the Swedish agriculture towards a sustainable status in line with the Swedish Environmental Goals. This roadmap was developed using a backcasting methodology. It means that first the goals were set and then the measures needed to move from the present status to the goals were developed. Based on political goals as well sustainability principles, a vision of the future for Swedish agriculture has been developed. The vision is:“In the future, agriculture is energy effective, independent from fossil resources, deliver energy to the society and is profitable. Agricultural enterprises have access to knowledge, competences, and decision support. Collaboration within the agricultural sector as well as with other sectors is comprehensive for energy.To analyse the current situation, four studies were implemented within the project: (i) a survey of farmers view and interest, (ii) a survey of agrarian education, (iii) identification of bottlenecks with research and development (R&D), and (iv) an analysis of how relevant tools for energy are communicated. A selection of observation positive for the energy and climate questions are as follow: more agricultural enterprises have solar cells today than three years ago, 25% of the respondents have attend an eco-driving course, large farms have done most energy surveys and, investment in fossil free energy is seen as positive for both enterprise and the environment. Negative observations are that farmers miss a long-term regulation for energy production and feel a lack of knowledge about energy efficiency and production. Only 8% of the respondents uses high blends biofuels. In addition, respondents have expressed a lack of collaboration and inquire for a joint communication for R&D results concerning energy efficiency and production. In the agrarian education the interest in energy efficiency and production is low.A range of measures contributing to reach the vision were suggested. These measures vary between different communication strategies, improved advisory services and need for regulatory simplification to minimize the hassle with permissions and administration. Simple and accessible key figures as well as better statistics would make it easier to follow the different energy flows. It is up to decision-making authorities, advisory organisations, institutions of higher education, agricultural organisations and agriculture themselves to implement these measures.The greenhouse gas emissions connected to energy use in the Swedish agriculture (excluding greenhouse cultures) represents 0,6 Mton CO2eq which is about 4% of the agriculture greenhouse gas emission in Sweden (Jordbruksverket, 2018). The “All Party Committee for environmental objectives” (miljömålsberedning) suggested that by 2045 Sweden should has a zero-net-emission of greenhouse gases. The parliament (Riksdag) adopted this political framework for climate issues which entered into force the 1st of January 2018. To reach this ambitious goal, all sectors including agriculture must undertake measures.The project developed a roadmap in the form of a list of measures leading the Swedish agriculture towards a sustainable status in line with the Swedish Environmental Goals. This roadmap was developed using a backcasting methodology. It means that first the goals were set and then the measures needed to move from the present status to the goals were developed. Based on political goals as well sustainability principles, a vision of the future for Swedish agriculture has been developed. The vision is:“In the future, agriculture is energy effective, independent from fossil resources, deliver energy to the society and is profitable. Agricultural enterprises have access to knowledge, competences, and decision support. Collaboration within the agricultural sector as well as with other sectors is comprehensive for energy.To analyse the current situation, four studies were implemented within the project: (i) a survey of farmers view and interest, (ii) a survey of agrarian education, (iii) identification of bottlenecks with research and development (R&D), and (iv) an analysis of how relevant tools for energy are communicated. A selection of observation positive for the energy and climate questions are as follow: more agricultural enterprises have solar cells today than three years ago, 25% of the respondents have attend an eco-driving course, large farms have done most energy surveys and, investment in fossil free energy is seen as positive for both enterprise and the environment. Negative observations are that farmers miss a long-term regulation for energy production and feel a lack of knowledge about energy efficiency and production. Only 8% of the respondents uses high blends biofuels. In addition, respondents have expressed a lack of collaboration and inquire for a joint communication for R&D results concerning energy efficiency and production. In the agrarian education the interest in energy efficiency and production is low.A range of measures contributing to reach the vision were suggested. These measures vary between different communication strategies, improved advisory services and need for regulatory simplification to minimize the hassle with permissions and administration. Simple and accessible key figures as well as better statistics would make it easier to follow the different energy flows. It is up to decision-making authorities, advisory organisations, institutions of higher education, agricultural organisations and agriculture themselves to implement these measures.
|
|
| 3. |
- Djodjic, Faruk, et al.
(författare)
-
Targeting critical source areas for phosphorus losses: Evaluation with soil testing, farmers’ assessment and modelling
- 2018
-
Ingår i: AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0044-7447 .- 1654-7209. ; 47, s. 45-56
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Diffuse phosphorus (P) losses from arable land need to be reduced in a cost-efficient way, taking into account their temporal and spatial variability. This study, based on 16 farms across southern Sweden, examined possibilities for identifying critical source areas for P losses based on the combined results of high-resolution erosion modelling, independent risk assessments by farmers, soil survey and SWOT analysis performed by farmers. Statistically significant differences in dissolved P release were found between soil P test classes in the studied area, whereas soil textural classes and not P content governed potential mobilisation of soil particles and unreactive P. Spatial comparison of problem areas identified by farmers and modelled features showed that the modelled erosion pathways intersected 109 in a total of 128 (85%) observed problem areas. The study demonstrates the value in involving farmers in the identification of critical source areas in order to select and support implementation of effective countermeasures.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Landquist, Birgit, et al.
(författare)
-
Uppdaterad och utökad livscykelanalys av svensk grisproduktion
- 2020
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Förbättrade produktionsresultat inom svensk grisproduktion, användning av biproduk-ter och djurhälsans betydelse har analyserats i en livscykelanalys. Klimatavtrycket för kött från en svensk medelgris är 2,54 kg koldioxidekvivalenter/kg slaktvikt, vilket är bland de lägsta jämfört med tillgängliga internationella studier. Produktionen av foder står för 54 % av klimatavtrycket och hanteringen av stallgödsel för 36 %. Av foderstaten till den svenska integrerade medelslaktgrisen utgjorde biprodukter 10 % och soja 4 %. Baserat på antalet dagars förlängd uppfödningstid för sjuka grisar, visar vi att 3,4 % av klimatavtrycket beror på ökad foderförbrukning orsakad av fyra utvalda sjukdomar i svenska grisbesättningar. Produktionshöjande åtgärder såsom exempelvis friska grisar och hög fodereffektivitet, övergång till förnybara bränslen inom såväl odling av foder som inom grisuppfödning är viktiga åtgärder för att minska klimatavtrycket givet att det inte påverkar andra miljöaspekter, djurhälsa eller djurvälfärd negativt. En central aspekt är fortsatt utveckling mot välbalanserade foderstater med val av foderråvaror med lågt klimatavtryck, användning av biprodukter och inhemska fodergrödor odlade på ett hållbart sätt.
|
|
| 7. |
- Lindgren, Urban, 1966-, et al.
(författare)
-
Environmental and economic impacts of decision-making at an Arable farm : an integrative modeling approach
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Ambio. - : The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. - 0044-7447 .- 1654-7209. ; 34:4-5, s. 393-401
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This study examines the dependency between physical and anthropogenic systems in arable farming. The dynamic simulation model, which has its methodological origins in the modeling traditions of environmental systems analysis and microsimulation, reproduces the mutual links between the physical flows (e.g. energy, materials, emissions, and products), the farmer as a decision-making agent, and structural conditions influencing the farm. In running the model, the intention is to answer the question: What are the impacts on profitability and the environment (i.e. greenhouse gas effects, eutrophication, acidification, and energy use) of variations in prices, subsidies, the farmer's environmental values, and the farmer's skill in making production allocation choices? The results of the model simulations indicate, for example, that in terms of economic performance, a farmer can choose between two relatively sustainable strategies-either to specialize in organic production (thereby benefiting from higher subsidies and output prices), or to focus on conventional cultivation and use of pesticides and fertilizers (thereby benefiting from large yields). Regarding environmental impacts, there was no clear-cut divide between organic and conventional farming due to difficulties in allocating the use of manure. This finding is essentially related to the choice of system boundary, which is thoroughly discussed in the paper.
|
|
