Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparison between two strategies for the collection of wheat residue after mechanical harvesting: Performance and cost analysis
CREA Centro di Ricerca Ingegneria e Trasformazioni Agroalimentari, Italy.
CREA Centro di Ricerca Ingegneria e Trasformazioni Agroalimentari, Italy.
CREA Centro di Ricerca Ingegneria e Trasformazioni Agroalimentari, Italy.
CREA Centro di Ricerca Ingegneria e Trasformazioni Agroalimentari, Italy.
Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: Sustainability, E-ISSN 2071-1050, Vol. 12, no 12, article id 4936Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The growing population worldwide will create the demand for higher cereal production, in order to meet the food need of both humans and animals in the future. Consequently, the quantity of crop by-products produced by cereal cropping will increase accordingly, providing a good opportunity for fostering the development of the sustainable supply chain of renewable solid fuels and natural feedstock for animal farming. The conventional machineries used in wheat harvesting do not guarantee the possibility to collect the chaff as additional residue to the straw. The present study investigated the possibility to equip a conventional combine with a specific device, already available on the market, in order to collect the chaff either separately (onto a trailer), or together with the straw (baled). The total residual biomass increased by 0.84 tha-1 and 0.80 tha-1 respectively, without negatively affecting the performance of the combine when the chaff was discharged on the swath. Farmers can benefit economically from the extra biomass collected, although a proper sizing of the machine chain is fundamental to avoid by-product losses and lower revenue. © 2020 by the authors.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
MDPI AG , 2020. Vol. 12, no 12, article id 4936
Keywords [en]
Bioenergy, Biomass, By-product, Chaff, Combine harvester, Straw, agricultural technology, byproduct, comparative study, cost analysis, crop residue, forage, harvesting, technological development, wheat, Animalia, Triticum aestivum
National Category
Natural Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-45630DOI: 10.3390/SU12124936Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85087790887OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-45630DiVA, id: diva2:1458053
Note

Funding details: Horizon 2020, 727961; Funding text 1: This research was funded by European Union's Horizon 2020 AGROinLOG project grant number 727961 (http://agroinlog-h2020.eu/en/home/). Authors thank the contractor Leif Jönsson (Tjärby Gästgivaregård Laholm, Sweden) and his team for their valid support and assistance provided during the activities, as well as Sandu Lazar for their valuable contribution in the field activities. Moreover, the authors thank Consuelo Attolico for looking after the relationship with the French company ETS Thierart?.

Available from: 2020-08-13 Created: 2020-08-13 Last updated: 2022-02-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Jonsson, Nils

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Jonsson, Nils
By organisation
Agriculture and Food
In the same journal
Sustainability
Natural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 62 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf