This is not the document you are looking for? Use the search form below to find more!

Report home > Science

Energy input-output analysis in Turkish agriculture

1.00 (1 votes)
Document Description
The objective of this study is to determine the energy use in the Turkish agricultural sector for the period of 1975-2000. In the study, the inputs in the calculation of energy use in agriculture include both human and animal labor, machinery, electricity, diesel oil, fertilizers, seeds, and 36 agricultural commodities were included in the output total. Energy values were calculated by multiplying the amounts of inputs and outputs by their energy equivalents with the use of related conversion factors. The output-input ratio is determined by dividing the output value by the input value. The results indicated that total energy input increased from 17.4 GJ/hain1975 to 47.4 GJ/ha in the year 2000. Similarly, total output energy rose from 38.8 to55.8GJ/ha in the same period. As a consequence, the output-input ratio was estimated to be 2.23 in1975 and 1.18 in 2000. This result shows that there was a decrease in the output- input energy ratio. It indicates that the use of inputs in Turkish agricultural production was not accompanied by the same result in the final product. This can lead to problems associated with these inputs, such as global warming, nutrient loading and pesticide pollution. Therefore, there is a need to pursue anew policy to force producers to undertake energy efficient practices to establish sustainable production systems.
File Details
  • Added: May, 10th 2010
  • Reads: 809
  • Downloads: 80
  • File size: 76.43kb
  • Pages: 13
  • Tags: energy, input output, energy ratio, agriculture, turkey
  • content preview
Submitter
  • Username: samanta
  • Name: samanta
  • Documents: 1258
Embed Code:

Add New Comment




Related Documents

GOODY Analysis in Turkish for IMKB

by: Mehmet Cetin, 4 pages

GOODY Analysis in Turkish for IMKB

STUDY OF LINKAGES BETWEEN CONSTRUCTION SECTOR AND OTHER SECTORS OF THE SRI LANKAN ECONOMY

by: samanta, 15 pages

Input-output analysis has been widely used to assess sectoral economic performance and production interdependence. This paper uses input-output tables compiled since 1960s in Sri Lanka to analyze the ...

A LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF NECESSITY AS A PART OF THE MODAL SYSTEM IN TURKISH

by: asuna, 193 pages

The main aim of the present study is to define the markers of necessity in Turkish and to define how the choice between the different markers of necessity are made in different occasions, including ...

ESTIMATING BROADBAND DEMAND AND ITS ECONOMIC IMPACT IN LATIN AMERICA

by: shinta, 20 pages

This paper estimates the demand for broadband technology in Latin America and quantifies the macroeconomic impact of broadband technology on employment and productivity. While the total number ...

Activity Analysis in Teambuilding and Group Initiative Programs

by: shinta, 69 pages

The purpose of this project was to demonstrate the need for activity analysis in teambuilding programs through prevailing literature and to create an activity analysis database for ...

Overview of Energy Flow for Industries in Standard Industrial ...

by: lakesha, 176 pages

Through a subcontract with the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Arthur D. Little, Inc. (ADL) undertook a task for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Industrial Technology (OIT) to ...

Deictic Expressions and the Types of Deixis in Turkish Narratives

by: tero, 11 pages

In this paper, it is intended to explore how the analyzes of deictic expressions in Turkish facilitate to develop textual and contextual understanding and to determine point of view in narrative ...

Security Analysis in Role-Based Access Control

by: samanta, 10 pages

Delegation is often used in administrative models for Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) systems to decentralize administration tasks. While the use of delegation greatly enhances flexibility and ...

Sources of inflation and output movements in Poland and Hungary: Policy implications for accession to the economic and monetary union

by: samanta, 25 pages

The paper examines the sources of fluctuations in inflation and output in Poland and Hungary. Using a rational expectations, dynamic open economy aggregate supply-aggregate demand model and ...

THE IMPACT OF BROADBAND ON JOBS AND THE GERMAN ECONOMY

by: samanta, 33 pages

This study quantifies the macroeconomic impact of investment in broadband technology on employment and output of Germany's economy. Building on the "National Broadband Strategy" announced by the ...

Content Preview
Renewable Energy 29 (2004) 39–51
www.elsevier.com/locate/renene
Energy input–output analysis in Turkish
agriculture
Burhan Ozkan ∗, Handan Akcaoz, Cemal Fert
University of Akdeniz, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural Economics, Antalya 07058,
Turkey
Received 28 December 2002; accepted 15 April 2003
Abstract
The objective of this study is to determine the energy use in the Turkish agricultural sector
for the period of 1975–2000. In the study, the inputs in the calculation of energy use in
agriculture include both human and animal labor, machinery, electricity, diesel oil, fertilizers,
seeds, and 36 agricultural commodities were included in the output total. Energy values were
calculated by multiplying the amounts of inputs and outputs by their energy equivalents with
the use of related conversion factors. The output–input ratio is determined by dividing the
output value by the input value. The results indicated that total energy input increased from
17.4 GJ/ha in 1975 to 47.4 GJ/ha in the year 2000. Similarly, total output energy rose from
38.8 to 55.8 GJ/ha in the same period. As a consequence, the output–input ratio was estimated
to be 2.23 in 1975 and 1.18 in 2000. This result shows that there was a decrease in the output–
input energy ratio. It indicates that the use of inputs in Turkish agricultural production was
not accompanied by the same result in the final product. This can lead to problems associated
with these inputs, such as global warming, nutrient loading and pesticide pollution. Therefore,
there is a need to pursue a new policy to force producers to undertake energy efficient practices
to establish sustainable production systems.
 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Energy; Input–output; Energy ratio; Agriculture; Turkey
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-90-242-310-2475; fax: +1-90-242-227-4564.
E-mail address: bozkan@akdeniz.edu.tr (B. Ozkan).
0960-1481/$ - see front matter  2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0960-1481(03)00135-6

40
B. Ozkan et al. / Renewable Energy 29 (2004) 39–51
Nomenclature
ME
machine energy (MJ/ha)
G
weight of tractor (kg)
E
constant that is taken to be 158.3 Mj/kg for tractor
T
economic life of tractor (h)
C
effective field capacity (ha/h)
a
W
working width (m)
S
working speed (km/h)
E
field efficiency
f
1. Introduction
Energy in agriculture is important in terms of crop production and agroprocessing
for value adding. Human, animal and mechanical energy is extensively used for crop
production in agriculture. Energy requirements in agriculture are divided into two
groups being direct and indirect. Direct energy is required to perform various tasks
related to crop production processes such as land preparation, irrigation, interculture,
threshing, harvesting and transportation of agricultural inputs and farm produce [1].
It is seen that direct energy is directly used at farms and on fields. Indirect energy,
on the other hand, consists of the energy used in the manufacture, packaging and
transport of fertilizers, pesticides and farm machinery [2,3]. As the name implies,
indirect energy is not directly used on the farm. Major items for indirect energy are
fertilizers, seeds, machinery production and pesticides. Calculating energy input in
agricultural production is more difficult in comparison to the industry sector due to
the high number of factors affecting agricultural production [4]. However, consider-
able studies have been conducted in different countries on energy use in agriculture
[3,5–11].
Energy use in the agricultural sector depends on the size of the population engaged
in agriculture, the amount of arable land and the level of mechanization. The agricul-
tural sector is vital in the Turkish economy. It is still Turkey’s largest employment
provider and a significant contributing sector to GDP, imports and exports. The share
of agriculture in 2000 in GDP at current prices was 14.1%. The contribution of
agricultural commodities in total exports was 10.6% and more than 40% of the total
population was engaged in agriculture. However, the importance of agriculture has
declined in relation to the rapid increase observed in the industry and service sec-
tors [12,13].
The number of farms is increasing in Turkey in contrary to developed countries.
The number of farms was 3.1 million in 1963 and it reached 4.1 million in 1991.
The number of plots is rather high and as a result of this the average plot size is
very small (1.09 ha). About 92.57% of the farms are family owned. Although the
average farm size was 7.73 ha in 1950, it decreased to 5.69 ha in 1991. Crop and

B. Ozkan et al. / Renewable Energy 29 (2004) 39–51
41
livestock production are carried out together in the majority of farm households
(72.7%). The share of crops value in the total agricultural production value is 66.0%
[14]. As of 1997, the total agricultural land was 28 million ha in Turkey of which
69.3% was for the area sown, 18.3% for the fallow area, 2.9% for the vegetable
area, 5.1% for the fruit area, 2.4% for olives and 2.0% for the orchard area [15]. In
1975, the total production area for the major crops examined in the study was 18.5
million ha and it reached to 20.5 million ha in 2000 with an increase of 1.1%.
Cereals are of great importance in Turkish agriculture. In 2001, cereal production
was nearly 30 million tones. Wheat takes the most important place in cereals with
a share of 64.5%, barley ranks second with 25.5% and is followed by maize with
a share of 7.5%. The remaining 2.5% consists of the production of other crops.
Turkey is also one of the most important fresh fruit and vegetable producing coun-
tries with 41 million tonnes. Turkish fresh fruit production in the year 2000 was
around 11 million tones. Turkey’s share in the world fresh fruit production is 2.5%.
Total vegetable production in the world is nearly 628 million tones of which 5% is
provided by Turkey [13].
As a result of development, Turkey’s energy consumption has increased in recent
years; therefore, the problem associated with energy use in Turkish agriculture has
grown. If the increase in the energy use in the agricultural industry continues, the
only chance of producers to increase total output will be using more input as there
is no chance to expand the size of arable lands. Under these circumstances, an input–
output analysis provides planners and policy-makers an opportunity to evaluate econ-
omic interactions of energy use.
The aim of this study is to provide a descriptive analysis of energy use in Turkish
agriculture in the period 1975–2000. This analysis is important to perform necessary
improvements that will lead to a more efficient and environment-friendly production
system. It is expected from the study to fill a gap in determining a production system
that involves the sustainable use of energy in Turkish agriculture.
2. Data and method
The energy ratio between output and input in Turkish agricultural production is
calculated for the period 1975–2000. In the calculation of the energy ratio both
human and animal labor, machinery, electricity, diesel oil, seed and fertilizer amounts
and yield values of 36 crops have been used. In the study, energy equivalents of
inputs and outputs were used to estimate the energy ratio. Energy equivalents of
inputs and outputs are given in Appendix 1. The data were converted into suitable
energy units and expressed in GJ/ha. The data used in the study were collected from
various statistical resources such as the Statistical Yearbook of Turkey published by
the State Institute of Statistics (SIS) under the Prime Ministry of the Republic of
Turkey [15–21] and the Special Privatization Commission Reports by the State Plan-
ning Organization under the Prime Ministry [22]. The study has also benefited from
previous researches and studies conducted on energy analysis in agriculture.
Energy ratio of input–output is determined by calculating energy equivalents of

42
B. Ozkan et al. / Renewable Energy 29 (2004) 39–51
yields gained from major crops produced and that consumed inputs in production.
In the study, 36 crops were taken into account to estimate output energy values.
These crops are wheat, rye, barley, oat, maize, rice, dry beans, lentils, chickpeas,
sugar beet, tobacco, cotton, sunflower, seed cotton, pears, apples, figs, apricots, cher-
ries, peaches, grapes, oranges, tangerines, grapefruits, lemons, nuts, tomatoes,
cucumbers, peppers, eggplants, carrots, water melon/melons, onions, potatoes, olive
and tea. The inputs used in the calculation of agricultural energy use include both
human and animal labor, machinery, electricity, diesel oil, fertilizers and seeds.
In order to make an energy analysis it is necessary to consider the use of human
and animal power in agricultural processes [15–18,21]. The economically active agri-
cultural population is considered to be above 12 years old in the examined years
except the year 2000 in which the economically active agricultural population is
considered to be above 15 years old by SIS. For the estimation of gross energy input
for agriculture, working days of agricultural workers are taken as 210 days assuming
an average of 8 h of work a day, and the number of working hours of animals in
agricultural production are taken as 360 h annually [15,23].
To calculate the energy used in agricultural production or repair of machinery,
the following formula was used [4].
ME
(G
E) / (T
C )
(1)
a
where ME, machine energy (MJ/ha); G, weight of tractor (kg); E, constant that is
taken 158.3 MJ/kg for tractor; T, economic life of tractor (h); C , effective field
a
capacity (ha/h).
For calculation of C , the following equation was used.
a
C
(S
W
E ) / 10
(2)
a
f
where C , effective field capacity (ha/h); W, working width (m); S, working speed
a
(km/h); E , field efficiency.
f
In the calculation of tractor manufacturing and repair costs, a single-wheeled 40
kW-power tractor with 60–70 hp of an average weight of 2500 kg was taken as
default [24]. Data on electricity use in agriculture were collected from the statistical
yearbook of SIS [15–18,21]. These data were given in terms of energy used in agri-
culture, and did not separate the energy used for personal purposes from that used
for commercial purposes.
Since there are no data available for diesel consumption for machinery used in
agriculture, the total diesel energy input was calculated from the diesel consumption
of tractors used during the examined period. Therefore, in the calculation it was
assumed that a 40 kW tractor consumes 4.8 l diesel per h with a 40% loading capacity
[25] and that its average use on the field is 720 h [26].
There are no data available for the application of pesticides. In the calculation of
chemical energy input information on individual fertilizer materials used was not
available; therefore, amounts of three main kinds of fertilizers (nitrogen, phosphate
and potash) were used in the estimation [15–18,21]. Since the largest energy input
is in the form of nitrogen fertilizer, total energy input calculated by summating the
energy amounts of individual fertilizers was converted to N equivalent.

B. Ozkan et al. / Renewable Energy 29 (2004) 39–51
43
In order to be able to make the analysis, it is essential to consider biochemical
energy sources, i.e. the amount of energy stored in the seed. Energy equivalents for
selected crop seeds were taken to be equal to the energy equivalent of the product
itself. Energy output from selected seeds of agricultural commodities was calculated
by multiplying the production amount by its corresponding equivalent. In the study,
wheat, barley, oats, rye, maize, rice, dry beans, lentils and chickpeas, potatoes and
sunflowers were considered in the calculation of biochemical energy.
Energy output arises mainly from the product itself and from the byproducts.
Energy output from main products is calculated by multiplying production and their
corresponding energy equivalent [23]. In calculation of byproduct husk of the com-
modity is taken as 30% of the grain and straw equal to the weight of grain. Cob
corn is calculated for maize as 0.8 times of maize grain equivalent. Energy output
from selected byproducts of agricultural commodities was calculated by multiplying
the byproduct amount by its corresponding equivalent. In the study wheat, barley,
maize, rice and seed cotton were considered in the calculation of byproduct energy.
3. Results and discussion
In the study output–input energy ratios were calculated by using energy consump-
tions of labor, machinery, electricity, diesel oil, fertilizer, seeds used in agricultural
production and of examined crops and their byproducts.
The main physical power sources of Turkish agriculture were examined and results
are presented in Table 1. Inputs such as human labor, animal power, and machinery
used in agriculture were expressed as physical power sources. The results indicated
that a decrease was observed in the agricultural labor for the period under study. As
can be seen in Table 1, the active agricultural population decreased from 11.7 million
in 1975 to 7.1 million in 2000. Similarly the total human power in agriculture
decreased from 10.5 million hp in 1975 to 6.4 million hp in 2000. This result indi-
cates that a decrease of about 39% occurred in the active population and total
human labor.
With the increase of technology in agriculture, the use of animal power in this
industry decreased year by year. The reason for the fall in the number of animals
used in agricultural production can be attributed to the increase observed in the level
of mechanization. In the period under study, the average animal power dropped from
38.1 to 23.2 million hp. The highest value in total human power was 11.3 million
hp in 1990, and the highest value for animal power was 41.6 million hp in 1980.
As a result, the decrease in total animal power was nearly 39% in the last 25 years.
In the calculation of energy consumption of machinery in agriculture only tractors
were considered. The number of tractors rose from 243 000 in 1975 to 942 000 in
the year 2000 growing at a four-fold rate. In the study period, the average power
calculated for tractors increased from 38.5 to 58.7 hp. Total physical power calcu-
lated for agricultural labor, animal power and machinery is given in Table 1. As can
be seen, total physical power rose from 58 million hp in 1975 to 84.9 million hp in
the year 2000. It shows that the horse power of tractors increased 1.5-fold during

44
B. Ozkan et al. / Renewable Energy 29 (2004) 39–51
Total
physical
power
a
v.
(million
hp)
58.0
73.1
72.1
76.2
79.1
84.9
Av.
pow.
(hp)
38.5
49.4
51.3
54.1
57.4
58.7
066
369
974
454
863
835
Tractor
(thousand)
243
436
583
692
776
941
Mechanical
Total
animal
av.
pow.
(million
hp)
38.1
41.6
31.2
27.5
26.8
23.2
Av.
pow.
(hp)
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.7
buf.
W.
(million)
1.1
1.0
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.1
Av.
pow.
(hp)
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
attle
C
(
million)
13.8
15.9
12.5
11.4
11.8
10.8
Av.
pow.
(hp)
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
and
Mule
donkey
(million)
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
0.9
0.6
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
Av.
pow.
(hp)
3
3
3
3
3
3
agriculture
Turkish
Horse
(million)
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
in
hp)
a
v.
sources
Animal
Total
human
pow.
(million
10.5
10.0
10.9
11.3
7.7
6.4
power
labor
Av.
pow.
(hp)
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
physical
of
Agricultural
No
(million)
11.7
11.1
12.1
12.5
8.6
7.1
1
Table
Availability
Years
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000

B. Ozkan et al. / Renewable Energy 29 (2004) 39–51
45
Table 2
Estimated physical energy input in Turkish agriculture
Years
Human avg.
Animal avg.
Tractor man. Electricity
Petroleum
Total
annual work
annual work
and repair
(1015 J)
(1015 J)
physical
(1015 J)
(1015 J)
energy
energy input
(1015J)
1975
45.2
34.0
1.41
3.2
47.3
131.1
1980
42.9
36.9
1.48
7.8
84.9
174.0
1985
46.8
28.6
1.55
13.4
113.6
204.0
1990
48.3
25.4
1.64
24.7
134.8
234.8
1995
33.2
25.0
1.57
65.0
151.2
276.0
2000
27.4
21.9
1.56
104.0
183.3
338.2
the last 25 years. This increase can be attributed to increase in the number of tractors
and the development in horse power of tractors.
Input values of physical energy in agriculture are illustrated in Table 2. Total
physical energy input consists of human labor, animal power, machinery power,
electricity and diesel oil consumptions. It was observed that there was a decrease in
the energy input value for human labor and animal power, while there was an
increase for machinery power, electricity and diesel oil in the study period. The input
value of physical energy was estimated to be 131.1 × 1015J in 1975 and it reached
338.2 × 1015 J in 2000. This shows that physical input value used in the agricultural
industry increased by 158% in the last 25 years. At the beginning of the examined
period the shares of human and animal power, tractor manufacture and repair energy,
electricity and diesel oil energy in total power were 34.5, 25.9, 1.1, 2.4 and 36.1%,
respectively. Due to a reduction in the shares of human and animal power, the tractor
manufacture and repair energy in the total energy in 2000 took shares of 8.1, 6.5
and 0.5%, respectively. However, there was an increase in electricity and diesel oil
consumption with shares of 30.8 and 54.2%.
In the calculation of fertilizer energy input in agricultural production, N, P O and
2
5
K O were taken into account and estimated values were summarized in Table 3. As
2
Table 3
Fertilizer energy input in Turkish agriculture
Years
N (000
Energy from P O
Energy
K O
Energy
Total energy N
2
5
2
tons)
N
(000
from P O
(000
from
input (1012 J) equivalent
2
5
tons)
tons)
K O
(106 kg)
2
1975
1750.2
112 712.0
1909.8
22 841.3
31.6
211.9
135 765.1
2108.2
1980
3038.6
195 683.6
2839.9
33 965.7
89.0
596.2
230 245.5
3575.2
1985
4383.7
282 307.6
2800.1
33 488.9
67.8
454.3
316 250.7
4910.7
1990
5711.6
367 827.4
3671.1
43 906.0
126.8
849.6
412 583.0
6406.6
1995
5016.6
323 069.0
3405.4
40 728.6
134.2
899.1
364 696.8
5663.0
2000
6563.3
422 676.5
3697.4
44 220.9
164.2
1100.1
467 997.6
7267.0

46
B. Ozkan et al. / Renewable Energy 29 (2004) 39–51
can be seen from the table, there was a 3.75-fold increase in terms of fertilizer energy
input for N, 1.94-fold for P O , and 5.19-fold for K O. Total fertilizer energy input
2
5
2
in agricultural production was calculated as 135 765.1 × 1012 J in 1975 and it reached
467 997.6 × 1012 J in 2000. If total fertilizer energy input value was expressed in
terms of N equivalent, it would equal 7262.0 × 106 kg in 2000.
Seed use amounts, seed energy values and energy equivalent value sourced from
seed use were also examined in the period 1975–2000 (Table 4). The energy equival-
ent value for seed use was 56 026.8 × 1012 J in 1975 and it increased to
165 778.5 × 1012 J in 2000. In 1975, cereal and pulses have the highest ratio in the
total amount of seeds with 69.7%, followed by 22.5% for oil seeds and 7.8% for
tubers. In 2000, cereal and pulses, oil seeds, and tubers constitute the total amount
of seed consumed with shares of 83.6, 12.3 and 4.1%, respectively. This result
showed that there was an increase regarding seed use for the examined crops. This
increase in the use of seed indicates an increase in the energy equivalent values.
Total input energy increased by approximately 172.4% from 1975 to 2000 (17.4
GJ/ha in 1975 as compared to 47.4 GJ/ha in 2000). Physical power, fertilizer and
seed sources of input energy have a linear increase, although increase determined
input costs during 1975–2000 period. Physical energy, fertilizer and seed consump-
tion increased over the study period.
Production values of selected crops and their energy equivalents are given in the
Table 5. Total grain equivalent of selected crops are as 33 215 × 103 tons for cereal
and pulses, 6439.3 × 103 tons for sugar beet, 11.4 × 103 tons for tobacco, 706.4 ×
103 tons for cotton, 3563 × 103 tons for oil seed, 1554.6 × 103 tons for tubers,
4098.2 × 103 tons for fruits, 1489.8 × 103 tons for vegetables, 1444.9 × 103 tons for
olives and 41.3 × 103 tons for tea in 2000. Total grain production rose from
321186.7 × 103 tons in 1975 to 52 563.8 × 103 tons in the year 2000. In 1975, the
production value of cereals and pulses has the highest ratio with 45.4% followed by
vegetables with 15.4%, sugar beet with 14.2% and fruits with 12.8%. The shares of
cereals, vegetables, sugar beet and fruits in 2000 were 35, 20.2, 19.8 and 11.1%,
respectively. The most significant increase over the study period was in olive pro-
duction with a 3.2-fold increase. The production increases are 2.9% for tea, 2.7%
for sugar beet, 2.5% for vegetables, 2.4% tubers, 1.8% for cotton, 1.7% for oil seeds
Table 4
Seed energy input in Turkish agriculture
Years
Cereals and
Oil seed (000 Tuber (000
Grain equivalent
Energy eqv. (1012 J)
pulses (000
tones)
tones)
(106 kg)
tones)
1975
2416.6
781.4
269.0
3811.3
56 026.8
1980
2420.9
815.0
275.0
3874.3
56 952.2
1985
2601.7
849.5
311.0
4122.5
60 601.0
1990
2583.3
1064.4
280.0
4462.0
65 591.5
1995
2846.3
1304.8
400.0
5163.3
75 900.5
2000
8939.1
1311.6
440.0
11 277.4
165 778.5

B. Ozkan et al. / Renewable Energy 29 (2004) 39–51
47
Table 5
Production values of major crops and their energy equivalents
Crop (1000 tones)
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Cereals and pulses
22 202.0
24 698.0
27 424.0
31 964.0
29 660.0
33 215.0
Sugar beet
6948.6
6766.0
9830.1
13 985.7
11 170.6
18 781.4
Tobacco
199.9
234.0
170.5
296.0
204.4
208.5
Cotton
480.0
500.0
518.0
654.6
851.5
879.9
Oil seed
1256.0
1550.0
1628.8
1907.4
2187.5
2095.1
Tuber
3160.0
3960.0
5370.0
5850.0
7600.0
7570.0
Fruits
6264.5
7473.0
7596.0
8751.0
9519.0
10 500.0
Vegetables
7548.0
9810.0
12 735.0
13 753.0
15 980.0
19 159.0
Olive
561.0
1350.0
600.0
1100.0
515.0
1800.0
Tea
261.8
476.1
624.2
608.4
523.5
758.0
Total grain eqv. (106 kg) 32 186.7
36 446.7
40 085.6
47 551.2
45 035.1
52 563.8
Total energy eqv. (1015 J) 473.1
535.8
589.3
699.0
662.0
772.7
and fruits, 1.5% for cereal and pulses, while tobacco production was stagnant in the
period under study.
These figures indicate that there was increase in the output of examined crops
(Table 5). Energy equivalents of examined crops were calculated by using equivalent
value of each crop. The results showed that the total output energy equivalent is
estimated to be 473.1 × 1015 J in 1975 and it has increased 772.7 × 1015 J in 2000
and this increase is realized as 163%.
Total output energy is influenced by weather, yield, price and technology. Weather
conditions influence output energy level and yield. Output energy however increased
over 25 years study period low energy returns generated low crop yields according
to input use amounts. Output energy level is adversely affected by changes in com-
modity price in terms of farmer preferences to choose the crop sown for the next
growing period. New technologies have also affected energy output. Newly
developed seed varieties have increased the yield, but not at desired levels because
of the use of old growing systems.
A comparison of output energy vs. input energy was performed. The energy ratio
was found by dividing total input energy ratio into total output energy. The results
of input–output values in per hectare basis for Turkish agriculture are presented in
Table 6. As can be seen, the size of arable land for Turkey has increased from 18.5
million ha in 1975 to 20.5 million ha in 2000. Physical power availability per ha
and physical energy input were found to be 4.1 hp and 16.5 GJ/ha, respectively. The
total output energy was as 38.8 GJ/ha in 1975 and it has increased to 55.8 GJ/ha in
2000. This result shows that output–input ratio has declined from 2.23 in 1975 to
1.18 in 2000. The percentage change in the energy ratio from 1975 to 2000 for
Turkey per hectare basis was -47.1%. This result indicated that input energy value
has shown faster increase compared to output energy value.

48
B. Ozkan et al. / Renewable Energy 29 (2004) 39–51
Table 6
Energy input and output values in Turkish agriculture (per hectare)
Years
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Area sown (million ha)
18.5
19.4
20.3
21.4
20.5
20.5
Available physical power (hp/ha)
3.1
3.8
3.6
3.6
3.9
4.1
Estimated physical energy input (GJ/ha)
7.1
9.0
10.0
11.0
13.5
16.5
Fertilizer input in nitrogen equivalent (kg/ha) 114.0
184.3
241.9
299.4
276.2
354.5
Fertilizer energy input (GJ/ha)
7.3
11.9
15.6
19.3
17.8
22.8
Seed energy input (GJ/ha)
3.0
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.7
8.1
Total energy input (GJ/ha)
17.4
23.8
28.6
33.4
35
47.4
Production value of major crops in grain
1.7
1.9
2.0
2.2
2.2
2.6
equivalent (ton/ha)
Production value of major crops in energy
25.6
27.6
29.0
32.7
32.3
37.7
equivalent (GJ/ha)
By product energy equivalent (GJ/ha)
13.2
13.9
14.6
16.1
15.7
18.1
Total output in GJ/ha
38.8
41.5
43.6
48.8
48.0
55.8
Output input ratio
2.23
1.74
1.52
1.46
1.37
1.18
4. Conclusions
The aim of this study is to calculate the output–input ratio in Turkish agriculture
to explore the current and past trends in respect of energy use. The methodology
used in calculation of energy use was broken down into two groups, namely inputs
and outputs. The total input energy consisted of the sum of all components of energy
used in production of outputs. The energy ratios in this study are based on the total
input and output in the primary agricultural sector. The major inputs used in agricul-
tural production and the output for the 36 crops were multiplied by their energy
equivalents for the period of 1975–2000.
The results showed that total input energy consumption and output energy
increased during the years 1975–2000. The input energy value rose from 17.4 GJ/ha
in 1975 to 47.4 GJ/ha in the year 2000. Similarly, total output energy increased from
38.8 GJ/ha in 1975 to 55.8 GJ/ha in 2000. The output–input ratio was found by
dividing output energy into input energy. The energy ratio was estimated to be 2.23
in 1975 and 1.18 in 2000. Hence, the energy declined by 47% over the study period.
It indicates a poor development in the energy use efficiency due to the decrease of
the energy ratio. The reason for this development stems mainly from the fact that
total output energy overall is not increasing at a faster rate than total input energy
in Turkish agriculture.
It was observed that the share of human and animal power (animate) went from
60.4 to 14.6% during the period of 1975–2000, whereas mechanical and electrical
power (inanimate power) increased from 39.6 to 85.5% in the same period. This
shows the development of mechanical and electrical power in the agricultural indus-
try. Although the production area for the crops increased and rose from 18.5 to 20.5

Document Outline

  • Energy input-output analysis in Turkish agriculture
    • Introduction
    • Data and method
    • Results and discussion
    • Conclusions
    • References

Download
Energy input-output analysis in Turkish agriculture

 

 

Your download will begin in a moment.
If it doesn't, click here to try again.

Share Energy input-output analysis in Turkish agriculture to:

Insert your wordpress URL:

example:

http://myblog.wordpress.com/
or
http://myblog.com/

Share Energy input-output analysis in Turkish agriculture as:

From:

To:

Share Energy input-output analysis in Turkish agriculture.

Enter two words as shown below. If you cannot read the words, click the refresh icon.

loading

Share Energy input-output analysis in Turkish agriculture as:

Copy html code above and paste to your web page.

loading