Analysis of Changes in Carbon Footprint of Farmland Before and After Tobacco Planting in Huang-Huai Tobacco Growing Region

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2024-0563

Abstract

Abstract:

To investigate the carbon emission characteristics of tobacco-dominant agricultural fields in the Huang-Huai region, this study took the rural complex as the basic research unit, and analyzed the changes in the carbon footprint of farmland ecosystem before and after tobacco planting. The main carbon emission links were identified, which could provide theoretical basis for the realization of green and low-carbon management in tobacco-dominated farmland areas. This study selected an agricultural complex in Shandong, which had transformed to a tobacco-dominant model since 2019. Through a questionnaire survey of raw material input, agricultural management measures, yield and other factors in the planting process of different local planting systems, the carbon footprint and composition of farmland production in 2018 and 2020 were calculated using the life cycle method. In 2020, the economic benefit per unit area reached 41548 yuan/hm², which was 3.2 times of that in 2018. Carbon emission per unit area in 2020 was 185.45 t/(hm²·a), with an increase of 108% compared with 2018, and carbon sink per unit area was 548.9 t/(hm²·a), with a decrease of 30% compared with 2018. Carbon footprint per unit area and carbon footprint per unit yield decreased by 48% and 40%, carbon production efficiency and carbon ecological efficiency decreased by 58% and 75%, and carbon economic efficiency increased by 103%. The carbon emission per unit area of flue-cured tobacco planting system was 119.40 t/(hm²·a), 64% of the regional average, and the carbon sink was 98.8 t/(hm²·a), 18% of the regional average. Flue-cured tobacco cultivation was a weak carbon active cropping system. After the farmland system was changed to flue-cured tobacco as the main planting system, the carbon sink of the whole region decreased, carbon emissions increased, and carbon footprint decreased significantly.

Key words: Huang-Huai tobacco area, tobacco-plant, rural complex, life cycle assessment, carbon emission, carbon footprint, Huang-Huai tobacco growing region

ZHANG Yang, DU Yuhai, DONG Xiaowei, LIU Yang, LIU Liwei, YAN Huifeng, KONG Decai. Analysis of Changes in Carbon Footprint of Farmland Before and After Tobacco Planting in Huang-Huai Tobacco Growing Region[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(8): 90-97.

Figures/Tables 8

References 37

[1]	张学智, 王继岩, 张藤丽, 等. 中国农业系统甲烷排放量评估及低碳措施[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2021, 44(3):200-208.
[2]	方恺. 足迹家族:概念、类型、理论框架与整合模式[J]. 生态学报, 2015, 35(6):1647-1659.
[3]	段华平, 张悦, 赵建波, 等. 中国农田生态系统的碳足迹分析[J]. 水土保持学报, 2011, 25(5):203-208.
[4]	王占彪, 王猛, 陈阜. 华北平原作物生产碳足迹分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2015, 48(1):83-92. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.01.09
[5]	CHEN X, MA C, ZHOU H. Identifying the main crops and key factors determining the carbon footprint of crop production in China, 2001-2018[J]. Resources, conservation & recycling, 2021,172:105661.
[6]	WANG X, CHEN Y, CHEN X, et al. Crop production pushes up greenhouse gases emissions in China: evidence from carbon footprint analysis based on national statistics data[J]. Sustainability, 2019, 11(18):4931.
[7]	CHEN Z, XU C, LI L, et al. Effects of multi-cropping system on temporal and spatial distribution of carbon and nitrogen footprint of major crops in China[J]. Global ecology and conservation, 2019,22:e00895.
[8]	XU Q, HU K, YAO Z, et al. Evaluation of carbon, nitrogen footprint and primary energy demand under different rice production systems[J]. Ecological indicators, 2020,117:106634.
[9]	LIANG L, RIDOUTT B G, LAL R, et al. Nitrogen footprint and nitrogen use efficiency of greenhouse tomato production in North China[J]. Journal of cleaner production, 2019,208:285-296.
[10]	YAN M, CHENG K, LUO T, et al. Carbon footprint of grain crop production in China e based on farm survey data[J]. Journal of cleaner production, 2015,104:130-138.
[11]	朱永昶, 李玉娥, 姜德锋, 等. 基于生命周期评估的冬小麦-夏玉米种植系统碳足迹核算——以山东省高密地区为例[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2017, 34(5):473-482.
[12]	杨自立, 顾慈阳, 高同雨. 京郊京白梨果园生产系统碳源/汇特征分析[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2017, 31(10):144-149.
[13]	邹晓霞, 张巧, 张晓军, 等. 玉米花生宽幅间作碳足迹初探[J]. 花生学报, 2017, 46(2):11-17.
[14]	WANG L, COULTER J A, LI L, et al. Plastic mulching reduces nitrogen footprint of food crops in China: A meta-analysis[J]. Science of the total environment, 2020,748,748:141479.
[15]	闫新甫, 孔劲松, 罗安娜, 等. 近20年全国烤烟产区种植规模消长变化分析[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2021, 42(4):92-101.
[16]	余小芬, 杨树明, 邹炳礼, 等. 菜籽油枯有机无机复混肥对烤烟产质量及养分利用率的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2020, 57(6):1564-1574.
[17]	张若焰, 陈儒, 王秀娟, 等. 现代烟草农业的碳效应核算与分析——以陕西省烟草合作社为例[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2019, 27(12):1903-1915.
[18]	刘青丽, 蒋雨洲, 邹焱, 等. 烟田生态系统碳收支研究[J]. 作物学报, 2020, 46(8):1258-1265. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.94164
[19]	贾明军, 申国明, 夏鹏亮, 等. 烤烟生产投入间接碳排放分析——以湖北省恩施州烟区为例[J]. 江西农业学报, 2024, 36(2):90-97.
[20]	周义和, 刘相甫, 黄晓东, 等. 论烤烟种植布局调整[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2016, 22(2):124-131.
[21]	田云, 张俊飚. 中国农业生产净碳效应分异研究[J]. 自然资源学报, 2013, 28(8):1298-1309. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2013.08.003
[22]	南学军, 蔡立群, 武均, 等. 生物质炭与氮肥配施对春小麦产量及其C:N:P的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2017, 25(8):1154-1162.
[23]	LIAO C, WU C, YAN Y, et al. Chemical elemental characteristics of biomass fuels in China[J]. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2004,27:119-130.
[24]	苗惠田, 张文菊, 吕家珑, 等. 长期施肥对潮土玉米碳含量及分配比例的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43(23):4852-4861.
[25]	全国农业技术推广服务中心. 中国有机肥料养分志[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社,1999.
[26]	阮建云. 茶园生态系统固碳潜力及低碳茶叶生产技术[J]. 中国茶叶, 2010, 32(7):6-9.
[27]	刘健伟. 基于组学技术研究氮素对于茶树碳氮代谢及主要品质成分生物合成的影响[D]. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2016.
[28]	中国烟草总公司, 郑州烟草研究院. GB 2635—1992,烤烟(GB2635—1992)[M]. 北京: 中国标准出版社,1992:1-11.
[29]	颜侃, 陈宗瑜, 王娟, 等. 不同生态区烤烟叶片稳定碳同位素组成特征[J]. 生态学报, 2015, 35(11):3846-3823.
[30]	中国农业科学院烟草研究所. 中国烟草栽培学[M]. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社,2005:66-87.
[31]	叶协锋, 刘红恩, 孟琦, 等. 不同类型烟秸秆化学组分分析[J]. 烟草科技, 2013(10):76-79.
[32]	肖志新, 刘芮, 彭坚强, 等. 生物质颗粒燃料密集烤房节能减排效果研究[J]. 现代农业科技, 2016(24):177-179,187.
[33]	周杏, 冯玄韬, 于书霞, 等. 湖北省油菜种植氮足迹分析[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2018, 41(1):41-46.
[34]	邹晓霞, 张晓军, 王月福, 等. 山东省小麦-夏直播花生种植体系碳足迹[J]. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(3):850-856. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201803.020
[35]	CAMPBELL J S. Tobacco and the environment: the continuous reduction of worldwide energy source use for green leaf curing[J]. Nephron clinical practice, 2015, 16(3):107-117.
[36]	宋朝鹏, 李富欣, 陈少斌, 等. 烤烟烘烤技术现状与发展趋势[J]. 作物杂志, 2010(1):6-8.
[37]	许锡祥, 陈承亮, 吕作新, 等. 几种新型密集烤房烘烤效果比较[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2017, 38(5):82-86.

项目		排放系数EF	参考文献
农资投入	化学氮肥	2.26 kg/kg	CHEN等^[5]
	磷肥	0.64 kg/kg	CHEN等^[5]
	钾肥	0.18 kg/kg	CHEN等^[5]
	有机肥	0.05 kg/kg	CHEN等^[5]
	农药	4.91 kg/kg	田云等^[21]
	农膜	0.68 kg/kg	CHEN等^[5]
能源投入	农机柴油	0.59 kg/kg	田云等^[21]
能源投入	人工	0.25 kg/d	张若焰等^[17]
田间管理	旱作	77.25 kg/hm²	田云等^[21]
	翻耕	312.6 kg/hm²	田云等^[21]
	灌溉	266.5 kg/hm²	段华平等^[3]
秸秆焚烧和初加工	烘烤用煤	0.7559 kg/hm²	张若焰等^[17]
	烘烤用电	0.92 kg/kWh	张若焰等^[17]
	秸秆焚烧	0.045 kg/kg	CHEN等^[4]

项目		排放系数EF	参考文献
农资投入	化学氮肥	2.26 kg/kg	CHEN等^[5]
	磷肥	0.64 kg/kg	CHEN等^[5]
	钾肥	0.18 kg/kg	CHEN等^[5]
	有机肥	0.05 kg/kg	CHEN等^[5]
	农药	4.91 kg/kg	田云等^[21]
	农膜	0.68 kg/kg	CHEN等^[5]
能源投入	农机柴油	0.59 kg/kg	田云等^[21]
能源投入	人工	0.25 kg/d	张若焰等^[17]
田间管理	旱作	77.25 kg/hm²	田云等^[21]
	翻耕	312.6 kg/hm²	田云等^[21]
	灌溉	266.5 kg/hm²	段华平等^[3]
秸秆焚烧和初加工	烘烤用煤	0.7559 kg/hm²	张若焰等^[17]
	烘烤用电	0.92 kg/kWh	张若焰等^[17]
	秸秆焚烧	0.045 kg/kg	CHEN等^[4]

作物	收获器官含碳量Cc_yield	茎秆含碳量Cc_straw	含水量r	经济系数H	参考文献
小麦	0.361	0.421	0.12	0.4	田云等^[21]；南学军等^[22]；LIAO等^[23]
玉米	0.485	0.421	0.13	0.4	田云等^[21]；苗惠田等^[24]；LIAO等^[23]
花生	0.426	0.403	0.1	0.43	田云等^[21]；全国农业技术推广服务中心^[25]；LIAO等^[23]
果树	0.42	0.46	0.11	9.68^*	田云等^[21]；阮建云等^[26]；刘健伟等^[27]
烤烟	0.432	0.458	0.16	0.486	GB2635^[28]；颜侃等^[29]；中国农业科学院烟草研究所^[30]；叶协锋等^[31]

作物	收获器官含碳量Cc_yield	茎秆含碳量Cc_straw	含水量r	经济系数H	参考文献
小麦	0.361	0.421	0.12	0.4	田云等^[21]；南学军等^[22]；LIAO等^[23]
玉米	0.485	0.421	0.13	0.4	田云等^[21]；苗惠田等^[24]；LIAO等^[23]
花生	0.426	0.403	0.1	0.43	田云等^[21]；全国农业技术推广服务中心^[25]；LIAO等^[23]
果树	0.42	0.46	0.11	9.68^*	田云等^[21]；阮建云等^[26]；刘健伟等^[27]
烤烟	0.432	0.458	0.16	0.486	GB2635^[28]；颜侃等^[29]；中国农业科学院烟草研究所^[30]；叶协锋等^[31]

	年份	小麦—玉米	春玉米	花生	果树	烤烟	区域平均
碳生产效率/(kg/kg)	2018	10.03	8.08	3.89	9.05	—	9.21
碳生产效率/(kg/kg)	2020	9.61	8.08	3.62	11.21	0.48	3.83
碳生态效率/(kg/kg)	2018	9.98	7.7	2.77	2.94	—	7.75
碳生态效率/(kg/kg)	2020	9.45	7.7	2.52	3.88	-0.18	1.94
碳经济效率/(元/kg)	2018	6.31	5.66	4.09	8.14	—	6.49
碳经济效率/(元/kg)	2020	5.77	4.85	3.8	17.93	13.85	13.22
碳强度/(t/万元)	2018	15.82	13.61	6.79	3.61	—	11.94
碳强度/(t/万元)	2020	16.4	15.88	6.63	2.16	-0.13	1.47