Author Archives: Gordon Rogers

Greenhouse gas emissions from the agriculture sector

This report provides updated projections of key agricultural activity levels which when applied to the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (DCCEE) emissions spreadsheets give projections of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in each year from 2009 to 2030.

It provides an update to previous projection rounds taken by the Centre for International Economics (CIE) for the then Australian Greenhouse Office (AGO) and DCCEE in 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2008. Like previous rounds, this report uses three economic models of Australian agriculture:

  • The Global Meat Industries (GMI) model;
  • The CIE Grain model; and
  • The CIE Dairy model.

Click here for the full report.

Protected cropping

Protected cropping accounts for a significant slice of the vegetable and flower industries in Australia, with a current annual GVP of about $1.3 billion (Graeme Smith Consulting) or about 16% of the total GVP for horticulture of $8.4 billion (ABS). There are about 1,300 ha of greenhouses in Australia with an average infrastructure value of $75/m2.

The industry is currently expanding at a rate of a rate of 25 ha of new structures per year with the cost of building new structures valued at $200/m2 or at ($50 million) per year.

Types of structures

There are three broad classes of protected cropping generally referred to by industry as low tech, medium tech and high tech.

  • Low structures are usually plastic covered igloos with minimal ventilation and heating .
  • Medium tech structures are more sophisticated, with computerised ventilation systems, heating and growing systems. The structures themselves are large multi span buildings with automated ventilation and shading systems but the coverings are usually a form of plastic.
  • High tech structures are the most sophisticated growing systems available with advanced computer-controlled heating and cooling systems, CO2 enrichment, large conglomerate structures covering large areas, up to 25ha in Australia. The covering material is usually glass.

guyra greenhouse

Productivity

The yield potential from protected cropping is much higher than is possible to achieve from normal outdoor production, with potential improvements ranging from 250 to 800%

Average yields from protected cropping compared to field production

Crop Field
(kg/m²)
Greenhouse
(kg/m²)
Increase
(%)
Tomatoes 18 76 422
Capsicums 12 30 250
Cucumbers 20 100 500
Lettuce 10 80 800

These yield differences also depend on the sophistication of the greenhouse system

Relative yields from low, medium and high tech protected cropping

Yield
(kg/m2/year)
Low
technology
Medium
technology
High
technology
Tomatoes 25 – 35 35 – 55 65 – 105
Capsicums 15 – 20 20 – 25 30 – 33
Cucumbers 60 88 120
Lettuce 30 60 90

Protected cropping to mitigate climate change

The protected-cropping industry is likely to be least affected by the physical impacts of climate change and increased climate variability and as such it may be a very useful adaptation strategy to allow production to continue, especially in areas close to retail markets. Temperature can be regulated to a large extent, and heating of greenhouses located in cool regions is becoming more energy- and emissions-efficient all the time.

Protected cropping and associated hydroponic irrigations systems are very efficient users of water. Fruit and vegetable growing generally uses about 38L of water per dollar of value produced, whereas hydroponically-produced vegetable crops use only 0.6L of water to produce the same value.

The main concern with greenhouse production is the cost as well as energy that is consumed in construction, maintenance and production of the crops. Structures tend to have:

  • High energy-use for heating and cooling.
  • High energy-inputs into the construction of greenhouses and in the manufacture of materials.

 


 

Postharvest temperature management

Cooling and cool rooms use a great deal of energy; together with irrigation pumps, cooling accounts for 66% of greenhouse gas emissions from vegetable farms. Of course, the industry product has to get the market, retailer or processor in good condition. This generally means cooling products as quickly as possible and storing at the optimum temperature.

Years of postharvest research has aimed at maximising shelf life and quality of fresh produce. However, until now there has been little or no consideration of the energy required to achieve this outcome. Tables which list shelf life at optimum storage temperatures rarely list storage life at sub-optimal temperatures, even though such temperatures may easily allow for normal distribution and retail.

For example, broccoli storage life is maximised at 0C. Under optimal conditions at 0C some cultivars can remain acceptable for 2 months or even more. However, at 5C broccoli can be stored for 2 weeks without major loss of quality, while storage for up to 10 days is still possible at 8C (in the absence of ethylene). An efficient supply chain should deliver broccoli to retail within 3-4 days of harvest; even after unrefrigerated display in the store, broccoli initially cooled to 8C should still have several days “fridge life” following purchase.

Similarly, seedless watermelons are ideally stored at 7-10C, giving them a shelf life of around 3 weeks. Increasing the temperature to 15C has been found to shorten shelf life to 2 weeks (UCDavis). However, Australian research has shown that so long as temperatures are kept below 25C, watermelons can remain acceptable for 14 days or more. This means that – so long as ambient conditions are favourable – cool fruit may not require refrigerated transport.

Research into the effect of sub-optimal cooling and storage could deliver major savings to the vegetable industry. Questions that need to be answered include;

  • What temperature do we need to achieve the shelf life and quality required for a given end use?
  • Are there more efficient ways of managing field heat eg harvesting at night instead of during the day? forced air cooling instead of vacuum cooling?
  • How quickly does temperature need to be reduced to still provide adequate shelf life and quality?
  • How can we minimize energy requirements while still providing good shelf life?