Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Earth Science

ISSN 2095-0195

ISSN 2095-0209(Online)

CN 11-5982/P

Postal Subscription Code 80-963

2018 Impact Factor: 1.205

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front Earth Sci    2011, Vol. 5 Issue (3) : 317-322    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-011-0183-0
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Impacts of biogas projects on agro-ecosystem in rural areas----A case study of Gongcheng
Jin YANG1, Weichao CHEN2, Bin CHEN1()
1. State Key Laboratory of Water Environment Simulation, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China; 2. Guangxi Administration Centre of Foreign-Funded Project for Agricultrue, Nanning 530022, China
 Download: PDF(87 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

The rapid growth of agro-ecosystem has been the focus of “New Rural Construction” in China due to intensive energy consumption and environmental pollution in rural areas. As a kind of renewable energy, biogas is helpful for new energy development and plays an important role in the sustainable development of agro-ecosystem in China. To evaluate the effects of biogas on agro-ecosystem from a systematic angle, we discussed the status quo of household biogas and identified its main factors that may have impacts on agro-ecosystem. An indicator framework covering environmental, social and economic aspects was established to quantify the impacts exerted by biogas project on agro-ecosystem. A case study of Gongcheng was then conducted to evaluate the combined impact of biogas project using the proposed indicator framework. Results showed that there was a notable positive effect brought by the application of biogas, and the integrated benefit has been significantly improved by 60.36%, implying that biogas as a substitute energy source can promote the sustainable level of rural areas.
Keywords biogas      agro-ecosystem      sustainable development      Gongcheng     
Corresponding Author(s): CHEN Bin,Email:chenb@bnu.edu.cn   
Issue Date: 05 September 2011
 Cite this article:   
Jin YANG,Weichao CHEN,Bin CHEN. Impacts of biogas projects on agro-ecosystem in rural areas----A case study of Gongcheng[J]. Front Earth Sci, 2011, 5(3): 317-322.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/10.1007/s11707-011-0183-0
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/Y2011/V5/I3/317
Destination layerCriteria layerIndicator layerExplanation
Sustainable developmentEnvironmental indicatorsIncreasing rate of organic matterIncreasing organic matter by returning biogas slurry, residue and straw to the field
SO2 reduction rateBiogas as a substitution of coal to reduce SO2 emission
CO2 reduction rateBiogas as a substitution of coal and firewood to reduce CO2 emission
Forest deterioration reduction rateBiogas as a substitution of coal and firewood to slowdown forest deterioration
Proportion of arable land taken by biogasdigesterArable land occupied by biogas digester construction
Increase in animal excreta disposal rateImproving residential environment quality through anaerobic fermentation
Social indicatorsReduction in the rate of emigrate workersMore jobs and opportunities are provided by biogas projects
Increase in labor productivity rate in rural areasSurplus labor is fully used for maintenance of biogas digester
Increase in the proportion of technical farmersEnlarging the proportion of technical farmers through technical training on biogas technology
Decrease in infection rate of parasitic diseaseInfluenced by the disposal of human and animal excreta
Decrease in infection rate of intestine diseaseInfluenced by the disposal of human and animal excreta
Economic indicatorsPromotion in farmers’ consumption levelIncrease in income simulated the consumption
Increasing rate of grain output per hectareThe use of organic fertilizer leads to the increase in grain output
Increasing rate of pig breeding numberBiogas pool construction pulled the livestock breeding
Increasing rate of fruit output per hectareThe developing mode of “pig-biogas-fruit” accelerated the development of fruit industry
Proportion of construction costThe proportion of pool construction costs in the whole expenditure
Tab.1  Evaluation indicator framework for biogas project
GradesSignificant beneficial impactLarge beneficial impactModerate beneficial impactSlight beneficial impactMinor beneficial impactSignificant adverse impactLarge adverse impactModerate adverse impactSlight adverse impactMinor adverseimpact
RatesIncrease by 90%Increase by 70%Increase by 50%Increase by 30%Increase by 10%Decrease by 90%Decrease by 70%Decrease by 50%Decrease by 30%Decrease by 10%
Value97531-9-7-5-3-1
Tab.2  Five-grade classification
Destination layerCriteria layerIndicator layerTotal weightValue of indicatorsValue of impacts
Sustainable developmentEnvironmental indicators 0.63Increasing rate of organic matter0.0352.490.084
SO2 reduction rate 0.0820.0523.510.156
CO2 reduction rate 0.3850.2435.122.187
Forest deterioration reduction rate 0.1770.1128.551.008
Proportion of arable land taken by biogas digester0.0290.0180.54-0.018
Animal excreta disposal rate 0.2720.1717.81.197
Social indicators 0.151Reduction in the rate of emigrate workers 0.0670.0120.02
Increase in labor productivity rate in rural areas 0.1150.0171.50.034
Increase in the proportion of technical farmers 0.4390.0663.10.198
Decrease in infection rate of parasitic disease 0.1890.0295.60.1624
Decrease in infection rate of intestine disease0.1890.0299.10.261
Economic indicators 0.218Promotion in farmers’ consumption level 0.0590.0138.50.104
Increasing rate of grain output per hectare 0.2820.067.20.42
Increasing rate of pig breeding number 0.1760.0381.50.076
Increasing rate of fruit output per hectare 0.4430.0975.50.485
Proportion of construction cost 0.0390.0081.7-0.016
Sum6.3584
Tab.3  Impacts of biogas project on the sustainable development of agro-ecosystem
Environmental benefitSocial benefitEconomic benefit
Score7.34.44.9
LevelLarge beneficial impactModerate beneficial impactModerate beneficial impact
Tab.4  Environmental, social and economic benefits derived from biogas project
1 Berglund M, B?rjesson P (2006). Assessment of energy performance in the life-cycle of biogas production. Biomass Bioenergy , 30(3): 254–266
doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2005.11.011
2 Brown B B, Yiridoe E K, Gordon R (2007). Impact of single versus multiple policy options on the economic feasibility of biogas energy production: Swine and dairy operations in Nova Scotia. Energy Policy , 35(9): 4597–4610
doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.03.023
3 Chen Y, Yang G H, Sweeney S, Feng Y Z (2010). Household biogas use in rural China: A study of opportunities and constraints. Renew Sustain Energy Rev , 14(1): 545–549
doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2009.07.019
4 Hediger W (1999). Reconciling “weak” and “strong” sustainability. International Journal of Social Economics , 26 (7–9): 1120–1143
5 Saaty T L (1992). Decision Making for Leaders.Pittsburgh: RWS Publications
6 Stoorvogel J J, Antle J M, Crissman C C, Bowen W (2004). The trade-off analysis model: Integrated bio-physical and economic modeling of agricultural production systems. Agric Syst , 80(1): 43–66
doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2003.06.002
7 Vaidya O S, Kumar S (2006). Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications. Eur J Oper Res , 169(1): 1–29
doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028
8 Wang X H, Di C L, Hu X Y, Wu W M, Jiang X P, Jiang S Y (2007). The influence of using biogas digesters on family energy consumption and its economic benefit in rural areas—Comparative study between Lianshui and Guichi in China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev , 11(5): 1018–1024
doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2005.08.001
9 Yiridoe E K, Gordon R, Brown B B (2009). Nonmarket cobenefits and economic feasibility of on-farm biogas energy production. Energy Policy , 37: 1170–1179
10 Zhang P D, Jia G M, Wang G (2007). Contribution to emission reduction of CO2 and SO2 by household biogas construction in rural China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev , 11(8): 1903–1912
doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2005.11.009
[1] Xuezhu CUI, Shaoying LI, Xuetong WANG, Xiaolong XUE. Driving factors of urban land growth in Guangzhou and its implications for sustainable development[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2019, 13(3): 464-477.
[2] Na DUAN,Cong LIN,Pingzhi WANG,Jing MENG,Hui CHEN,Xue LI. Ecological analysis of a typical farm-scale biogas plant in China[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2014, 8(3): 375-384.
[3] Shaoqing CHEN, Bin CHEN. Assessing inter-city ecological and economic relations: An emergy-based conceptual model[J]. Front Earth Sci, 2011, 5(1): 97-102.
[4] Hoshu CHOU, . Introspection of sustainable development and environmental planning of National Park management[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2010, 4(1): 83-88.
[5] Andreas WILKES, Jingzheng TAN, MANDULA, . The myth of community and sustainable grassland management in China[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2010, 4(1): 59-66.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed