Determination of Energy Balance and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) of Cotton Cultivation in Turkey: A Case Study from Bismil District of Diyarbakır Province

The purpose of this study is to reveal the energy usage and greenhouse gas emission in lavender production. The study has been conducted in 2022 in Center district of Kırklareli province in Turkey and covers the 2021-2022 production seasons. Agricultural inputs and outputs were calculated to calculate the energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in lavender production. According to the research results, the inputs are 5883.39 MJ ha-1 (59.30%) farmyard manure energy, 2425.51 MJ ha-1 (24.45%) diesel fuel energy, 732.02 MJ ha-1 (7.38%) chemical fertilizers energy, 421.89 MJ ha-1 (4.25%) machinery energy, 276.70 MJ ha-1 (2.79%) human labour energy, 97.31 MJ ha-1 (0.98%) transportation energy and 84.81 MJ ha-1 (0.85%), vermicompost energy, respectively. Total input and output energy were calculated as 9921.63 MJ ha-1 and 12859.77 MJ ha-1, respectively. Energy use efficiency (EUE), specific energy (SE), energy productivity (EP) and net energy (NE) were calculated as 1.30, 2.86 MJ kg-1, 0.35 kg MJ-1 and 2938.13 MJ ha-1, respectively. The total energy input can be classified as 27.24% direct, 72.76% indirect, 62.94% renewable and 37.06% non-renewable. GHG ratio value was calculated as 0.08 kg CO2-eqkg-1 in lavender production.

In this study was purposed to define an energy balance of pumpkin seed production in Kavaklı town of Kırklareli province in Turkey. In order to define the energy balance of pumpkin seed production in dry conditions, trials and measurement were applied in pumpkin seed farm in the Kavaklı town of Kırklareli province. Human labour energy, machinery energy, diesel fuel energy, chemical fertilizers energy and seed energy were computed as energy inputs. The pumpkin seedswere computed as output energy. The energy input and output were computed as 10022.42 MJ ha-1 and as 9611.25 MJ ha-1 in pumpkin seed production. Energy inputs consist respectively for chemical fertilizers energy by 5266.50 MJ ha-1 (52.55%), diesel fuel energy by 3375.78 MJ ha-1 (33.68%), machinery energy by 805.46 MJ ha-1 (8.04%), human labour energy by 429.04 MJ ha-1 (4.28%) and seed energy by 145.63 MJ ha-1 (1.45%). Energy efficiency, specific energy, energy productivity and net energy in pumpkin seed production were computed respectively as 0.96, 12.15 MJ kg-1, 0.08 kg MJ-1 and (-) 411.17 MJ ha-1. 94.27% of total energy inputs in the production of pumpkin seed consisted of non-renewable energy input.

In this research, the energy use efficiency (EUE) and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) of cotton cultivation in Beşiri district of Batman province in Turkey were determined. This research was conducted through face-to-face surveys with 64 farms selected by simple random sampling method in the 2018-2019 cultivation season. The energy input (EI) and energy output (EO) in cotton cultivation were calculated as 52,302.62 MJ/ha and 60,341.03 MJ/ha. Energy inputs consist of electricity energy with 19,948.86 MJ/ha(38.14%), chemical fertilizers energy with 14,163.83 MJ/ha (27.08%), diesel fuel energy with 13,218.49 (25.27%), irrigation water energy with 2563.79 MJ/ha(4.90%), machinery energy with 1071.14 MJ/ha(2.05%), chemicals energy with 797.96 MJ/ha (1.53%), seed energy with 291.46 MJ/ha (0.56%) and human labour energy with 247.09 MJ/ha(0.47%), respectively. Total energy inputs in cotton cultivation can be categorized as 68.79% direct, 31.21% indirect, 5.93% renewable and 94.07% non-renewable. EUE, specific energy (SE), energy productivity (EP) and net energy (NE) in cotton cultivation were calculated as 1.15, 10.23 MJ/kg, 0.10 kg /MJ and 8038.41 MJ/ ha, respectively. Total GHG was calculated as 3742.59 kgCO2-eq ha-1 for cotton cultivation with the greatest share taken by nitrogen (26.19%). Nitrogen was followed by electricity (24.73%), irrigation water (18.48%), diesel fuel (17.31%), seed (5.04%), chemicals (2.93%), phosphorous (2.74%), human labour (2.36%), potassium (0.19%) and machinery (0.03%), respectively. GHG ratio value was calculated as 0.73 kgCO2-eq kg-1 in cotton cultivation.

This study was aimed to determine the energy use efficiency and economic analysis of nectarine production for the 2015–2016 production seasons in Nigde province in Turkey. A survey data were collected in 2017 and the farms were selected according to the full counting method and the survey was applied to these farms. In order to determine the energy use efficiency and economic analysis in the production of nectarine, a survey was made with 8 farms that can be reached over 20 decares of nectarine production in Nigde province. According to results of study, human labour energy, machinery energy, chemical fertilizers energy, chemicals energy, organic fertilizers energy, diesel fuel energy, irrigation water energy and electricity energy were calculated as energy inputs. Nectarine fruit was calculated as output. In nectarine production, total input energy was calculated as 29,893.35 MJ ha−1 and total energy output was calculated as 55,731.09 MJ ha−1. The energy inputs in nectarine production were calculated respectively as chemical fertilizers energy 12,900.69 MJ ha−1 (43.15%), electricity energy 6698.27 MJ ha−1 (22.41%), irrigation water energy 4142.05 MJ ha−1 (13.86%), human labour energy 1826.29 MJ ha−1 (6.11%), chemicals energy 1660.69 MJ ha−1 (5.56%), diesel fuel energy 1479.26 MJ ha−1 (4.95%), machinery energy 1134.65 MJ ha−1 (3.80%) and organic fertilizers energy 51.45 MJ ha−1 (0.17%). The energy use efficiency, specific energy, energy productivity and net energy calculations were calculated in nectarine production respectively as 1.86, 1.02 MJ kg−1, 0.98 kg MJ−1 and 25,837.74 MJ ha−1. Benefit-cost ratio was calculated as 2.02 for nectarine production.

The purpose of this study was to determine the energy use efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions of lemon production. It was performed during the 2019-2020 production period in Turkey. The agricultural inputs and outputs used in lemon production were calculated to determine the energy use efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions. According to study findings, the energy inputs in lemon production were calculated respectively as 16,046.98 MJha-1 (55.43%) chemical fertilizers energy, 4168.93 MJha-1 (14.40%) chemicals energy, 2815.20 MJha-1 (9.72%) electricity energy, 2740.42 MJha-1 (9.47%) diesel fuel energy, 1864.80 MJha-1 (6.44%) irrigation water energy, 705.67 MJha-1 (2.44%) machinery energy and 610.20 MJha-1 (2.11%) human labour energy. Total input energy and output energy were calculated as 28,952.20 MJha-1 and 60,165.40 MJha-1, respectively. Energy use efficiency, specific energy, energy productivity and net energy values were calculated respectively as 2.08, 0.91 MJkg-1, 1.09 kgMJ-1 and 31,213.20 MJha-1. The consumed total energy inputs in lemon production can be categorized as 27.74% direct, 72.26% indirect, 8.55% renewable and 91.45% non-renewable. Total greenhouse gas emissions were calculated as 2650.96 kgCO2‑eqha-1 for lemon production, with the greatest share for nitrogen 950.62 kgCO2‑eqha-1 (35.86%). Based on the study findings, it was concluded that lemon production in 2019-2020 production season was profitable in terms of energy use efficiency (2.08). Greenhouse gas emission ratio (per kg) was calculated as 0.08. This study is important since there is no study on the energy balance and greenhouse gas emissions in lemon production in Muğla province, Turkey.

In this research was aimed to define the energy use efficiency of mandarin production for the 2017 production seasons in Adana province in Turkey. A survey data were compiled in 2017 and the farms were chosen according to the simple random sampling method and the survey were done to these farms. In order to define the energy use efficiency in the production of mandarin, a survey was done with 142 farmers in Adana province. According to results of research, human labour energy, machinery energy, chemical fertilizers energy, chemicals energy, farmyard manure energy, diesel fuel energy, irrigation water energy and lime energy were calculated as energy inputs. Mandarin fruit was calculated as output. In mandarin production, total input energy was calculated as 38,303.09 MJ ha−1 and total energy output was calculated as 59,850 MJ ha−1. The energy inputs in mandarin production were calculated respectively as chemical fertilizers energy 15,568.80 MJ ha−1 (40.65%), farmyard manure energy 5781 MJ ha−1 (15.09%), diesel fuel energy 5034.11 MJ ha−1 (13.14%), irrigation water energy 4095 MJ ha−1 (10.69%), machinery energy 3207.60 MJ ha−1 (8.37%), human labour energy 3039.18 MJ ha−1 (7.93%), chemicals energy 1518 MJ ha−1 (3.96%) and lime energy 59.40 MJ ha−1 (0.16%). The energy use efficiency, specific energy, energy productivity and net energy calculations were calculated in mandarin production respectively as 1.56, 1.22 MJ kg−1, 0.82 kg MJ−1 and 21,546.91 MJ ha−1.

The objective of this study was to determine the energy use and greenhouse gas emissions associated with sesame production. Energy use efficiency indicators and greenhouse gas emission rates were calculated for the 2022-2023 production season. The energy input and output for sesame production were found to be 12079.15 MJ ha-1 and 30052.44 MJ ha-1, respectively. The study found an energy use efficiency of 2.49, with a specific energy of 12.20 MJ kg-1, an energy productivity of 0.08 kg MJ-1, and a net energy value of 17973.29 MJ ha-1. The direct and indirect energy inputs were calculated to be 4584.41 MJ ha-1 (37.95%) and 7494.74 MJ ha-1 (62.05%), while the renewable and non-renewable energy inputs were calculated to be 469.12 MJ ha-1 (3.88%) and 11610.03 MJ ha-1 (98.65%), respectively. The calculation shows that the total greenhouse gas emissions are 380.52 kgCO2-eq ha-1 and the greenhouse gas emission rate is 0.38 kgCO2-eq ha-1. Sesame production is highly profitable for the 2022-2023 production season in terms of energy use efficiency.

This study has been conducted with the purpose of determining the energy usage (EU) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of artichoke production. It has been conducted in Efeler district of Aydın province of Türkiye during the 2022 production period. According to the results of the study, total input energy (EI) was calculated to be 32 211.48 MJ/ha and output energy (OE) was calculated to be 5 460 MJ/ha. EI in artichoke production were 15 718.20 MJ/ha (48.80%) chemical fertilizers energy, 8 896.98 (27.62%) diesel fuel energy, 3 832.27 (11.90%) machinery energy, 1 958.40 (6.08%) electricity energy, 1 036.35 (3.22%) irrigation water energy, 329.55 (1.02%) human labour energy, 294 MJ/ha (0.91%) plant energy and 145.73 (0.45%) chemicals energy, respectively. Energy use efficiency (EUE), specific energy (SE), energy productivity (EP) and net energy (NE) values were found as 0.17, 4.72 MJ/kg, 0.21 kg/MJ and -26 751.48 MJ/ha, respectively. The total energy inputs that were involved in artichoke production were classified as: 37.94% (12 221.28 MJ/ha) direct (IE), 62.06% (19 990.20 MJ/ha) indirect (IDE), 5.15% (1 659.90 MJ/ha) renewable (RE) and 94.85% (30 551.58 MJ/ha) non-renewable (NRE). Total GHG emission was calculated as 1 401.64 kgCO2eq/hafor artichoke production with the greatest share for diesel fuel (31.11%). GHG ratio value was calculated as 0.21 kgCO2eq/kg in artichoke production.

The aim of this research is to compose the energy input-output analysis of plum in Nevsehir province in Turkey. This research was conducted at the plum cultivating facilities during the 2015–2016 production seasons in Nevsehir province of Central Anatolian Region in Turkey. The agricultural input energies and output energies used in plum cultivation were calculated to determine the energy input-output analysis. According to the research findings, the energy inputs in plum cultivation were calculated respectively 3920 MJ ha−1 (44.99%) chemical fertilizers energy, 1618.91 MJ ha−1 (18.58%) diesel fuel energy, 1125.85 MJ ha−1 (12.92%) chemicals energy, 1069.20 MJ ha−1 (12.27%) machinery energy, 723.24 MJ ha−1 (8.30%) human labour energy and 255 MJ ha−1 (2.93%) irrigation water energy. Production output plum yield were calculated as 12,112.50 MJ ha−1. The energy output/input ratio, specific energy, energy usage efficiency and net energy calculations were calculated respectively as 1.39, 1.37 MJ kg−1, 0.73 kg MJ−1 and 3400.30 MJ ha−1.

In agricultural production, it is important to determine where input usage saving can be implemented by taking energy use into consideration and to analyze the greenhouse gas emissions of agricultural activities. This study has been conducted to review orange (Citrus sinensis L.) production in terms of energy balance and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This study was carried out during the 2015/2016 production season in Adana, a province in Turkey. Energy balance and GHG emissions have been defined by calculating the inputs and outputs of agricultural nature used in orange production. The findings of the study indicate that the distribution of energy inputs in orange production are 11,880 MJ ha−1 (34.10%) of electricity, 10,079.75 MJ ha−1 (28.93%) of chemical fertilizer energy, 7630 MJ ha−1 (21.90%) of chemical energy, 3052 MJ ha−1 (8.76%) of diesel fuel energy, 1348.91 MJ ha−1 (3.87%) of human labor energy, 378 MJ ha−1 (1.09%) of irrigation water energy, 351.22 MJ ha−1 (1.01%) of machinery energy and 118.80 MJ ha−1 (0.34%) of lime energy. In total, input energy (IE) in orange production has been calculated as 34,838.68 MJ ha−1 and the output energy (OE) has been calculated as 95,000 MJ ha−1. Energy use efficiency (EUE), specific energy (SE), energy productivity (EP) and net energy (NE) have been calculated as 2.73, 0.70 MJ kg−1, 1.44 kg MJ−1 and 60,161.32 MJ ha−1, respectively. The total energy input in the production of oranges was divided into: 47.82% direct, 52.18% indirect, 4.96% from renewable sources and 95.04% from non-renewable sources. The GHG emissions figure for orange production was 3794.26 kg CO2–eq ha−1, with electricity having the greatest share, 1983.96 (52.29%); the GHG ratio was 0.08 kg CO2–eq kg−1. According to the results, the production of orange was considered to be profitable in terms of EUE.

Introduction: Golestan province is one of Northern provinces in Iran. The area under cultivation of agricultural products in this province is 724.697 hectares, of which about 694.618 hectares are used for farm products (AJMDC, 2011). Cotton as one of oilseed is a potential feedstock for biodiesel production (Ahmad et al., 2011). In the study of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions for cotton production in Alborz province, results showed that the total energy input was 31.237 MJ ha-1. Energy efficiency and energy productivity were 1.85 and 0.11, respectively, and greenhouse gas emissions of cotton production in Alborz province were 1195.25 kg CO2eq ha-1 (Pishgar-Komleh et al., 2012). Another study on energy analysis, greenhouse gas emissions and economic analysis of agricultural production was performed in Northern Iran (AghaAlikhani et al., 2013; Royan et al., 2012; Pishgar-Komleh et al., 2011; Mohammadi et al., 2010; Taheri-Garavand et al., 2010). The aims of this study were to determine the energy flow, greenhouse gas emissions and economic analysis of cotton production in the Golestan province and also to determine the effect of energy inputs on cotton yield. Materials and methods: This research was conducted during 2011-2012 in three areas including Gorgan, Aq’qala and Gonbad in the Golestan province. The primary data were collected from the rice producers through a field survey with the help of a structured questionnaire. The number of subjects were studied by the Cochran formula (Snedecor and Cochran, 1980). Accordingly, 43 cotton producers were determined. In this study, eight energy inputs including seed, labor, machinery, diesel fuel, chemical fertilizers, chemicals, water for irrigation and farmyard manure for cotton production system were considered as independent variables. The outputs of the system including lint and seed were considered as dependent variable. Energy indices including energy efficiency, energy productivity, specific energy and net energy were calculated. In this study, the effect of energy inputs on yield was estimated using the Cobb-Douglas function. In order to determine the sensitivity of energy inputs in the production of cotton in the Golestan province, the marginal physical productivity method was applied. Greenhouse gas emissions, inputs of agricultural machinery, fuel, chemical fertilizers, chemicals and farmyard manure in cotton production in the Golestan province were calculated by the coefficients of each of these inputs. For economic evaluation of cotton production in the Golestan province, the variable costs, fixed and total production per unit area were considered. Economic indices of total production value, gross income, net income, economic productivity and benefit to cost ratio were estimated. Data analysis was performed using JMP8 software. Results and Discussion: Cotton yield in the Golestan province was about 2650 kg ha-1. Average cotton yield in the Alborz province was reported to be 3430 kg ha-1 (Pishgar-Komleh et al., 2012). In this study, diesel fuel had the highest energy consumer among other inputs like the other studies that have been done on energy crop production in Iran. Labor energy input with energy consumption of 2413 MJ ha-1, is known to be the fourth high-energy input in cotton production in the Golestan province. However, in many studies in Iran, this input was accounted to be less than one percent of the energy consumption in the production of agricultural products (Saeedi et al., 2013; Khoshnevisan et al., 2013; Mobtaker et al., 2012; Mobtaker et al., 2010). Chemical energy input with 1036 MJ ha-1, was allocated as 3.6% of energy consumption in the cotton production in the region. Seed energy input was the lowest energy among the other inputs in cotton production in the Golestan province. The results revealed that the total energy inputs for cotton production in the Golestan province was 28.898 MJ ha-1. The average energy efficiency for cotton production in the Golestan province was obtained to be 1.58. Energy productivity for cotton production in the Golestan province was calculated to be 0.092. From the results of Cobb-Douglas function to determine the relationship between energy input and yield of cotton in Golestan province, the effects of human labor, diesel fuel, water for irrigation, chemical fertilizers and farmyard manure inputs on the yield were positive, and the effects of agriculture machinery and chemicals inputs on cotton yield were negative. Greenhouse gas emission from diesel fuel input hadthe highest value of 646.23 kg CO2eq ha-1 with a 45.2 percent share. Farmyard manure with 23.5 percent of greenhouse emissions was identified as the second largest input in greenhouse gas emissions in cotton production. Variable costs, fixed and total cotton production in the Golestan province were calculated to be 3042429, 851880 and 3894309 Toman ha-1, respectively. Benefit to cost ratio for the cotton production in the Golestan province was calculated as 1.16. Conclusions: The results of this study showed that the energy efficiency for cotton production in the Golestan province was less than the energy efficiency for cotton production in the Alborz province, Hatay province of Turkey, and canola, soybean and sunflower production in the Golestan province. Also, the energy efficiency of cotton production was less than that of cotton production in Antalya Turkey and canola in the Mazandaran province. The highest share of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions belonged to diesel fuel with the share of 45.6 and 45.2 percent, respectively. However, this input accounted for 2.7 percent of variable costs.

The aim of this study is to determine an energy balance of common vetch, hungarian vetch and narbonne vetch production during the production season of 2015 in Bingol province of Turkey. The energy input in common vetch, hungarian vetch and narbonne vetch production have been calculated as 13060.72 MJ ha-1, 15767.22 MJ ha-1and 14769.73 MJ ha-1, respectively. The energy output in common vetch, hungarian vetch and narbonne vetch production have been calculated as 42048.22 MJ ha-1, 10051.33 MJ ha-1 and 11963.62 MJ ha-1, respectively. Energy usage efficiency, specific energy, energy productivity and net energy values related to common vetch, Hungarian vetch and Narbonne vetch production have been determined as 3.22, 0.64, 0.81; 5.46 MJ kg-1, 29.98 MJ kg-1, 21.98 MJ kg-1; 0.18 kg MJ-1, 0.03 kg MJ-1, 0.05 kg MJ-1 and 28987.50 MJ ha-1, -5715.89 MJ ha-1, -2806.11 MJ ha-1 respectively for each type. The total renewable energy input applied in common vetch, hungarian and narbonne vetch was 26.85, 20.42 and 29.69 per cent, respectively.

The aim of this research is to compose an energy input-output of guar and lupin production during the production season of 2015 in Bingol province of Turkey. The energy input in guar and lupin production have been computed as 14 619.97 MJ ha-1 and 23 486.73 MJ ha-1, respectively. The energy output in guar and lupin production have been calculated as 43 767.21 MJ ha-1 and 16 554.41 MJ ha-1, respectively. Energy usage efficiency, specific energy, energy productivity and net energy in guar production have been calculated as 2.99, 6.42 MJ kg-1, 0.16 kg MJ-1 and 29 147.24 MJ ha-1, respectively. Energy usage efficiency, specific energy, energy productivity and net energy in lupin production have been calculated as 0.70, 31.95 MJ kg-1, 0.04 kg MJ-1 and -6932.32 MJ ha-1, respectively. The total energy input used up in guar production could be classified as 51.31 % direct, 48.69 % indirect, 22.24 % renewable and 77.76 % non-renewable. The total energy input used up in lupin production could be classified as 31.35 % direct, 68.65 % indirect, 33.68 % renewable and 66.32 % non-renewable.

توسعه پایدار تولید یک محصول در هر منطقه مستلزم توجه به سیر انرژی سامانه تولیدی آن است، در عین حال توجه به نهاده‌های ورودی سامانه تولیدی با نگرش مدیریت محیط زیست نیز از اهمیت ویژه ای برخوردار است. در این تحقیق انرژی مصرفی و انتشار گازهای گلخانه‌ای تولید چای در استان گیلان مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. اطلاعات از طریق مصاحبه حضوری با 75 چای‌کار گیلانی و تطبیق اطلاعات با دفترچه چای هر کشاورز جمع‌آوری شد. مجموع انرژی‌های ورودی 60/39060 مگاژول بر هکتار بود. کارایی انرژی 22/0 محاسبه شد. کودهای شیمیایی بیش‌ترین سهم را در انرژی‌های مصرفی و انتشار گازهای گلخانه‌ای به ترتیب با 55/58 و 22/74 درصد در تولید چای به خود اختصاص دادند. مجموع انتشار گازهای گلخانه‌ای تولید چای در منطقه kgCO2eq. ha-1 82/1281 بود. نتایج استفاده از تابع کاب داگلاس و تحلیل حساسیت انرژی تولید چای در استان گیلان نشان داد که تأثیر تمامی نهاده‌های انرژی ورودی به غیر از سموم شیمیایی بر عملکرد مثبت بود و تأثیر نهاده انرژی نیروی کارگری بر عملکرد در سطح یک درصد معنی‌دار شد. نهاده انرژی نیروی کارگری، حساس‌ترین و همچنین بیش‌ترین تأثیر را بر عملکرد داشت و پس از آن نهاده‌های انرژی ماشین‌ها و سموم شیمیایی بیش‌ترین تأثیر را بر عملکرد چای در استان گیلان داشتند. توسعه پایدار تولید یک محصول در هر منطقه مستلزم توجه به سیر انرژی سامانه تولیدی آن است، در عین حال توجه به نهاده‌های ورودی سامانه تولیدی با نگرش مدیریت محیط زیست نیز از اهمیت ویژه ای برخوردار است. در این تحقیق انرژی مصرفی و انتشار گازهای گلخانه‌ای تولید چای در استان گیلان مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. اطلاعات از طریق مصاحبه حضوری با 75 چای‌کار گیلانی و تطبیق اطلاعات با دفترچه چای هر کشاورز جمع‌آوری شد. مجموع انرژی‌های ورودی 60/39060 مگاژول بر هکتار بود. کارایی انرژی 22/0 محاسبه شد. کودهای شیمیایی بیش‌ترین سهم را در انرژی‌های مصرفی و انتشار گازهای گلخانه‌ای به ترتیب با 55/58 و 22/74 درصد در تولید چای به خود اختصاص دادند. مجموع انتشار گازهای گلخانه‌ای تولید چای در منطقه kgCO2eq. ha-1 82/1281 بود. نتایج استفاده از تابع کاب داگلاس و تحلیل حساسیت انرژی تولید چای در استان گیلان نشان داد که تأثیر تمامی نهاده‌های انرژی ورودی به غیر از سموم شیمیایی بر عملکرد مثبت بود و تأثیر نهاده انرژی نیروی کارگری بر عملکرد در سطح یک درصد معنی‌دار شد. نهاده انرژی نیروی کارگری، حساس‌ترین و همچنین بیش‌ترین تأثیر را بر عملکرد داشت و پس از آن نهاده‌های انرژی ماشین‌ها و سموم شیمیایی بیش‌ترین تأثیر را بر عملکرد چای در استان گیلان داشتند.

In this study, energy use efficiency (EUE) and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) in wheat production were defined, and the energy equivalents (EE) of the inputs in production per unit production area, EUE and GHG values of the product were computed. The data used in the study were obtained from 175 different wheat producing enterprises in 2021 by conducting face-to-face surveys according to the proportional sampling method. In the study, the amount of direct (DE) and indirect energy (IE) use in wheat production and their shares in total energy consumption were defined. According to the results of the study, total energy input (EI) in wheat production was com-puted as 19,024.21 MJ/ha and energy output (EO) as 80,585.40 MJ/ha. It was defined that the input with the highest energy consumption was fertili-zation with a value of 8748.38 MJ/ha. This was followed by seed energy input 4626.79 MJ/ha (24.32%), fuel energy 2697.25 MJ/ha (14.18%), irriga-tion energy 2362.50 MJ/ha (12.42%), chemicals energy 269.19 MJ/ha (1.41%), machinery energy 309.52 MJ/ha (1.63%), human labor energy 10.58 MJ/ha (0.06%). EUE, energy productivity (EP), specific energy (SE) and net energy (NE) yield values were 4.24, 0.29 kg/MJ, 3.47 MJ/kg and 61561.19 MJ/ha, respectively. Total GHG emission for wheat production was computed as 3784.60 kgCO2-eq/ha. The highest share of total GHG emissions belonged to seed (59.41%). Seed was followed by irrigation (16.84%), nitrogen fertilizer use (14.60%), phosphate fertilizer use (3.99%), fuel use (3.49%), chemicals use (0.98%), machinery use (0.58%) and hu-man labor (0.10%). In addition, the GHG ratio in wheat production was computed as 0.69 kgCO2-eq/ha.