Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Combine Harvester Fuel Consumption and Air Pollution Reduction

  • Published:
Water, Air, & Soil Pollution Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Agricultural production has a major impact on the environment. Indeed, the emissions from agricultural machinery have a significantly negative impact on ambient air, thereby contributing to Climate Change. This study analyses combine harvesters and justifies their optimization in order to increase resource efficiency as well as reduce any negative impact on the environment. Data from 90 combine harvesters in Lithuania and Latvia from 2016 to 2018 is collected using telematics, and the parameters that directly influence engine exhaust emissions are analyzed, such as operation time, grain unloading method, fuel consumption, and auto-steering, according to the engine-operating modes of harvesting, transportation, and idling. Statistically reliable strong correlations can be found between harvesting time and idling time, as well as between fuel consumption during harvesting and idling modes. On average, roughly 20% of the operating time consists of idling and roughly 15% of transportation; moreover, roughly 14% of the diesel fuel is used per year in the aforementioned engine modes. In addition, the auto-steering function enables the efficient use of diesel fuel (average cost per combine harvester is reduced by 0.2 t year−1), thereby reducing air pollution (pollution per combine harvester is reduced on average by 0.6 t year−1). The results suggest telematics system data can be effectively used for data analysis, problem identification, and decision-making with respect to pollution prevention and optimizing combine harvester operation.

Graphical Abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Benes, L., Novak, P., Masek, J., & Petrasek, S. (2014). John Deere combine harvester's fuel consumption and operation costs. Engineering for Rural Development, 13, 13–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, L., & Giles, D. (2011). Current and future agricultural practices and technologies which affect fuel efficiency. Intelligent Energy Europe, D 3.1(1), 30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bora, G. C., Nowatzki, J. F., & Roberts, D. C. (2012). Energy savings by adopting precision agriculture in rural USA. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 2(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delchev, N., Trendafilov, K., Tihanov, G., & Stoyanov, Y. (2016). Grain combines productivity according to various unloading methods – In the field and at the edge of the field. Agricultural Science and Technology, 8(3), 221–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EMEP/EEA (2017). EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook, (May), 1–82.

  • Filipovic, D., Kosutic, S., Gospodaric, Z., Zimmer, R., & Banaj, D. (2006). The possibilities of fuel savings and the reduction of CO2 emissions in the soil tillage in Croatia. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 115(1–4), 290–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gualtieri, G., Crisci, A., Tartaglia, M., Toscano, P., & Gioli, B. (2015). A statistical model to assess air quality levels at urban sites. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 226(12), 394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, E., Cavigelli, M. A., Camargo, G., Ryan, M., Ackroyd, V. J., Richard, T. L., & Mirsky, S. (2018). Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in organic and conventional grain crop production: Accounting for nutrient inflows. Agricultural Systems, 162, 89–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huyghebaert, B., Dubois, G., Defays, G., Namur, C. De, & Gembloux, B. (2013). Actual and global precision of the guidance system AutoTrac from John Deere, June 23–27, Torino, Italy, 8 pp.

  • Juostas, A., & Janulevičius, A. (2014). Tractor’s engine efficiency and exhaust emissions’ research in drilling work. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management, 22(2), 141–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaivosoja, J., & Linkolehto, R. (2016). Spatial overlapping in crop farming works. Agronomy Research, 14(1), 41–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khoshnevisan, B., Rafiee, S., Omid, M., & Mousazadeh, H. (2013). Reduction of CO2 emission by improving energy use efficiency of greenhouse cucumber production using DEA approach. Energy, 55, 676–682.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J.-H., Park, S.-H., Kim, H.-J., Kim, Y.-J., Kim, J.-Y., & Shim, S.-B. (2017). Development of automated guidance tracking sensor system based on laser distance sensors. Journal of Biosystems Engineering, 41(4), 319–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kliopova, I., & Petraškienė, V. (2009). Evaluation of significant environmental aspects in grain processing. Environmental Research, Engineering and Management, 49(3), 44–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kliopova, I., & Staniškis, J. K. (2004). Process control in cleaner production. Environmental Engineering and Management Journal, 3(3), 517–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kliopova, I., & Staniskis, J. K. (2006). The evaluation of cleaner production performance in Lithuanian industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(18), 1561–1575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kliopova, I., Staniškis, J. K., Stunžėnas, E., & Jurovickaja, E. (2019). Bio-nutrient recycling with a novel integrated biodegradable waste management system for catering companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 209, 116–125.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lal, R. (2004a). Carbon emission from farm operations. Environment International, 30(7), 981–990.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lal, R. (2004b). Agricultural activities and the global carbon cycle. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 70(2), 103–116.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Q., Liu, B., Ambus, P., Zhang, Y., Hansen, V., Lin, Z., et al. (2016). Carbon footprint of rice production under biochar amendment - a case study in a Chinese rice cropping system. GCB Bioenergy, 8(1), 148–159.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mark, T. B., Griffin, T. W., & Whitacre, B. E. (2016). The role of wireless broadband connectivity on ‘big data’ and the agricultural industry in the United States and Australia. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 19(A), 43–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ntinas, G. K., Neumair, M., Tsadilas, C. D., & Meyer, J. (2017). Carbon footprint and cumulative energy demand of greenhouse and open-field tomato cultivation systems under Southern and Central European climatic conditions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 3617–3626.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen, T., Piirainen, P., & Seilonen, I. (2015). Remote access of ISO 11783 process data by using OPC unified architecture technology. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 117, 141–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen, T., Linkolehto, R., & Seilonen, I. (2016). Adapting an industrial automation protocol to remote monitoring of mobile agricultural machinery: A combine harvester with IoT. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49(16), 127–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prístavka, M., Krištof, K., & Findura, P. (2017). Reliability monitoring of grain harvester. Agronomy Research, 15(3), 817–829.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebolledo-Leiva, R., Angulo-Meza, L., Iriarte, A., & González-Araya, M. C. (2017). Joint carbon footprint assessment and data envelopment analysis for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture production. Science of the Total Environment, 593–594, 36–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodias, E., Berruto, R., Busato, P., Bochtis, D., Sørensen, C. G., & Zhou, K. (2017). Energy savings from optimised in-field route planning for agricultural machinery. Sustainability, 9, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Šarauskis, E., Vaitauskienė, K., Romaneckas, K., Jasinskas, A., Butkus, V., & Kriaučiūnienė, Z. (2017). Fuel consumption and CO2emission analysis in different strip tillage scenarios. Energy, 118, 957–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shearer, S. A., Wolters, D. J., Root, P. G., Klopfenstein, A. A., & Schroeder, B. A. (2015). International Conference Agricultural Engineering - Internationale Tagung Land.Technik (pp. 379–385). Hannover: Innovations in Agricultural Engineering for Efficient Farming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, C. G. G. (2003). Workability and machinery sizing for combine harvesting. The CIGR Journal of AE Scientific Research and Development, V(August), Manuscript PM 03 003. http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-4444378303&partnerID=tZOtx3y1, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280316072_Workability_and_machinery_sizing_for_combine_harvesting. Accessed 1 July 2019.

  • Špokas, L., Steponavičius, D., Žebrauskas, G., Čiplienė, A., & Bauša, L. (2019). Reduction in adverse environmental impacts associated with the operation of combine harvesters during the harvesting of winter oilseed rape. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management, 27(2), 72–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staniškis, J. K., Stasiškienė, Ž., & Kliopova, I. (2002). Cleaner production: A systematic approach. Monograph.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tihanov, G. (2018). Study on the duration of operations performed by transport vehicles during unloading of the grain harvester hopper. Applied Researches in Technics, Technologies and Education, 6(3), 232–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Hampton, T. (2015). Moving data and dirt. ENR: Engineering News-Record, 274(10), 21 Accessed November 13, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xue, J. F., Pu, C., Liu, S. L., Zhao, X., Zhang, R., Chen, F., et al. (2016). Carbon and nitrogen footprint of double rice production in Southern China. Ecological Indicators, 64, 249–257.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Žitňák, M., Macák, M., & Korenko, M. (2014). Assessment of risks in implementing automated satellite navigation systems. Research in Agricultural Engineering, 60, 16–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Enago (www.enago.com) for the English language review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vytautas Magnus University, Agriculture Academy, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Institute of Agricultural Engineering and Safety, Kaunas, Lithuania

    Dainius Savickas, Dainius Steponavičius & Lina Saldukaitė

  2. Kaunas University of Technology, Institute of Environmental Engineering, Kaunas, Lithuania

    Irina Kliopova

Authors
  1. Dainius Savickas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dainius Steponavičius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Irina Kliopova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lina Saldukaitė
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dainius Savickas.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Savickas, D., Steponavičius, D., Kliopova, I. et al. Combine Harvester Fuel Consumption and Air Pollution Reduction. Water Air Soil Pollut 231, 95 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-020-4466-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-020-4466-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation