论文部分内容阅读
以湖南双季稻区双季稻-马铃薯(CT1)、双季稻-黑麦草(CT2)、双季稻-紫云英(CT3)、双季稻-油菜(CT4)、双季稻双免栽培(CT5)5种保护性耕作模式为例,应用生命周期评价方法,从单位面积投入、单位面积产量、单位经济效益的环境影响三个角度评价不同保护性耕作模式的环境潜在影响。结果表明:从单位面积物质投入的角度评价结果显示,CT3模式的潜在环境影响综合指数较对照模式(双季稻-冬闲,CK)低4.72%,而其他模式则比CK高出11.95%-45.20%,平均增加了29.02%;从单位面积产量的角度评价结果显示,CT5模式的潜在环境影响综合指数比CK高34.55%,而其他模式则比CK低1.57-45.93%,平均降低24.29%;从单位经济效益的角度评价结果显示,CT5模式的潜在环境影响综合指数比CK高23.93%,而其他模式则比CK低29.07-49.06%,平均增加了24.88%。综合考虑,与CK对比,CT3和CT4模式对环境的潜在影响较小,CT2居中,CT5和CT1模式则较大。
In order to study the effects of double-cropping rice-potato (CT1), double-cropping rice-ryegrass (CT2), double cropping rice-astragalus (CT3), double cropping rice-canola (CT4) Five conservation tillage models (CT5), for example, were applied to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of different conservation tillage models from the perspectives of input per unit area, yield per unit area, and environmental impact per unit economic benefit, using life cycle assessment methods. The results showed that from the perspective of material input per unit area, the potential environmental impact index of CT3 model was 4.72% lower than CK (double cropping rice - winter leisure CK), while the other models were 11.95% -45.20 higher than CK. %, An average increase of 29.02%. From the perspective of yield per unit area, the results showed that the composite index of potential environmental impact of CT5 model was 34.55% higher than that of CK, while the other models were 1.57-45.93% lower than CK and decreased by 24.29% on average. From the perspective of unit economic efficiency, the results showed that the composite index of potential environmental impact of CT5 model was 23.93% higher than CK, while the other models were 29.07-49.06% lower than CK and an average increase of 24.88%. Taken together, compared with CK, the potential impact of CT3 and CT4 modes on the environment is small, with CT2 centered and CT5 and CT1 modes larger.