Abstract An energy analysis comparing three different soil management systems was carried out in Southern Italy using data collected in a five-year field experiment, with the aim of identifying the most energy efficient system. On average, because of a little more energy is demanded (13.3 GJ ha−1) and a higher grain yield is obtained (2.20 t ha−1) in the Intensive practice than in the other two, the total Energy Input required to produce 1 kg durum wheat was higher in the No tillage-based system (11.05 MJ kg−1) than in the Intensive (6.80 MJ kg−1) and the Minimum one (6.78 MJ kg−1). The highest contribution to Energy Input derived from nitrogen fertiliser followed by diesel fuel. In this regard, No-tillage allowed for reduction of diesel energy consumption by about 70% and 60% compared with Intensive tillage and Minimum tillage, respectively. The Minimum tillage practice showed the best energy performance, because it determined the following results on an average base: the highest energy ratio (4.69) and the highest energy profitability (3.69); the lowest energy intensity (5.86 MJ kg−1). Therefore, under the environmental conditions in which the experimens were carried out, MT may be considered as the practice exhibiting the best energy performance and representing the viable trade-off between IT and NT.

中文翻译：

---

使用三种不同土壤管理系统的地中海地区雨养硬质小麦的能源消耗

摘要 使用五年田间试验中收集的数据，在意大利南部进行了比较三种不同土壤管理系统的能源分析，目的是确定最节能的系统。平均而言，由于在集约化实践中需要更多的能量 (13.3 GJ ha−1) 并且获得更高的谷物产量 (2.20 t ha−1)，因此生产 1以免耕为基础的系统 (11.05 MJ kg-1) 中的 kg 硬粒小麦高于集约化 (6.80 MJ kg-1) 和最小系统 (6.78 MJ kg-1)。氮肥对能源投入的贡献最大，其次是柴油。在这方面，与集约耕作和少耕相比，免耕使柴油能源消耗分别减少了约 70% 和 60%。最少耕作实践显示出最好的能源性能，因为它在平均基础上确定了以下结果：最高的能源比率 (4.69) 和最高的能源盈利能力 (3.69)；最低的能量强度（5.86 MJ kg-1）。因此，在进行实验的环境条件下，MT 可以被视为表现出最佳能源性能并代表 IT 和 NT 之间可行权衡的实践。