【摘要】：自工業(yè)革命以來,人類活動導致的全球溫室氣體排放快速增長,其中二氧化碳(CO_2)排放的增加主要來源于化石燃料燃燒和土地利用變化,而甲烷和氧化亞氮排放主要來自農(nóng)業(yè)。農(nóng)業(yè)貢獻了中國人為溫室氣體排放總量的11%,分別占人為源甲烷(CH_4)和氧化亞氮(N_2O)排放的52%和84%。農(nóng)業(yè)緩解全球溫室氣體排放的重大科技減排潛力在于改善作物生產(chǎn)田間管理。而基于生命周期分析法的作物生產(chǎn)碳足跡計量可以幫助識別農(nóng)業(yè)溫室氣體減排的關(guān)鍵技術(shù)和措施。本論文通過實地農(nóng)場調(diào)查、文獻收集獲取數(shù)據(jù),采用生命周期分析法,主要研究內(nèi)容:(1)量化中國農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)(糧食作物、蔬菜和水果)碳足跡及其構(gòu)成;(2)分析比較不同經(jīng)營規(guī)模、不同管理模式和不同環(huán)境條件下農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)碳足跡的差異;(3)氮肥施用是導致農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)高排放的主要原因,對氮肥的去向與利用率變化進行了研究分析,以構(gòu)建用以系統(tǒng)評估農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)碳足跡的方法學體系,提出農(nóng)業(yè)溫室氣體減排的關(guān)鍵途徑和技術(shù)選擇,為農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)可持續(xù)性管理和食物低碳消費提供科學依據(jù)和政策建議。得到的主要結(jié)果如下:1.量化了中國主要糧食作物生產(chǎn)的碳足跡,識別農(nóng)業(yè)溫室氣體減排的關(guān)鍵途徑本研究對中國東部代表性地區(qū)進行了實地農(nóng)戶問卷調(diào)查,獲取糧食作物生產(chǎn)和管理相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù),構(gòu)成碳足跡評價數(shù)據(jù)庫。采用生命周期評價方法,評估水稻、小麥和玉米糧食作物生產(chǎn)的碳足跡。結(jié)果表明,水稻、小麥和玉米的單位面積碳足跡(土地利用碳足跡)分別為6.0±0.1、3.0±0.2和2.3±0.1 t CO_2-eq ha~(-1),而單位產(chǎn)量碳足跡(產(chǎn)品碳足跡)分別為0.80±0.02、0.66±0.03和0.33±0.02 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1)。其中,氮肥和農(nóng)用機械分別貢獻了總碳足跡的44%-79%和8%~(-1)5%。水稻生產(chǎn)總排放中,灌溉用電排放和稻田甲烷直接排放分別占19%和25%。但在小麥和玉米生產(chǎn)的碳足跡中,灌溉只占了2%-3%。而且,在不同氣候地區(qū)間小麥和玉米碳足跡存在顯著差異,主要是由于作物管理過程中氮肥和農(nóng)業(yè)機械投入的差異所導致。研究還發(fā)現(xiàn),農(nóng)戶承包管理的農(nóng)田面積大小對作物生產(chǎn)碳足跡也有影響。相對于承包農(nóng)田面積較小(0.5 ha)的生產(chǎn)條件,農(nóng)戶承包農(nóng)田面積較大(0.5ha)時小麥和玉米碳足跡減少了22%-28%,這主要歸因于農(nóng)田管理效率的提高。研究也表明,我國糧食作物生產(chǎn)碳足跡高于西方國家,具有高碳排放特征,主要是由于氮肥的不合理施用,因而減少氮肥施用提高氮肥利用效率是中國農(nóng)業(yè)糧食生產(chǎn)溫室氣體減排的關(guān)鍵途徑;2.調(diào)查了南京市周邊蔬菜生產(chǎn),初步表征了大棚蔬菜生產(chǎn)的碳足跡,揭示蔬菜碳足跡與其營養(yǎng)價值及銷售收益間存在沖突矛盾對南京市周邊大棚蔬菜基地進行農(nóng)戶調(diào)查,訪問獲取了小青菜、莧菜、空心菜、番茄、黃瓜和土豆的生產(chǎn)管理調(diào)查資料,建成了蔬菜生產(chǎn)碳足跡數(shù)據(jù)庫。采用同上的計量方法,結(jié)果表明,大棚蔬菜生產(chǎn)的土地利用碳足跡在0.7~(-1)0.4 tCO_2-eq ha~(-1)之間,且不同蔬菜種類間沒有差異。但是,小青菜和莧菜的單位產(chǎn)量(產(chǎn)品)碳足跡(分別為0.34 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1)和0.38 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1))顯著高于其它蔬菜種類(0.07-0.17 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1));且小青菜和莧菜生產(chǎn)的單位收益碳排放也較高(分別為1.95kg CO_2-eq USD~(-1)和1.82 kg CO_2-eq USD~(-1))。然而,相比小青菜、番茄、黃瓜和土豆,空心菜和莧菜(分別為0.12kg CO_2-eq ANV~(-1)和0.36kg CO_2-eq ANV~(-1))的單位營養(yǎng)價值碳排放較低�；释度雽μ甲阚E的貢獻最大,占蔬菜生產(chǎn)總排放的55%-82%。其次為有機肥和灌溉,分別占總排放的2%-21%和1%-26%,不同蔬菜類型間差異較大;而農(nóng)機、農(nóng)膜和農(nóng)藥對碳足跡貢獻最小,分別占總排放的5%、5%和2%。因此,減少化肥施用和增施有機肥可能是蔬菜生產(chǎn)實現(xiàn)減排的重要措施。不過,鼓勵農(nóng)北溫室氣體減排的同時,如何平衡人們的營養(yǎng)需求和農(nóng)民的經(jīng)濟利益仍然是一個巨大的挑戰(zhàn)。3.調(diào)查評價了中國主要水果生產(chǎn)的碳足跡,明確了水果生產(chǎn)在土地利用碳足跡與水果產(chǎn)品碳足跡間的反差,提出果園施肥管理是減排的重要途徑分別在陜西、福建、湖北、河北和滬寧地區(qū)選擇代表性果園實地調(diào)查了蘋果、香蕉、柑橘、梨和桃等中國主要水果生產(chǎn),按水果生產(chǎn)周期評價了水果生產(chǎn)的碳足跡。結(jié)果表明,在所有被調(diào)查的果園中,單位面積碳足跡(土地利用碳足跡)的范圍從2.9 t CO_2-eq ha~(-1)到12.8t CO_2-eq ha~(-1),而單位產(chǎn)量碳足跡(水果產(chǎn)品碳足跡)范圍從0.07 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1)到0.7kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1)。這里,水果生產(chǎn)的土地利用碳足跡顯著高于糧食作物,但水果產(chǎn)品碳足跡又顯著低于糧食作物。柑橘和梨的產(chǎn)品碳足跡(分別為0.14和0.18 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1))顯著低于蘋果、香蕉和桃(分別為0.24、0.27和0.37 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1))。然而,從不同水果的營養(yǎng)價值來看,柑橘的單位營養(yǎng)價值碳排放強度(平均0.5 kg CO_2-eq g~(-1) Vc)顯著低于其他水果(3.0-5.9kg CO_2-eq g~(-1) Vc)。此外,從果農(nóng)可以獲得的經(jīng)濟效益來看,柑橘和梨的單位收益碳排放強度(分別為1.20和1.01 kg CO_2-eq USD~(-1))顯著高于蘋果、香蕉和桃(0.87-0.39 kg CO_2-eq USD~(-1))。在果園的管理活動中,化學氮肥是最重要的貢獻者,占溫室氣體排放總量的47%-75%。本研究也發(fā)現(xiàn),在氮肥高效管理下,水果碳足跡降低且產(chǎn)量提高。適當增施有機肥和提高氮肥利用率是水果生產(chǎn)的重要減排途徑。我們的研究建議鼓勵低碳水果消費,而服務(wù)于減排的同時,如何權(quán)衡人們對營養(yǎng)的需要和果農(nóng)的經(jīng)濟利益是重要的政策考量。4.量化了土地管理機制和不同農(nóng)田管理模式對農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)碳足跡的影響幅度,指出發(fā)展規(guī)模經(jīng)營和集約化管理可以提高農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)效率,具有巨大的減排潛力選擇了鄱陽湖周邊地區(qū)不同經(jīng)營規(guī)模的農(nóng)戶(大戶,3.3ha以上;小戶,3.3 ha以下),詳細調(diào)查了水稻生產(chǎn)和管理情況,分析比較了不同經(jīng)營規(guī)模下水稻生產(chǎn)(早稻、晚稻和單季稻)的碳足跡。在調(diào)查的農(nóng)戶生產(chǎn)中,早稻碳足跡最低,單季稻次之而晚稻最高(單位面積碳足跡和單位產(chǎn)量碳足跡分別是:早稻,4.54±0.44t CO_2-eq ha~(-1)和0.62±0.1 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1);單季稻,6.84±0.79t CO_2-eq ha~(-1)和0.80±0.13 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1)和晚稻,8.72±0.54t CO_2-eq ha~(-1)和1.1±0.17 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1))。氮肥施用和稻田甲烷排放是水稻生產(chǎn)碳排放的最大貢獻者,分別占總碳足跡的33%和57%。比較而言,大戶雙季稻產(chǎn)品碳足跡(0.86±0.11kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1))比小戶(1.14±0.25kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1))減少了25%,主要是由于規(guī)�；N植模式下氮肥利用率得到提高和良好水分管理下甲烷排放的降低。因此,優(yōu)化農(nóng)田管理方式和發(fā)展規(guī)模化種植模式是減少中國農(nóng)業(yè)溫室氣體排放的重要策略。而對江蘇典型地區(qū)土地流轉(zhuǎn)農(nóng)場的實地調(diào)查計量表明,農(nóng)戶分散經(jīng)營管理模式(散戶)、集約型生產(chǎn)模式(無公害農(nóng)場)和有機生產(chǎn)模式(有機農(nóng)場)三種管理模式下水稻碳足跡存在顯著差異。散戶經(jīng)營管理下水稻產(chǎn)品碳足跡(0.80 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1))顯著高于有機農(nóng)場(0.56 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1))和集約型農(nóng)場管理模式(0.50 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1))。其差異主要表現(xiàn)在肥料和農(nóng)藥投入及灌溉管理活動的不同,在集約化和有機生產(chǎn)管理模式下這三項投入的碳成本顯著減少。而散戶經(jīng)營管理下灌溉用電導致的排放和稻田甲烷直接排放顯著高于集約型和有機模式。有機生產(chǎn)管理模式中由于有機肥替代了化肥,生物農(nóng)藥替代了化學農(nóng)藥,這些有機生產(chǎn)資料的碳成本較低。上述結(jié)果說明,集約型農(nóng)場管理模式是一種既低碳又高產(chǎn)的農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)方式,當前仍具有顯著的減排潛力,而改善散戶經(jīng)營管理可能是中國農(nóng)業(yè)溫室氣體減排的普遍任務(wù)。5.對全球研究文獻的統(tǒng)計和計量,揭示了提高氮肥利用率的重要途徑是提高土壤中殘留氮的作物吸收利用,為指導氮肥合理施用和溫室氣體減排提出了重要方向氮肥是農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)不可或缺的外部投入,但氮肥利用率的問題一直困擾著肥料施用和環(huán)境管理。收集了全球范圍內(nèi)氮肥田間試驗的已發(fā)表英文文獻,獲取了肥料、土壤、作物相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)和15N標記豐度數(shù)據(jù),建成數(shù)據(jù)庫,分析評估肥料氮去向和作物吸收氮的來源,以探討提高氮肥利用率的農(nóng)田管理措施。結(jié)果表明,作物氮來源于肥料氮的比例平均不到一半,而大部分氮是直接或間接來源于土壤氮。施肥后的當季收獲作物氮中來源于肥料氮的比例,玉米、水稻和其它小粒谷類作物(包括大麥、小麥、小米、燕麥和高粱)平均分別為41%、32%和37%。相比無機肥料,有機肥料(糞肥、綠肥、堆肥等)在當季作物的氮回收率平均為29%,但在后季作物中的氮回收率還可達到10%�？梢哉J為,作物中大多數(shù)非肥料氮來自土壤和作物殘留氮的周轉(zhuǎn),但后季作物對無機肥料氮總回收率僅占5%。因此,以往考慮提高肥料氮利用率時,可能忽視了作物氮最重要的來源—土壤氮。關(guān)注提高土壤中殘留肥料氮的作物吸收利用和合理施用有機氮肥可能是提高氮肥利用率的重要途徑。本論文量化了中國主要種植業(yè)生產(chǎn)(包括糧食作物、大棚蔬菜和水果)的碳足跡,并對不同環(huán)境條件、不同經(jīng)營規(guī)模和不同管理模式下作物生產(chǎn)碳足跡進行比較,探明了中國農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)碳足跡特征及其不同產(chǎn)業(yè)的碳排放差異,也為政策制定者提供低碳生產(chǎn)和低碳消費的科學依據(jù)。同時,對農(nóng)業(yè)系統(tǒng)中氮肥去向與作物氮素來源的研究提示了對土壤殘留氮素的利用是提高氮肥利用率的重要途徑,并支持了有機肥對于提高氮肥利用率并降低溫室氣體排放的重要意義。本研究也提出了碳足跡在評價農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)環(huán)境影響中的問題和挑戰(zhàn),例如如何權(quán)衡土地利用碳強度和農(nóng)產(chǎn)品碳強度(反之是碳排放的生產(chǎn)效益),特別是考慮農(nóng)產(chǎn)品的營養(yǎng)價值和農(nóng)民的銷售收益。這些問題,可能對于國家正在實施的生態(tài)文明建設(shè)具有重要的科學價值和政策意義,值得進一步研究。
[Abstract]:Since the Industrial Revolution, human activities have led to a rapid increase in global greenhouse gas emissions. Increases in carbon dioxide (CO 2) emissions are mainly due to fossil fuel combustion and land use change, while methane and nitrous oxide emissions are mainly from agriculture. Agriculture contributes 11% of the total anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions in China, accounting for anthropogenic sources, respectively. Methane (CH_4) and nitrous oxide (N_2O) emissions account for 52% and 84%. Improving crop production management is a major scientific and technological potential for mitigating global greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture. Field farm survey, literature collection and data acquisition, using life cycle analysis, the main research contents: (1) quantify the carbon footprint and its composition of China's agricultural production (grain crops, vegetables and fruits); (2) analyze and compare the differences of carbon footprint of agricultural production under different management scale, different management modes and different environmental conditions; (3) nitrogen fertilizer application is the cause The main reasons for the high emission of agricultural production were studied and analyzed. A methodological system for systematically assessing the carbon footprint of agricultural production was established. The key ways and technical choices for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture were put forward, which provided scientific basis for sustainable agricultural production management and low carbon consumption of food. The main results are as follows: 1. Quantifying the carbon footprint of major grain crops in China and identifying the key ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture The results showed t ha t the carbon footprint per unit area (land use carbon footprint) of rice, wheat and maize were 6.0 (+0.1), 3.0 (+0.2) and 2.3 (+0.1) t CO_2-eq ha-1, respectively, while the carbon footprint per unit yield (product carbon footprint) was 0.80 (+0.02), 0.66 (+0.03) and 0.33 (+0.33) respectively. 0.02 kg CO_2-eq kg-1. Nitrogen fertilizer and agricultural machinery contributed 44-79% and 8-1.5% of the total carbon footprint respectively. Irrigation accounted for 19% and 25% of the total rice production emissions, respectively. However, irrigation accounted for only 2-3% of the carbon footprint of wheat and maize production. There are significant differences in rice carbon footprint, mainly due to the differences in nitrogen fertilizer and agricultural machinery input in the process of crop management. The carbon footprint of wheat and maize decreased by 22% - 28%, which was mainly attributed to the improvement of farmland management efficiency. The key ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions were investigated. The results showed that the land use carbon footprint of greenhouse vegetable production was between 0.7 ~ (- 1) 0.4 tCO_2 - EQ ha ~ (- 1), and there was no difference among different vegetable types. However, the carbon footprint per unit yield (product) of pakchoi and amaranth was not different. 0.34 kg CO_2-eq kg-1 and 0.38 kg CO_2-eq kg-1, respectively, were significantly higher than those of other vegetable varieties (0.07-0.17 kg CO_2-eq kg-1), and the carbon emissions per unit income of pakchoi and amaranth production were also higher (1.95 kg CO_2-eq USD-1 and 1.82 kg CO_2-eq USD-1, respectively). Carbon emissions per unit nutrient value of Amaranth (0.12 kg CO_2-eq ANV-1) and Amaranth (0.36 kg CO_2-eq ANV-1), respectively, were lower. Fertilizer input contributed the most to carbon footprint, accounting for 55-82% of total vegetable production emissions, followed by organic fertilizer and irrigation, accounting for 2-21% and 1-26% of total emissions, respectively, with significant differences among different vegetable types. The contribution of pesticides to carbon footprint is the smallest, accounting for 5%, 5% and 2% of total emissions, respectively. Therefore, reducing the use of chemical fertilizers and increasing the use of organic fertilizers may be an important measure to reduce emissions in vegetable production. Carbon footprint of major fruit production in China was evaluated, and the contrast between land use carbon footprint and fruit product carbon footprint was clarified. It was pointed out that fertilization management was an important way to reduce emissions in orchards. The results showed t ha t the carbon footprint per unit area (land use carbon footprint) ranged from 2.9 t CO_2-eq ha~(-1) to 12.8 t CO_2-eq ha~(-1) and the carbon footprint per unit yield (fruit product carbon footprint) ranged from 0.07 kg CO_2-eq kg~(-1) in all orchards surveyed. - 1) to 0.7 kg CO_2-eq kg-1. Here, the land use carbon footprint of fruit production was significantly higher than that of grain crops, but the carbon footprint of fruit products was significantly lower than that of grain crops. The carbon footprint of citrus and pear products (0.14 and 0.18 kg CO_2-eq kg-1, respectively) was significantly lower than that of apple, banana and peach (0.24, 0.27 and 0.37 kg CO_2-eq kg-1, respectively). However, according to the nutritional value of different fruits, the carbon emission intensity per unit nutritional value of citrus (average 0.5 kg CO_2-eq g-1) Vc) was significantly lower than that of other fruits (3.0-5.9 kg CO_2-eq g-1) Vc). In addition, the carbon emission intensity per unit income of citrus and pear (average 0.5 kg CO_2-eq US-1) Vc) was significantly lower than that of other fruits (3.0-5.9 kg CO_2-eq g-1). D~(-1) was significantly higher than that of apples, bananas and peaches (0.87-0.39 kg CO_2-eq USD~(-1)). Chemical nitrogen was the most important contributor in orchard management, accounting for 47-75% of total greenhouse gas emissions. Our research suggests that low-carbon fruit consumption should be encouraged, and at the same time, how to balance the nutritional needs of people and the economic interests of fruit farmers is an important policy consideration. Developing large-scale management and intensive management can improve the efficiency of agricultural production. Farmers with different management scales (large households, more than 3.3ha; small households, less than 3.3ha) around Poyang Lake are selected with great emission reduction potential. The rice production and management situation are investigated in detail, and the rice production (early rice, late rice) under different management scales is analyzed and compared. The carbon footprint of early rice was the lowest, followed by single-cropping rice, and the highest (carbon footprint per unit area and yield per unit area) of late rice were: early rice, 4.54 (+0.44 t) CO_2-eq ha~(-1) and 0.62 (+0.1 kg) CO_2-eq kg~(-1); single-cropping rice, 6.84 (+0.79 t) CO_2-eq ha~(-1) and 0.80 (+0.13 kg) CO_2-eq ha~(-1), respectively. Nitrogen fertilizer application and methane emission from rice paddy fields were the biggest contributors to carbon emissions from rice production, accounting for 33% and 57% of the total carbon footprint respectively. Compared with the small households, the carbon footprint of double-cropping rice products (0.86 0.11 kg CO_2-eq kg-1) was lower in large households than that of small households (1.14.25 kg CO_2-eq kg-1). 25% is mainly due to the improvement of nitrogen use efficiency and the reduction of methane emission under good water management under large-scale planting mode. Therefore, optimizing farmland management mode and developing large-scale planting mode are important strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in China's agriculture. The results showed that there were significant differences in rice carbon footprint among the three management modes of decentralized management (retail household), intensive production (non-polluted farm) and organic production (organic farm). The carbon footprint of rice products under retail management (0.80 kg CO_2-eq kg-1) was significantly higher than that of organic farms (0.56 kg CO_2-eq kg-1) and intensive management (0.56 kg CO_2-eq kg-1)). The difference was mainly manifested in the differences of fertilizer and pesticide input and irrigation management activities. Under intensive and organic production management, the carbon costs of these three inputs were significantly reduced, while under retail management, the emissions of irrigation electricity and direct methane emissions from paddy fields were significantly higher than those under farm management. These results indicate that intensive farm management is a low-carbon and High-yielding mode of agricultural production, which still has significant potential to reduce emissions and improve. Retail household management may be a general task for China's agricultural greenhouse gas emission reduction. 5. Statistics and measurement of global research literature reveal that an important way to improve the utilization rate of nitrogen fertilizer is to increase the uptake and utilization of residual nitrogen in soil by crops. It is proposed that nitrogen fertilizer is an important direction for guiding rational application of nitrogen fertilizer and greenhouse gas emission reduction in agricultural production. Indispensable external inputs, but the problem of nitrogen use efficiency has been plaguing fertilizer use and environmental management. Published English literature on nitrogen fertilizer field trials worldwide has been collected, fertilizer, soil, crop-related data and 15N-labeled abundance data have been obtained, and a database has been established to analyze and assess the fate of fertilizer nitrogen and the uptake of nitrogen by crops. The results showed that the proportion of crop nitrogen derived from fertilizer nitrogen was less than half on average, and most of the nitrogen was directly or indirectly derived from soil nitrogen. Compared with inorganic fertilizers, organic fertilizers (manure, green manure, compost, etc.) have an average nitrogen recovery rate of 29% in the current crop season, but the nitrogen recovery rate in the later crop season can reach 10%. It can be considered that most of the non-fertilizer nitrogen in crops comes from the turnover of residual nitrogen in soil and crops, but in the later season. In the past, the most important source of crop nitrogen, soil nitrogen, was neglected in the consideration of increasing the utilization rate of fertilizer nitrogen. It may be an important way to improve the utilization rate of nitrogen fertilizer by paying attention to increasing crop uptake and utilization of residual fertilizer nitrogen in soil and applying organic nitrogen fertilizer rationally. Carbon footprints of major crop production (including grain crops, greenhouse vegetables and fruits) in China were compared under different environmental conditions, different management scales and different management modes. The characteristics of carbon footprints in agricultural production and the differences of carbon emissions in different industries were explored, and low-carbon production was provided for policy makers. At the same time, the study on the fate of nitrogen fertilizer and the source of crop nitrogen in agricultural system suggests that the utilization of soil residual nitrogen is an important way to improve the utilization rate of nitrogen fertilizer, and supports the important significance of organic fertilizer in improving the utilization rate of nitrogen fertilizer and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Problems and challenges in assessing the environmental impact of agricultural production, such as how to balance land use carbon intensity with agricultural product carbon intensity (vice versa)
【學位授予單位】：南京農(nóng)業(yè)大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：S181;S143.1

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 曹淑艷;謝高地;;中國產(chǎn)業(yè)部門碳足跡流追蹤分析[J];資源科學;2010年11期

2 ;消除碳足跡 企業(yè)在行動[J];綠化與生活;2011年02期

3 胡煒;;減少碳足跡,你我須努力[J];創(chuàng)新科技;2012年05期

4 芮加利;王子彥;;減少碳足跡的政府作為[J];環(huán)境保護與循環(huán)經(jīng)濟;2009年03期

5 吳明;;追尋“碳足跡”[J];大眾標準化;2009年10期

6 王微;林劍藝;崔勝輝;吝濤;;碳足跡分析方法研究綜述[J];環(huán)境科學與技術(shù);2010年07期

7 羅運闊;周亮梅;朱美英;;碳足跡解析[J];江西農(nóng)業(yè)大學學報(社會科學版);2010年02期

8 秦卻;;“碳足跡”行動[J];新經(jīng)濟導刊;2010年04期

9 王奉安;;碳足跡——環(huán)保新坐標[J];環(huán)境保護與循環(huán)經(jīng)濟;2010年07期

10 祁悅;謝高地;蓋力強;張彩霞;李士美;;基于表觀消費量法的中國碳足跡估算[J];資源科學;2010年11期

相關(guān)會議論文 前10條

1 陳展展;;各國碳足跡評估工作概覽及其啟示[A];經(jīng)濟發(fā)展方式轉(zhuǎn)變與自主創(chuàng)新——第十二屆中國科學技術(shù)協(xié)會年會（第一卷）[C];2010年

2 王立國;廖為明;黃敏;鄧榮根;;基于終端消費的旅游碳足跡測算[A];第八屆博士生學術(shù)年會論文摘要集[C];2010年

3 董雪;柯水發(fā);;國內(nèi)外碳足跡計算方法、評估標準及研究進展[A];綠色經(jīng)濟與林業(yè)發(fā)展論——第六屆中國林業(yè)技術(shù)經(jīng)濟理論與實踐論壇論文集[C];2012年

4 曹磊;劉尊文;岳文淙;;中國產(chǎn)品碳足跡評價制度設(shè)計初探[A];2013中國環(huán)境科學學會學術(shù)年會論文集（第四卷）[C];2013年

5 鄭凱;陳學淵;韋文珊;吳永常;;農(nóng)村社區(qū)碳足跡的內(nèi)涵與計算方法研究[A];中國人口·資源與環(huán)境2013年�？�2013中國可持續(xù)發(fā)展論壇（一）[C];2013年

6 梁淳淳;宋燕唐;云鷺;;產(chǎn)品碳足跡標準化研究[A];市場踐行標準化——第十一屆中國標準化論壇論文集[C];2014年

7 李志強;劉春梅;;碳足跡及其影響因素分析——基于中部六省的實證[A];2009年南昌大學中國中部經(jīng)濟發(fā)展研究中心學術(shù)年會暨“貫徹國務(wù)院《促進中部地區(qū)崛起規(guī)劃》”研討會論文集[C];2009年

8 ;碳足跡與碳標簽[A];江蘇紡織學會通訊（總第127期）[C];2011年

9 趙先貴;肖玲;郝高建;高利峰;戴兵;;陜西省銅川市碳足跡動態(tài)分析[A];2013中國環(huán)境科學學會學術(shù)年會論文集（第二卷）[C];2013年

10 李志強;劉春梅;;碳足跡及其影響因素分析——基于中部六省的實證[A];第六屆中國科技政策與管理學術(shù)年會論文集[C];2010年

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前10條

1 本報記者 石琨;“碳足跡”計算該信誰[N];文匯報;2009年

2 記者 高天宇;專家：碳足跡標準不權(quán)威[N];國際商報;2010年

3 記者 張麗娜;油墨企業(yè)降低能耗減控碳足跡[N];消費日報;2010年

4 鄭平;大學生用行為藝術(shù)宣傳“碳足跡”[N];科技日報;2008年

5 資深媒體人士 林益楷;讓“碳足跡”更加透明化[N];中國能源報;2010年

6 特約編譯 王晉;新西蘭葡萄酒企業(yè)率先標明碳足跡[N];華夏酒報;2010年

7 青石;碳足跡標準將制約石材出口[N];中國建材報;2011年

8 楊威;新民科技成為 吳江首批“碳足跡”認證企業(yè)[N];中國紡織報;2011年

9 記者 羅暉;中糧兩產(chǎn)品獲碳足跡盤查第三方國際認證[N];科技日報;2012年

10 本報記者 蘇南;碳足跡盤查仍處初級階段[N];中國能源報;2012年

相關(guān)博士學位論文 前6條

1 徐中岳;從單元操作角度研究不同凍結(jié)和凍藏方式對豬肉碳足跡和質(zhì)量的影響[D];華南理工大學;2016年

2 閆明;農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)碳足跡及氮肥去向的計量研究[D];南京農(nóng)業(yè)大學;2015年

3 林濤;天津市能源消耗碳足跡影響因素研究[D];天津大學;2013年

4 馮超;城市框架內(nèi)的碳足跡量化方法及影響因素研究[D];華南理工大學;2014年

5 程永宏;碳排放政策下供應(yīng)鏈定價與產(chǎn)品碳足跡決策及協(xié)調(diào)研究[D];重慶大學;2015年

6 田慎重;基于長期耕作和秸稈還田的農(nóng)田土壤碳庫演變、固碳減排潛力和碳足跡分析[D];山東農(nóng)業(yè)大學;2014年

相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前10條

1 丁華艷;洪澤湖濕地生態(tài)旅游碳足跡研究[D];西華師范大學;2015年

2 梁修如;我國出口谷物產(chǎn)品的碳足跡分析[D];中國科學技術(shù)大學;2015年

3 方蕾;基于生命周期理論的船舶碳足跡研究[D];寧波大學;2015年

4 朱捷;松嫩平原旱作農(nóng)田土壤CO_2排放規(guī)律及碳足跡研究[D];東北農(nóng)業(yè)大學;2015年

5 肖圣杰;中國30省市碳足跡測算及影響因素研究[D];江西財經(jīng)大學;2015年

6 周鵬飛;碳足跡評估對竹產(chǎn)品企業(yè)的潛在影響及策略選擇[D];浙江農(nóng)林大學;2015年

7 謝櫨樂;基于灌溉效益和碳足跡的河北省農(nóng)業(yè)可持續(xù)發(fā)展研究[D];河北科技大學;2015年

8 薛景潔;河南省旅游碳足跡測算及影響因素研究[D];燕山大學;2015年

9 江永楷;中國各地區(qū)及工業(yè)行業(yè)水-碳足跡核算及情景模擬研究[D];清華大學;2015年

10 徐延菊;基于碳足跡視角的安徽省種植業(yè)低碳化研究[D];安徽農(nóng)業(yè)大學;2014年

，

本文編號：2230155