Estimation on the environmental carrying capacity of livestock and poultry breeding based on emergy analysis in Quzhou, Zhejiang of China

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20250261

Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis ›› 2026, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (7): 1443-1452.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20250261

• Environmental Science • Previous Articles Next Articles

Estimation on the environmental carrying capacity of livestock and poultry breeding based on emergy analysis in Quzhou, Zhejiang of China

CHU Tianshu¹(), CHEN Chenchen², LI Yiming¹, YANG Yuchen², YANG Hang², ZHANG Xuejian³, YU Lu⁴, MA Xingwang⁵^,^*()

¹ College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China
² College of Engineering, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, China
³ College of Chemical and Material Engineering, Quzhou University, Quzhou 324000, Zhejiang, China
⁴ Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
⁵ Key Laboratory of Northwest Oasis Agricultural Environment, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Institute of Agricultural Resources and Environment, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Urumqi 830091, China

Received:2025-03-31 Online:2026-07-25 Published:2026-08-20

Abstract

Abstract:

This study aimed to optimize the regional livestock and poultry breeding volume by using the emergy analysis method, to synergistically achieve the integrated crop-livestock and sustainable development. Taking Quzhou, Zhejiang as the research area, the emergy analysis theory was used to evaluate the sustainable development level of Quzhou’s crop-livestock production system from 2013 to 2022. Four scenarios were set according to policy orientation, and the sustainability index was used as the threshold to simulate and analyze the appropriate livestock and poultry breeding volume in Quzhou. It was shown that the emergy input of Quzhou’s crop-livestock production system showed a “downward-increasing” trend from 2013 to 2022, reaching 2.5×10²¹ sej (1 sej is the solar energy equivalent of 1 J) in 2022. Among them, non-renewable industrial resources accounted for about half, and concentrated feed and electricity were its main sources. The sustainability index of Quzhou’s crop-livestock production system showed an “increasing-downward” trend from 2013 to 2022, and it was 1.6 in 2022. Under the scenarios of N reduction and efficiency improvement, concentrated feed replacement, energy structure optimization and comprehensive application, the environmental carrying capacity (in terms of pig equivalent) of Quzhou’s livestock and poultry breeding was 2.281 million to 2.326 million heads, 2.295 million to 2.384 million heads, 2.303 million to 2.418 million heads and 2.346 million to 2.611 million heads, respectively. On the premise that the sustainability index of crop-livestock production system did not decline, with the promotion and application of efficient use of nitrogen fertilizer, concentrated feed replacement and energy structure optimization, the future breeding increment in Quzhou could reach 79 000 to 344 000 heads. It was recommended to promote the reduction and substitution technology of concentrated feed such as soybean meal, accelerate the construction of a clean energy system dominated by photovoltaics, and help the green and low-carbon transformation of crop-livestock production system.

Key words: livestock and poultry breeding, emergy analysis, sustainability index, environmental carrying capacity

CLC Number:

CHU Tianshu, CHEN Chenchen, LI Yiming, YANG Yuchen, YANG Hang, ZHANG Xuejian, YU Lu, MA Xingwang. Estimation on the environmental carrying capacity of livestock and poultry breeding based on emergy analysis in Quzhou, Zhejiang of China[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2026, 38(7): 1443-1452.

Figures/Tables 6

References 34

[1]	FAO. Proportion of agricultural area under productive and sustainable agriculture (SDG Indicator 2.4.1)[EB/OL]. (2024-03-22) [2025-01-18]. https://www.fao.org/3/ca7154en/ca7154en.pdf.
[2]	Liu S Y. Towards a sustainable agriculture: achievements and challenges of Sustainable Development Goal Indicator 2.4.1[J]. Global Food Security, 2023, 37: 100694.
[3]	Brown M T, Ulgiati S. Emergy evaluations and environmental loading of electricity production systems[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2002, 10(4): 321-334.
[4]	Fonseca A M P, Marques C A F, Pinto-Correia T, et al. Emergy analysis of a silvo-pastoral system, a case study in southern Portugal[J]. Agroforestry Systems, 2016, 90(1): 137-157.
[5]	Golshani F, Asgharipour M R, Ghanbari A, et al. Environmental accounting for croplands, livestock husbandry, and integrated systems based on emergetic indicators[J]. Energy, Ecology and Environment, 2023, 8(1): 28-49.
[6]	Wang X L, Wu X, Yan P, et al. Integrated analysis on economic and environmental consequences of livestock husbandry on different scale in China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 119: 1-12.
[7]	Xu Y N, Li P F, Gao Y H, et al. Sustainability evaluation for a circular maize-pig system driven by indigenous microbes: a case study in Northeast China[J]. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 2022, 8(1): 2080591.
[8]	Li Y, Sun Z G, Accatino F, et al. Comparing specialised crop and integrated crop-livestock systems in China with a multi-criteria approach using the emergy method[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 314: 127974.
[9]	Yun L, Li J, Hou R X, et al. Emergy-based sustainability analysis of an ecologically integrated model with maize planting for silage and pig-raising in the North China Plain[J]. Sustainability, 2019, 11(22): 6485.
[10]	黄黄, 时宇, 冉珊珊, 等. 基于能值理论的农田-畜禽生产系统可持续动态[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(4): 869-883.
	Huang H, Shi Y, Ran S S, et al. Dynamic research on sustainable development of farmland-livestock production system based on emergy theory[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020, 35(4): 869-883.
[11]	衢州市统计局. 衢州统计年鉴: 2014—2023[M]. 北京: 中国统计出版社.
[12]	Odum H T. Environmental accounting: emergy and environmental decision making[M]. New York: Wiley, 1996.
[13]	国家青藏高原科学数据中心. 中国区域融合日照时数的高分辨率(10 km)地表太阳辐射数据集:1983—2017[EB/OL]. (2022-04-18) [2025-01-18]. https://doi.org/10.11888/Meteoro.tpdc.271023.
[14]	陆云波, 王伦澈, 牛自耕, 等. 2000—2017年中国区域地表反照率变化及其影响因子[J]. 地理研究, 2022, 41(2): 562-579.
	Lu Y B, Wang L C, Niu Z G, et al. Variations of land surface albedo and its influencing factors in China from 2000 to 2017[J]. Geographical Research, 2022, 41(2): 562-579.
[15]	Brown M T, Ulgiati S. Emergy assessment of global renewable sources[J]. Ecological Modelling, 2016, 339: 148-156.
[16]	National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Average wind speed data from weather stations around the world from 1929 to 2023[EB/OL]. (2023-12-28) [2025-01-18]. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/data/global-summary-of-the-day/archive/.
[17]	University of East Anglia. Climatic research unit[EB/OL]. (2023-08-01) [2025-01-18]. https://www.uea.ac.uk/groups-and-centres/climatic-research-unit.
[18]	楚天舒, 宋宇桐, 杨增玲. 黑龙江垦区种养业生产系统可持续发展评价[J]. 中国农业资源与区划, 2022, 43(3): 8-18.
	Chu T S, Song Y T, Yang Z L. Sustainability evaluation on crop-farm animal production system of Heilongjiang land reclamation area[J]. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2022, 43(3): 8-18.
[19]	王小龙. 基于生命周期评价与能值分析的循环农业评价理论、方法与实证研究[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2016.
	Wang X L. An integrated framework based on life cycle assessment and emergy evaluation for circular agriculture: methods and cases[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2016.
[20]	Brandt W S. Folio 4: emergy of Florida agriculture[M]//Handbook of Emergy evaluation: a compendium of data for emergy computation issued in a series of folios. Gainesville: Center for Environmental Policy, University of Florida, 2002.
[21]	衢州市政府办公室. 衢州市人民政府办公室关于印发衢州市能源发展“十四五”规划的通知[EB/OL]. (2021-07-28) [2025-01-18]. https://www.qz.gov.cn/art/2021/7/28/art_1229542783_59004730.html.
[22]	DB 33/T 769—2022农业用水定额[S].
[23]	包维卿, 刘继军, 安捷, 等. 中国畜禽粪便资源量评估相关参数取值商榷[J]. 农业工程学报, 2018, 34(24): 314-322.
	Bao W Q, Liu J J, An J, et al. Discussion on value-taking of relative parameters for assessment of livestock and poultry excrement resource in China[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2018, 34(24): 314-322.
[24]	国家发展和改革委员会价格司, 国家发展和改革委员会价格成本调查中心. 全国农产品成本收益资料汇编2023[M]. 北京: 中国统计出版社, 2023: 229-320.
[25]	生态环境部第二次全国污染源普查工作办公室. 第二次全国污染源普查产排污系数书册[M]. 北京: 中国环境出版集团, 2020: 1-12.
[26]	董红敏. 畜禽养殖业粪便污染监测核算方法与产排污系数手册[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2019: 38-100.
[27]	王鑫磊. 中国典型秸秆和畜禽粪便原料组成特性大数据挖掘与系统分析[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2021.
	Wang X L. Big data mining and systematic analysis of the composition characteristics of typical straw and livestock manure in China[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2021.
[28]	中华人民共和国农业农村部. 农业农村部关于加快农业发展全面绿色转型促进乡村生态振兴的指导意见[EB/OL]. (2024-12-26) [2025-01-18]. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/202412/content_6995343.htm.
[29]	中华人民共和国农业农村部. 农业农村部关于实施养殖业节粮行动的意见[EB/OL]. (2024-12-31) [2025-01-18]. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/202501/content_6996448.htm.
[30]	NY/T 3877—2021畜禽粪便土地承载力测算方法[S].
[31]	中华人民共和国农业农村部. 饲用豆粕减量替代行动助力养殖降本增效[EB/OL]. (2024-12-23) [2025-01-18]. http://www.moa.gov.cn/ztzl/2024fzcj/202412/t20241223_6468437.htm.
[32]	中华人民共和国农业农村部. 农业农村部办公厅关于公布饲料中豆粕减量替代典型案例的通知[EB/OL]. (2022-09-20) [2025-01-18]. https://www.nahs.org.cn/xxcm/slzlaq/qtxm/202209/P020220920268269070315.pdf.
[33]	李一鸣, 陈晨晨, 赵智强, 等. 基于土壤有机碳密度变化率的畜禽粪便农田承载力估算[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2024, 29(6): 240-248.
	Li Y M, Chen C C, Zhao Z Q, et al. Estimation on farmland bearing capacity of animal manure based on soil organic carbon density change rate[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2024, 29(6): 240-248.
[34]	楚天舒, 韩鲁佳, 杨增玲. 考虑种养平衡的黄淮海小麦-玉米模式下畜禽承载量估算[J]. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(11): 214-222.
	Chu T S, Han L J, Yang Z L. Livestock carrying capacity estimation in wheat-corn production model of Huang-Huai-Hai Region considering planting-raising balance[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019, 35(11): 214-222.

计算参数 Calculation parameters	生猪 Swine	蛋鸡 Layer	肉鸡 Broiler	肉牛 Beef cattle	奶牛 Dairy cattle	肉羊 Sheep	参考文献 References
用水定额/(L·d^-1) Water quota/(L·d^-1)	20.0	0.5	0.4	70.0	90.0	10.0	[22]
养殖时间/d Breeding time/d	180	365	59	365	365	365	[23]
用电量/(kW·h) Power consumption/(kW·h)	21.3	2.5	0.3	19.0	983.1	4.4	[24]
精饲料用量/kg Concentrated feed dosage/kg	118.4	13.4	2.2	223.7	1 140.0	18.8	[24]
劳动时长/d Working-time duration/d	0.270	0.010	0.003	0.370	24.000	0.130	[24]
粪肥氮量/kg Manure N content/kg	2.93	0.33	0.05	19.67	36.58	1.37	[23,25-27]
粪肥磷量/kg Manure P content/kg	0.95	0.14	0.01	4.04	6.91	0.45	[23,25-27]

计算参数 Calculation parameters	生猪 Swine	蛋鸡 Layer	肉鸡 Broiler	肉牛 Beef cattle	奶牛 Dairy cattle	肉羊 Sheep	参考文献 References
用水定额/(L·d^-1) Water quota/(L·d^-1)	20.0	0.5	0.4	70.0	90.0	10.0	[22]
养殖时间/d Breeding time/d	180	365	59	365	365	365	[23]
用电量/(kW·h) Power consumption/(kW·h)	21.3	2.5	0.3	19.0	983.1	4.4	[24]
精饲料用量/kg Concentrated feed dosage/kg	118.4	13.4	2.2	223.7	1 140.0	18.8	[24]
劳动时长/d Working-time duration/d	0.270	0.010	0.003	0.370	24.000	0.130	[24]
粪肥氮量/kg Manure N content/kg	2.93	0.33	0.05	19.67	36.58	1.37	[23,25-27]
粪肥磷量/kg Manure P content/kg	0.95	0.14	0.01	4.04	6.91	0.45	[23,25-27]

增长比例/ % Growth rate/%	畜禽养殖量/10⁴ Livestock and poultry breeding volume/10⁴	可持续发展指数 Sustainability index	能值投入/ (10²¹ sej) Emergy input/ (10²¹ sej)
0	226.7	1.6	2.5
10	249.3	1.5	2.7
20	272.0	1.5	2.8
30	294.7	1.4	2.9
40	317.3	1.3	3.0
50	340.0	1.3	3.1

增长比例/ % Growth rate/%	畜禽养殖量/10⁴ Livestock and poultry breeding volume/10⁴	可持续发展指数 Sustainability index	能值投入/ (10²¹ sej) Emergy input/ (10²¹ sej)
0	226.7	1.6	2.5
10	249.3	1.5	2.7
20	272.0	1.5	2.8
30	294.7	1.4	2.9
40	317.3	1.3	3.0
50	340.0	1.3	3.1

Estimation on the environmental carrying capacity of livestock and poultry breeding based on emergy analysis in Quzhou, Zhejiang of China

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 6

References 34

Related Articles 2

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	ZHAO Huijun, YAO Dongrui, SUN Linhe, CUI Jian, CHANG Yajun, CAO Jianjun. Accumulation ability and bioremediation potential of water dropwort on nine elements in livestock and poultry breeding wastewater [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(8): 1477-1488.
[2]	CHEN Hai\\|tao. Dynamic assessment on water environmental carrying capacity in Taihu Lake Watershed in past 20 years [J]. , 2015, 27(12): 2186-.