Agrivoltaics in Alberta Canada: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Uzair Jamil
,
Joshua M. Pearce

As Alberta increases conventional solar power generation, land-use conflicts with agriculture increase. A solution that enables low-carbon electricity generation and continued (in some cases, increased) agricultural output is the co-locating of solar photovoltaics (PV) and agriculture: agrivoltaics.

  • agriculture
  • agrivoltaic
  • Canada
  • energy policy

1. Introduction

Consistent solar photovoltaic (PV) system cost decreases [1][2] are largely responsible for the fact that solar electricity, which is a renewable energy source, is often the least costly electricity source globally [3][4]. Even in harsher northern environments, such as those found in Canada, grid-connected solar PV systems are already past grid-parity, with solar projects in Alberta being proposed at CAD$47/MWh and power purchase agreements (PPAs) with renewable energy credits (RECs) attached being contracted for less than CAD$70/MWh [5]. It should be noted that these values are generation costs and not retail electric rates that include transmission and distribution costs that are measured per kWh and are normally 3–4 times higher. The return on investment (ROI) of installing PV systems generally varies by province and utility [6]. Surprisingly, PV costs have declined to the point that they can be used to subsidize heat pumps to enable profitable electrification of gas-based heating in Canada [7]. These cost-related issues have ensured PV electricity production in Canada continues to grow, although this growth must be put in context. Solar still makes up less than 1% of electricity generation [6].
This Canadian PV growth is good for the local, national, and global environment as solar PV is a well-established sustainable energy source [8]. PV is a net energy producer, which means the embodied energy in PV production (the invested energy in its production) is made up for during operation many times over its 25 or 30-year lifetime under warranty [9]. The energy payback time values only become better as the energy conversion efficiency of all the major commercial and precommercial PV types increase [10]. Today, PV energy payback times are less than a single year [11]. As PV costs have declined, more PV systems have been installed, and large surface areas are needed to power high-population-density cities, which are normally supplied in large PV tracts located in rural agricultural areas [12]. City dwelling has become dominant globally [13]. This has also occurred in Canada, with the four largest urban regions in Canada (the Calgary-Edmonton corridor, Southern Vancouver Island, Lower Mainland, and the Extended Golden Horseshoe in Ontario) housing more than half (51%) of the Canadian population [14]. Similar to wind power siting conflicts [15][16], siting conflicts are increasingly becoming a barrier to large-scale PV, primarily because of the potential interference with agricultural production [17][18] and the public’s negative perception of this [19][20][21]. Land-use conflicts are expected to increase as the population increases (1.15%/year) [22] and the need for food production must increase accordingly [23]. Both historical and current programs to convert crop land to energy production (with the most popular method being crops used for ethanol fuel production) had detrimental effects of increasing both global food costs and world hunger [24][25][26]. Canada is dealing with these issues on a smaller scale as the population growth rate is currently 0.86%/year [27] and urban growth encroaches on agricultural land. Fortunately, a long and rapidly increasing list of studies show that it is possible to have large-scale solar PV growth while protecting agricultural production using the innovation of agrivoltaics. Agrivoltaics is the strategic co-development of land for both solar PV electrical generation and agricultural production [28][29][30][31][32][33].

2. Agrivoltaics Background

Agrivoltaics is a symbiotic system that overall provides fifteen potential services summarized in Figure 1. Of the fifteen benefits of agrivoltaics, the first two are easy to understand as PV systems generate renewable electricity and this electricity offsets fossil fuel electricity production that in turn decreases greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [34]. The reduced GHG emissions thus help alleviate global climate change and the concomitant adverse effects on the environment and the economy [35]. In addition, a common misperception is that shaded crops from solar panels would reduce crop productivity, but less clearly intuitively, there are now many studies that show agrivoltaics increases crop yield for a wide variety of crops [36][37], while if shading is too much they can decrease [38]. For example, crop yield increased for peppers in the U.S. [39]. Investigations in Japan revealed augmented production of sweet corn in agrivoltaics applications [40]. There is even evidence of enhanced output of grain crops when farmed with solar PV systems [41]. Land-use efficiency increases when PV-generated electricity is added to crop production for a farm, particularly when crop yields increase [41]. This nonintuitive result is possible because agrivoltaics arrays create microclimates beneath the PV modules that alter air temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, and soil moisture [42].
Figure 1. Services provided by agrivoltaics are: renewable electricity generation, decreased greenhouse gas emissions, reduced climate change, increased crop yield, plant protection from excess solar energy, plant protection from inclement weather such as hail, water conservation, agricultural employment, local food, improved health from pollution reduction increased revenue for farmers, a hedge against inflation, the potential to produce nitrogen fertilizer on farm, on farm production of renewable fuels such as anhydrous ammonia or hydrogen, and electricity for EV charging for on- or off-farm use.
This microclimate can be beneficial to crops because the PV protects crops from excess solar energy and inclement weather such as hail or high winds, while also improving PV performance because of lower operating temperatures created by the crops underneath the panels [29][39][43]. Remarkably, a study by Mow et al., showed that agrivoltaics has the potential to increase global land productivity by 35–73% [44]. PV systems designed specifically to be agrivoltaics also minimize agricultural displacement for energy [33][44][45]. In addition to the benefits for the PV array and the crops, agrivoltaics also can benefit water systems as it enables more efficient use of water for farming and thus provides water conservation [46][47][48][49]. PV can also be used to power drip irrigation [50] and vertical growing [51], which uses a fraction of the water of field-based crops. Unlike conventional solar farms that eliminate agricultural employment when they are installed on agricultural land, taking it out of production, agrivoltaics maintains agricultural employment and the farmers provide local food along with all the benefits of reducing food miles and providing fresh food [52][53][54]. Fresh food has health benefits, but agrivoltaics, because it can offset fossil fuel pollution that is also linked to health problems [55], and also can improve human health and even prevent premature deaths [56]. Thus, agrivoltaics provides two mechanisms to benefit human health. Reduction in pollution is primarily attributed to (Scope 1) minimizing emissions related to products produced remotely and brought onto farms for crop production purposes (i.e., fuel, electricity, and fertilizers), (Scope 2) minimizing emissions generated during farming operations, particularly if electric vehicles (EV) and processing are used, and (Scope 3) minimizing emissions related to transportation of produce from farmland (again being used for EVs). In addition, both the increased solar energy production and the increased land-use efficiency have an economic value and thus increase the revenue for a given acre [57]. In addition, because PV is a capital asset that generates value that increases with inflation, it can be used as an inflation hedge during times of high inflation (e.g., 2021 and 2022) [58]. Lastly, agrivoltaics has the potential to be used for on-farm production of nitrogen fertilizer [59], renewable fuels such as anhydrous ammonia [60] or hydrogen [61][62][63], or for electricity for EV charging for on- or off-farm use.
Agrivoltaics is available at all scales. Normally, agrivoltaics is deployed at large scales, but even for the home gardener, parametric open-source cold-frame agrivoltaic systems (POSCAS) have been developed [64]. Agrivoltaics also works with different levels of shade tolerant crops. Full array density PV modules are beneficial for shade tolerant crops, while half or three-fourth array density PV is beneficial for shade intolerant crops [64]. Considering crop performance, east-west-facing vertical bifacial solar panels can be the preferred fixed tilting scheme to be employed for agrivoltaics applications [65]. For bifacial PV modules installed in agrivoltaics applications, increased irradiance and bifacial gain is observed by elevating the height of PV arrays [66]. This also results in convenience of operation for conventional agricultural machinery. Moreover, increasing row spacing reduces electrical output per unit area, though, this increased ground irradiation as compared to closer spacing that has a higher shading percent of the ground [66]. South-facing topologies are conducive for cultivation during summer for farming shade-tolerant crops, whereas east-west vertical arrays are beneficial during non-summer seasons, and hence, advantageous for permanent crops (e.g., species that are harvested over many seasons, such as grapes) [66].
Agrivoltaics has been demonstrated in Canada such as in the Arnprio tri-part agrivoltaics that consists of a monarch butterfly conservation subproject, a bee and honey production subproject, and a solar grazing and natural weed cutting subproject [67]. Currently, most Canadian agrivoltaics systems are made up of conventional solar PV farms that are also used for grazing sheep. This does have positive benefits for both the sheep (i.e., both thermal protection [68] and more importantly, higher-quality grazing areas [69]), but also the PV systems (i.e., reduced costs for weed abatement) and when combined, the global environment [70]. These uses are considered agrivoltaics, but they are not the highest value benefits seen in Figure 1, nor are they the greatest land-use efficiency strategy. Unfortunately, Canada is lagging Europe, Asia, and the U.S. in agrivoltaics. Other countries that make more aggressive use of agrivoltaics would be expected to generate more revenue per acre and win in competitive markets. As the fifth-largest agricultural exporter in the world [71], Canada has considerable revenue at stake to maintain the state-of-the-art in agricultural technology.
Land use policies and legislation have traditionally been a deterrent to wide-scale PV deployment due to the worries of potential adverse impacts on agricultural yield due to the addition of PV [17][18]. Some studies have been clearer in warning that PV development could directly hurt the food supply by replacing arable land with industrial PV and no food production [21][72]. As Canada in general, and Alberta in particular, is already at a strategic disadvantage in the agricultural space without the use of agrivoltaics compared to other nations that are using it, researchers reviewed both the current policies and the policy changes necessary to capitalize on the benefits of using agrivoltaics in Alberta.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/en16010053

References

  1. Feldman, D.; Barbose, G.; Margolis, R.; Wiser, R.; Darghouth, N.; Goodrich, A. Photovoltaic (PV) Pricing Trends: Historical, Recent, and Near-Term Projections; National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, USA, 2012.
  2. Barbose, G.L.; Darghouth, N.R.; Millstein, D.; LaCommare, K.H.; DiSanti, N.; Widiss, R. Tracking the Sun X: The Installed Price of Residential and Non-Residential Photovoltaic Systems in the United States; Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2017.
  3. IRENA. Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2017; IRENA: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2018.
  4. Dudley, D. Renewable Energy Will Be Consistently Cheaper than Fossil Fuels By 2020, Report Claims. Available online: https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2018/01/13/renewable-energy-cost-effective-fossil-fuels-2020/ (accessed on 7 April 2020).
  5. Business Renewables Canada. Business Renewables Centre Canada Deal Tracker. Available online: https://businessrenewables.ca/deal-tracker (accessed on 21 October 2022).
  6. Baldus-Jeursen, C. National Survey Report of PV Power Applications in Canada. Available online: https://iea-pvps.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/NSR_Canada_2019.pdf (accessed on 21 October 2022).
  7. Pearce, J.M.; Sommerfeldt, N. Economics of Grid-Tied Solar Photovoltaic Systems Coupled to Heat Pumps: The Case of Northern Climates of the U.S. and Canada. Energies 2021, 14, 834.
  8. Pearce, J.M. Photovoltaics—A Path to Sustainable Futures. Futures 2002, 34, 663–674.
  9. Pearce, J.; Lau, A. Net Energy Analysis for Sustainable Energy Production from Silicon Based Solar Cells. In Proceedings of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Solar 2002: Sunrise on the Reliable Energy Economy, Reno, NV, USA, 15–20 June 2002.
  10. NREL. Best Research-Cell Efficiency Chart. Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/pv/cell-efficiency.html (accessed on 12 January 2021).
  11. Bhandari, K.P.; Collier, J.M.; Ellingson, R.J.; Apul, D.S. Energy payback time (EPBT) and energy return on energy invested (EROI) of solar photovoltaic systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 47, 133–141.
  12. Denholm, P.; Margolis, R.M. Land-use requirements and the per-capita solar footprint for photovoltaic generation in the United States. Energy Policy 2008, 36, 3531–3543.
  13. Engelke, P. Foreign Policy for an Urban World: Global Governance and the Rise of Cities; Atlantic Council: Washington, DC, USA, 2013.
  14. What Percentage of Canadians Live in Cities and Towns? Available online: http://www.canadafaq.ca/what+percentage+canadians+live+in+cities/ (accessed on 18 December 2021).
  15. Wüstenhagen, R.; Wolsink, M.; Bürer, M.J. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 2683–2691.
  16. Batel, S.; Devine-Wright, P.; Tangeland, T. Social acceptance of low carbon energy and associated infrastructures: A critical discussion. Energy Policy 2013, 58, 1–5.
  17. Calvert, K.; Mabee, W. More solar farms or more bioenergy crops? Mapping and assessing potential land-use conflicts among renewable energy technologies in eastern Ontario, Canada. Appl. Geogr. 2015, 56, 209–221.
  18. Calvert, K.; Pearce, J.M.; Mabee, W.E. Toward renewable energy geo-information infrastructures: Applications of GIScience and remote sensing that build institutional capacity. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 18, 416–429.
  19. Sovacool, B. Exploring and Contextualizing Public Opposition to Renewable Electricity in the United States. Sustainability 2009, 1, 702–721.
  20. Sovacool, B.K.; Ratan, P.L. Conceptualizing the acceptance of wind and solar electricity. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 5268–5279.
  21. Dias, L.; Gouveia, J.P.; Lourenço, P.; Seixas, J. Interplay between the Potential of Photovoltaic Systems and Agricultural Land Use. Land Use Policy 2019, 81, 725–735.
  22. UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Concise Report on the World Population Situation in 2014; UN: New York, NY, USA, 2014.
  23. FAO. How to Feed the World 2050. Available online: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/Issues_papers/HLEF2050_Global_Agriculture.pdf (accessed on 25 October 2021).
  24. Runge, C.F.; Senauer, B. How Biofuels Could Starve the Poor. Foreign Aff. 2007, 86, 41.
  25. Tomei, J.; Helliwell, R. Food versus Fuel? Going beyond Biofuels. Land Use Policy 2016, 56, 320–326.
  26. Tenenbaum, D.J. Food vs. Fuel: Diversion of Crops Could Cause More Hunger. Environ. Health Perspect. 2008, 116, A254–A257.
  27. Canada Population Growth Rate 1950–2021. Available online: https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CAN/canada/population-growth-rate (accessed on 19 December 2021).
  28. Mamun, M.A.A.; Dargusch, P.; Wadley, D.; Zulkarnain, N.A.; Aziz, A.A. A Review of Research on Agrivoltaic Systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 161, 112351.
  29. Pearce, J.M. Agrivoltaics in Ontario Canada: Promise and Policy. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3037.
  30. Dupraz, C.; Marrou, H.; Talbot, G.; Dufour, L.; Nogier, A.; Ferard, Y. Combining Solar Photovoltaic Panels and Food Crops for Optimising Land Use: Towards New Agrivoltaic Schemes. Renew. Energy 2011, 36, 2725–2732.
  31. Guerin, T.F. Impacts and opportunities from large-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) electricity generation on agricultural production. Environ. Qual. Manag. 2019, 28, 7–14.
  32. Valle, B.; Simonneau, T.; Sourd, F.; Pechier, P.; Hamard, P.; Frisson, T.; Ryckewaert, M.; Christophe, A. Increasing the Total Productivity of a Land by Combining Mobile Photovoltaic Panels and Food Crops. Appl. Energy 2017, 206, 1495–1507.
  33. Mavani, D.D.; Chauhan, P.M.; Joshi, V. Beauty of Agrivoltaic System regarding double utilization of same piece of land for Generation of Electricity & Food Production. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 2019, 10, 118–148.
  34. Fthenakis, V.M.; Kim, H.C.; Alsema, E. Emissions from Photovoltaic Life Cycles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 2168–2174.
  35. Wade, K. The Impact of Climate Change on the Global Economy. Available online: https://prod.schroders.com/en/sysglobalassets/digital/us/pdfs/the-impact-of-climate-change.pdf (accessed on 2 October 2022).
  36. Marrou, H.; Wery, J.; Dufour, L.; Dupraz, C. Productivity and radiation use efficiency of lettuces grown in the partial shade of photovoltaic panels. Eur. J. Agron. 2013, 44, 54–66.
  37. Sekiyama, T. Performance of Agrivoltaic Systems for Shade-Intolerant Crops: Land for Both Food and Clean Energy Production. Master’s Thesis, Harvard Extension School, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019.
  38. Nassar, A.; Perez-Wurfl, I.; Roemer, C.; Hameiri, Z. Improving Productivity of Cropland through Agrivoltaics. Available online: https://apvi.org.au/solar-research-conference/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Alexander-Nassar-Improving-Productivity-of-Cropland-through-Agrivoltaics.pdf (accessed on 2 September 2022).
  39. Barron-Gafford, G.A.; Pavao-Zuckerman, M.A.; Minor, R.L.; Sutter, L.F.; Barnett-Moreno, I.; Blackett, D.T.; Thompson, M.; Dimond, K.; Gerlak, A.K.; Nabhan, G.P.; et al. Agrivoltaics Provide Mutual Benefits across the Food–Energy–Water Nexus in Drylands. Nat. Sustain. 2019, 2, 848–855.
  40. Sekiyama, T.; Nagashima, A. Solar Sharing for Both Food and Clean Energy Production: Performance of Agrivoltaic Systems for Corn, A Typical Shade-Intolerant Crop. Environments 2019, 6, 65.
  41. Trommsdorff, M.; Kang, J.; Reise, C.; Schindele, S.; Bopp, G.; Ehmann, A.; Weselek, A.; Högy, P.; Obergfell, T. Combining Food and Energy Production: Design of an Agrivoltaic System Applied in Arable and Vegetable Farming in Germany. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 140, 110694.
  42. Adeh, E.H.; Selker, J.S.; Higgins, C.W. Remarkable Agrivoltaic Influence on Soil Moisture, Micrometeorology and Water-Use Efficiency. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0203256.
  43. Schindele, S.; Trommsdorff, M.; Schlaak, A.; Obergfell, T.; Bopp, G.; Reise, C.; Braun, C.; Weselek, A.; Bauerle, A.; Högy, P.; et al. Implementation of Agrophotovoltaics: Techno-Economic Analysis of the Price-Performance Ratio and Its Policy Implications. Appl. Energy 2020, 265, 114737.
  44. Mow, B. Solar Sheep and Voltaic Veggies: Uniting Solar Power and Agriculture. Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/state-local-tribal/blog/posts/solar-sheep-and-voltaic-veggies-uniting-solar-power-and-agriculture.html (accessed on 2 July 2020).
  45. Adeh, E.H.; Good, S.P.; Calaf, M. Solar PV Power Potential is Greatest Over Croplands. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 11442.
  46. Elamri, Y.; Cheviron, B.; Lopez, J.-M.; Dejean, C.; Belaud, G. Water Budget and Crop Modelling for Agrivoltaic Systems: Application to Irrigated Lettuces. Agric. Water Manag. 2018, 208, 440–453.
  47. Al-Saidi, M.; Lahham, N. Solar energy farming as a development innovation for vulnerable water basins. Dev. Pract. 2019, 29, 619–634.
  48. Giudice, B.D.; Stillinger, C.; Chapman, E.; Martin, M.; Riihimaki, B. Residential Agrivoltaics: Energy Efficiency and Water Conservation in the Urban Landscape. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Green Technologies Conference (GreenTech), Denver, CO, USA, 7–9 April 2021; pp. 237–244.
  49. Miao, R.; Khanna, M. Harnessing Advances in Agricultural Technologies to Optimize Resource Utilization in the Food-Energy-Water Nexus. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 2019, 12, 65–85.
  50. Dursun, M.; Özden, S. Control of Soil Moisture with Radio Frequency in a Photovoltaic-Powered Drip Irrigation System. Turk. J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 2015, 23, 447–458.
  51. Solankey, S.S.; Akhtar, S.; Maldonado, A.I.L.; Rodriguez-Fuentes, H.; Contreras, J.A.V.; Reyes, J.M.M. Urban Horticulture: Necessity of the Future; BoD: Norderstedt, Germany, 2020.
  52. Brain, R. The Local Food Movement: Definitions, Benefits, and Resources; Utah State University Extension: Logan, UT, USA, 2012; pp. 1–4.
  53. Martinez, S. Local Food Systems; Concepts, Impacts, and Issues; DIANE Publishing: Collingdale, PA, USA, 2010.
  54. Feenstra, G.W. Local Food Systems and Sustainable Communities. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 1997, 12, 28–36.
  55. Fuller, R.; Landrigan, P.J.; Balakrishnan, K.; Bathan, G.; Bose-O’Reilly, S.; Brauer, M.; Caravanos, J.; Chiles, T.; Cohen, A.; Corra, L.; et al. Pollution and Health: A Progress Update. Lancet Planet. Health 2022, 6, e535–e547.
  56. Prehoda, E.W.; Pearce, J.M. Potential Lives Saved by Replacing Coal with Solar Photovoltaic Electricity Production in the U.S. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 80, 710–715.
  57. Dinesh, H.; Pearce, J.M. The potential of agrivoltaic systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 54, 299–308.
  58. Sommerfeldt, N.; Pearce, J.M. Can Grid-Tied Solar Photovoltaics Lead to Residential Heating Electrification? A Techno-Economic Case Study in the Midwestern U.S. to be published.
  59. Du, Z.; Denkenberger, D.; Pearce, J.M. Solar Photovoltaic Powered On-Site Ammonia Production for Nitrogen Fertilization. Sol. Energy 2015, 122, 562–568.
  60. Fasihi, M.; Weiss, R.; Savolainen, J.; Breyer, C. Global Potential of Green Ammonia Based on Hybrid PV-Wind Power Plants. Appl. Energy 2021, 294, 116170.
  61. Tributsch, H. Photovoltaic Hydrogen Generation. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2008, 33, 5911–5930.
  62. Fereidooni, M.; Mostafaeipour, A.; Kalantar, V.; Goudarzi, H. A Comprehensive Evaluation of Hydrogen Production from Photovoltaic Power Station. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 82, 415–423.
  63. Pal, P.; Mukherjee, V. Off-Grid Solar Photovoltaic/Hydrogen Fuel Cell System for Renewable Energy Generation: An Investigation Based on Techno-Economic Feasibility Assessment for the Application of End-User Load Demand in North-East India. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 149, 111421.
  64. Pearce, J.M. Parametric Open Source Cold-Frame Agrivoltaic Systems. Inventions 2021, 6, 71.
  65. Riaz, M.H.; Imran, H.; Alam, H.; Alam, M.A.; Butt, N.Z. Crop-Specific Optimization of Bifacial PV Arrays for Agrivoltaic Food-Energy Production: The Light-Productivity-Factor Approach. IEEE J. Photovoltaics 2022, 12, 572–580.
  66. Katsikogiannis, O.A.; Ziar, H.; Isabella, O. Integration of Bifacial Photovoltaics in Agrivoltaic Systems: A Synergistic Design Approach. Appl. Energy 2022, 309, 118475.
  67. Belo, M. Agrivoltaics: Integrating Solar and Agriculture Is a Win-Win. Available online: https://blog.compassenergyconsulting.ca/agrivoltaics-integrating-solar-and-agriculture-is-a-win-win (accessed on 22 December 2021).
  68. Maia, A.S.C.; de Andrade Culhari, E.; de França Carvalho Fonsêca, V.; Milan, H.F.M.; Gebremedhin, K.G. Photovoltaic Panels as Shading Resources for Livestock. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 258, 120551.
  69. Andrew, A.C.; Higgins, C.W.; Smallman, M.A.; Graham, M.; Ates, S. Herbage Yield, Lamb Growth and Foraging Behavior in Agrivoltaic Production System. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 5, 659175.
  70. Handler, R.; Pearce, J.M. Greener Sheep: Life Cycle Analysis of Integrated Sheep Agrivoltatic Systems. Clean. Energy Syst. 2022, 3, 100036.
  71. MacLean, R. Canadian Food DYK: Canada Ranks as the Fifth Largest Agricultural Exporter in the World. Available online: https://eatnorth.com/robyn-maclean/canadian-food-dyk-canada-ranks-fifth-largest-agricultural-exporter-world (accessed on 29 September 2022).
  72. Nonhebel, S. Renewable Energy and Food Supply: Will There Be Enough Land? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2005, 9, 191–201.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback