Life cycle assessment of pasture-based agrivoltaic systems: Emissions and energy use of integrated rabbit production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agrivoltaic systems, which deliberately maximize the utility of a single parcel of land for both solar photovoltaic (PV) electricity production and agriculture , have been demonstrated as a viable technology that can ameliorate competing land uses and meet growing energy and food demands efficiently. The goal of this study is to assess the environmental impacts of a novel pasture-based agrivoltaic concept: co-farming rabbits and solar PV. A life cycle assessment (LCA) quantified the impacts of 1) the integrated agrivoltaic concept in comparison to conventional practices including 2) separate rabbit farming and PV production and 3) separate rabbit farming and conventional electricity production. The impact assessment methods employed to determine the environmental impacts were IPCC 2013 global warming potential 100a V1.03 and fossil energy demand V1.11. The results indicate that the pasture-based agrivoltaic system produces the least amount of greenhouse gas emissions (3.8 million kg CO₂ equivalent) and demands the least amount of fossil energy (46 million MJ) per functional unit of cumulative MWh output of electricity and cumulative kg of meat over 30 years in comparison to the two other scenarios under study. The pasture-based agrivoltaic system features a dual synergy that consequently produces 69.3 % less emissions and demands 82.9 % less fossil energy compared to non-integrated production. The potential for agrivoltaic systems to significantly reduce environmental impacts revealed by this LCA demonstrates that integrated solar and pasture-based agricultural systems are superior to conventional practices in terms of their comparatively lower emission and energy intensity. These findings provide empirical support for increased agrivoltaic system development more broadly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".