4. Conclusion and recommendations
As it was shown daytime soil heat flux values were greater in surface drip irrigation. It may caused by heat convection in surface drip irrigation while moving down the water
from the surface and higher temperature of water when drip tapes were positioned on the ground. Therefore available energy for soil evaporation, Rns-G, was lower in surface drip
irrigation. As it was shown λEs accounted for about 41 to 63 of Rns in surface drip
irrigation while it was about 56 to 71 in subsurface drip irrigation. It was observed the ground in both surface and subsurface drip irrigation became wet but reverse direction of
moving water in subsurface system, as may contributed to more evaporation in subsurface drip irrigation. According to the results, more consideration should be applied
using subsurface drip irrigation systems on depth of lateral line which carrying the emitters.
References
1. Conaway, J. and van Bavel, C.H.M., 1967.Evaporation from a wet soil surface calculated from radiometrically determined surface temperatures. J. Appl.
Meteorol., 6: 650-655. 2. Boast C.W. Robertson T.M. 1982. A micro-lysimeter method for determining
evaporation from a bare soil: Description and laboratory evaluation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 46: 689-696.
3. Ashktorab H. Pruitt W. O. Paw U K. T. George. W.V. 1989. Energy balance determination close to the soil surface using a micro-bowen ratio system. Agric.
For. Meteorol. 46: 259-274. 4. Ham J.M. Heilman J.L. Lascano R.J. 1990. Determination of soil water evaporation
and transpiration from energy balance and stem flow measurements. Agric. For. Meteorol. 59: 287-301
5. Zeggaf T.A. Takeuchi S. Dehghanisanij H. Anyoji H. Yano T. 2008. A Bowen Ratio Technique for partitioning energy fluxes between Maize transpiration and soil
surface evaporation, Agron. J.100: 1-9. 6. Ashktorab H. Pruitt W. O. Paw U. K. T. 1994. Partitioning of evapotranspiration
using lysimeter and micro-bowen-ratio system. ASCE J. of Irrigation and drainage. 120 2 MarchApril. 450-464.
7. Kato, T., R. Kimura, and M. Kamichica,2004. Estimation of evapotranspiration, transpiration ratio and water use efficiency from a sparse canopy using a
compartment model. Agric. Water Manage. 65: 173-191. 8. Gardiol, J.M., L.A.Serio, and A.I Della Maggiora, 2003, Modelling
evapotranspiration of corn Zea mays under different plant densities. J. Hydrol, 271: 188-196.
9. Jara J. Stockle C. O. Kjelgard J. 1998. Measurement of evapotranspiration and its components in a corn Zea Mays L. field. Agric. For. Meteorol. 92:131-145.
10. Rosenberg, N.J., Blad, B.L. and Verma, S.B., 1983. Microclimate: The biological environment. Wiley, NewYork, 495 PP.
11. Heilman J.L., C.L. Brittin and C.M.U. Neale. 1989. Fetch requirements of Bowen ratio measurements of latent and sensible heat fluxes. Agric. For. Meteorol. 44:
261-273.
12. Azevedo, P.V, Souza, C.B., Silva, B.B, Silva, V.P.R, 2007, Water requirement of pineapple crop grown in a tropical environment, Brazil, Agric.Water.Manage. 88:
201-208. 13. Prueger, J.H., Hatfield, J.K. Aase, and J.L. Pikul, Jr. 1997. Bowen ratio
comparisons with lysimetric evapotranspiration. Agron. J. 89:730-736.
COMPARED EFFICIENCY, CONSUMPTION AND WASTE OF ENERGY BETWEEN DRIP AND SPRINKLER PUMPING PLANT
IRRIGATION
S. Rezvani
1
, M. Farzamnai
2
, A. Zolfagharan
3
and S. Amin
4
ABSTRACT
For efficiency and consumption of energy measurement in irrigation pumping plant, a project was performed from 2007 to 2009 in some fields in Hamedan, Kerman and Khorasan Razavi
provinces. Nebraska Pumping Plant Performance Criteria NPPPC was used for comparison of pressurized irrigation pumping plant energy efficiency. Overall energy efficiency and waste
energy were measured in electrical and diesel pumping plant. Electromotor and pumping efficiency were measured in electrical pumping plant. Technical measurements were done in
44 fields in Hamedan, Kerman, and Khorasan Razavi, with 22-drip and 22-sprinklers for irrigation in these fields. Results showed average of overall energy efficiency in electrical
pumping plants to be 48.5 percent 73.5 present NPPPC and in diesel pumping plants 12.3 percent 51.3 percent NPPPC. Average of waste fuel consumption in diesel and electrical
pumping plants was 3.9 liters diesel per hour and 9.8 kW-h, respectively. Energy consumption in electromotor and diesel pump was 60.5 percent and 115.4 percent as compared to actual
energy, respectively. Average electromotor and pump efficiency were 91.3 and 50.6 percent in pressurized irrigation, pumping plant did not connect directly to the well and the average of
electromotor efficiency was only higher than NPPPC. Average of overall energy efficiency in motor-powered pumping plants was 48.0 and 49.2 in trickle and sprinkler irrigation, system
respectively. Comparison of means with t-test showed overall energy efficiency did not reveal significant difference in sprinkler and drip irrigation systems with electric-powered pumping
plants. For each percentage increased in overall energy efficiency, the average of excessive energy consumption decreased 0.6 and 0.4 kWh in sprinkler and drip irrigation systems,
respectively. Average of excessive energy consumption in sprinkler and drip irrigation systems was 60.6 and 60.5 more than NPPPC, respectively. Average of electric-motors efficiency
was 92.7 and 89.5 in sprinkler and drip irrigation systems, respectively. Pump efficiency could be estimated from overall energy efficiency and electric-motors efficiency. Mean of
pumps efficiency was 51.2 and 50.0 in drip, and sprinkler irrigation systems, respectively.
Keywords: pressurized Irrigation, Energy, Nebraska Pumping Plant Performance Criteria, Overall energy efficiency
1-Scientific Staff Member of Agrcultural and natural resources research center of Hamedan,Iran, E-mail: moin.rezvanigmail.com
2 -Scientific Staff Member of Agrcultural and natural resources research center of Kerman, Iran 3-Scientific Staff Member of Agrcultural and natural resources research center of Khorasan reazavi, Iran
4 -Professor of Irrigation Science Department, Shiraz university, Iran
1.INTRODUCTION
Water consumption is about 88.5 BCM in Iran that 82.5 BCM 93.2 is allocated to agricultural section. Urban and industrial sections consumed less than 7 of total water
consumption. Ground waters provide about 50.7 of water consumption for agricultural section. The final statistic showed 364381 wells operated in Iran that 317830 wells 87 were
in agricultural section Ardkanian, 2005. Because surface water recourses are limitation and ground waters are critical in many plains of Iran, proper methods based on demand
management are not possible. Consequently As a result for optimal water used, demand management was noticed jafari and rezvani, 2002. At the field scale, pressurized irrigation
development for optimal water recourses performed, as the most important of product factor, is one of the proper methods. In Hamedan, Kerman and Khorasan razavi were performed 70000,
36500 and 81000 hectares pressurized irrigation respectively. Energy consumption in agricultural section was 2.8 million barrels in 1966 that it reached to 33.1 million barrels in
1991. After that, energy consumption is ranged from 29 to 33 million barrels Figure 1. Due to agricultural wells electric-powered development, the proportion of fossil fuel consumption to
total energy consumption from 100 in 1966 reduce to 71.7 in 2005 and electrical energy consumption increase from 0 to 28.3 during that timeFigure 1. Domestic, industrial and
agricultural sectors electrical consumption from 31.8, 68.2 and 0 percent respectively in 1966 change to 33.2, 32.33 and 12.4 percent respectively in 2005Anon, 2006b that showed
sharply increased intensity electrical consumption in agricultural sector compared with domestic and industrial sectors. Although statically investigation showed that agricultural
sector is third electrical consumption after domestic and industrial sectors in Iran, electrical consumption in some of provinces equal industrial. In provinces such as Hamedan and
Kerman electrical consumption in agricultural sector is more than industrial sector Anon, 2006b. Agricultural sector is second diesel consumption after transportation Anon, 2006b.
Agricultural energy consumption equaled 29.22 million barrels of oil 3.7 percent of total energy consumption and 1185.45 million dollars value in 2002 Hashemi, 2005. Agricultural
energy consumption equaled 32.2 million barrels of oil in 2004. If we suppose world oil price about 85 dollars, the energy consumption value will be about 2737 million dollars.
Amin and sepaskha 1996 reported irrigation pumping plant waste energy in fields around Shiraz was 225 percent and electro-motor energy efficiency was more than engine energy
efficiency in totally. Amin and sepaskha 1996 declared the more effective factors on waste energy were: 1. motors, engine, pump and equipment were worn out 2. Connection was not
sealing 3. maximum capacity of power unit was not used. Schneider and New 1986 reported average thermal efficiency 31.2 and range from 26.0 to 34.8 for 26 diesel engines. Six of
the 26 engines equaled or exceeded the Nebraska performance criteria. New 1986 mentioned achievable irrigation pumping equipment efficiency for pumping
unit components in good condition and carefully selected to match requirements of a specific pumping situation Table 1. Rogers and Black 1993 reported irrigation pumping plants in
Kansas used about 40 percent more fuel than necessary and causes of excessive fuel used were: 1. Poor pump selection. 2. Pumps out of adjustment. 3. Worn-out pumps. 4. Improperly
sized engines or motors. 5. Engines in need of maintenance andor repair. 6. Improperly matched gear heads. Fippes and Neal 1995 tested irrigation pumping plant in 25 counties in
Texas and reported minimum, maximum and average of over all energy efficiency 5.0, 34.5 and 18.1 for 65 diesel pumping plants and 17.5, 68.5 and 42.6 for 86 electric pumping
plants. Rogers and Alam 1999 explained comparison method of energy sources in irrigation pumping plants and Nebraska Pumping Plant Performance Criteria NPPPC was considered
such a basis for comparison of potential fuel or energy. NPPPC is a compromise between the most efficient pumping plant possible and the average pumping plant. Tests in Nebraska
showed about 15 of the systems were exceed the NPPPC. Results showed even with low
0.0 5.0
Kategori