This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.
Quimís-Guerrido et al. Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2022, 39(1): e2239075-6 |
Figure 2. Indicator values of the direct cost of operation, in
USD.h
-1
.
Indeed, the cost per salary (Gs) was the indicator with the highest
disposition with 68 and 70.4%, followed by the amortization cost
(Ga) with 16.3 and 15.2%, the cost for repairs and maintenance
(Grm) with 11 and 10%, and with less incidence, due to the diesel
subsidy in Ecuador (Terneus and Viteri, 2020), the cost per fuel
(Gc) that represented 4.7 and 4.4% in the organization of the direct
operating cost (Gd), for the YTO DF 15L and DONGFENG DF
151L sets, respectively.
The aforementioned differs from the work of Ramos and Lora
(2013) and Crespo et al. (2018), who indicated that the highest
indicators in Gd were the cost of fuel consumption (Gc) and the cost
of maintenance and repairs (Grm), respectively. The variabilities
are subject to experimental, currency, cost and annual workload
factors of the equipment.
Consequently, table 6 shows the values achieved by the sets
under study regarding to the direct hourly operating cost (Gd) and
per unit of worked area (Gex).
Table 6. Economic cost values of the equipment.
Agricultural assemblies
Parameters
U/M
YTO DF
15L
DONGFENG
DF 151L
Direct operating cost (Gd ) USD.h
-1
5.31
5.68
Per unit area worked (Gex) USD.ha
-1
106.20
142.00
As can be observed, the hourly direct operating cost (Gd) reported
5.31 and 5.68 USD.h
-1
for the YTO DF 15L and DONGFENG DF
151L sets, respectively. The direct hourly operating cost (Gd) of the
latter set was 0.37 USD.h
-1
higher. It should be noted that the highest
hourly direct operating cost (Gd) and the lowest eld productivity
of the DONGFENG DF 151L set, caused that the direct operating
cost per unit of worked area (Gex) of 142.00 USD.ha
-1
was 25%
higher than that achieved by the YTO DF 15L set of 106.20 USD.
ha
-1
.
In addition, the results obtained in this study for Gex, exceed
the reported by the Indian manufacturing equipment, the Mahindra
-Yuvraj (15 hp) mini tractor and by the VST Shakti 130 DI (13 hp)
power tiller of 35.00 and 40.90 USD.ha
-1
(Dabhi et al., 2016; and
Rangapara et al., 2017), respectively.
It is evident that these records are not conclusive; since,
socioeconomic and edaphoclimatic variables of experimentation in
the realization of agricultural operations differ.
Conclusions
The total energy cost of agricultural operations in soil
preparation (EST) for the YTO DF 15L set is 78.50 MJ. h
-1
and for
DONGFENG DF 151L is 75.30 MJ. h
-1
. The dominant indicator
is the energy sequestered by fuel (ESc), which represents 55 and
58.4% of the EST distribution. Likewise, the energy cost per unit
of worked area EST (ha) amounts to 1.574.00 and 1.883.00 MJ.ha
-1
for the YTO DF 15L and DONGFENG DF 151L sets, respectively.
On the other hand, the direct operating cost (Gd) reached 5.31
and 5.68 USD.h
-1
, with the cost per salary (Gs) being the indicator
with the highest participation in the Gd structure, with 68 and 70.4%.
The operating cost per unit of worked area (Gex) registered 106.20
and 142.00 USD.ha
-1
, for the YTO DF 15L and DONGFENG DF
151L sets, respectively.
The YTO DF 15L set presents lower energy and operating
cost, per unit of worked area, EST (ha) and (Gex), in 16 and 25%,
correspondingly, in relation to the DONGFENG DF 151L set, in the
arranged agricultural operation.
Cited literature
Bojacá, C. R., Casilimas, H. A., Gil, R., y Schrevens, E. (2012). Extending
the input-output energy balance methodology in agriculture through
cluster analysis. Energy, 47(1), 465–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2012.09.051
Crespo-Amaya, R., Paneque-Rondón, P., y Miranda-Caballero, A. (2018).
Determinación del costo energético y de explotación de la cosecha
mecanizada del arroz. Revista Ciencias Técnicas Agropecuarias, 27(2),
1–10.
Dabhi, K. L., Godhani, R. S., y Swarnkar, R. (2016). Comparative performance
of mini tractor draw tillage implements for seed bed preparation under
sandy loam conditions of middle Gujarat. International Journal of
Agricultural Engineering, 9(1), 53–61. https://doi.org/10.15740/HAS/
IJAE/9.1/53-61
De las Cuevas, H. R., Hernández, R. T., Herrera, P. M., y Paneque, R. P. (2008).
Software para la evaluación tecnológica de las máquinas agrícolas.
Revista Ciencias Técnicas Agropecuarias, 17(2), 24–28.
Devkota, R., Pant, L. P., Gartaula, H. N., Patel, K., Gauchan, D., Hambly-
Odame, H., Thapa, B., y Raizada, M. N. (2020). Responsible
agricultural mechanization innovation for the sustainable development
of Nepal’s hillside farming system. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(1),
1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12010374
DFMA. (2020). Fabricante de tractores de 4 ruedas y motocultores en China
desde 1952. Changzhou Dongfeng Agricultural Machinery Group Co.,
Ltd. http://dftractor.es/2b-DF-15L-walking-tractor.html
Fluck, R C, y Baird, C. D. (1980). Agricultural Energetics. AVI Publishing
Company. https://books.google.com.na/books?id=aXFRAAAAMAAJ
Fluck, Richard C. (1992). Energy for farm production. In Energy for World
Agriculture (Vol. 6, p. 287). Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Fluck, Richard C. (1981). Net energy sequestered in agricultural labor.
Transactions of the ASAE, 24(6), 1449–1455.
Frank, L. (1998). Costos de la Maquinaria Agrícola, Cátedra de Administración
Rural (2da. ed.). FAUBA.
Hetz, E., Huerta, A., Villar, S., y López, M. (1997). Evaluación Económica
de los Tractores Agrícolas Comercializados en Chile. Universidad de
Concepción-Facultad de Ingeniería Agrícola. Chillán, Chile. http://
revistas.uach.cl/html/agrosur/v26n2/body/art04.htm
Hetz, E. J., y Barrios, A. I. (1997). Costo Energético de las Operaciones
Agrícolas Mecanizadas más Comunes en Chile. Agro Sur, 25(2), 146–
161. https://doi.org/10.4206/agrosur.1997.v25n2-03
ILGA. (2021). Motocultor DongFeng. Importadora ILGA. https://
ilgaimportadora.com/productos/motocultor-dong-feng/#
InfoStat. (2017). InfoStat-Software estadístico versión 2017. https://www.
infostat.com.ar/index.php?mod=noticia&id=49
Ledesma, R. (2018). República del Ecuador. Ministerio del Trabajo. Acuerdo
Ministerial Nro. MDT-2018-0001. Ministerio Del Trabajo. https://www.
trabajo.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2018/01/mdt-2018-
0001_fijación_de_sueldo_salarios_tarifas_para_el_sector_privado_
de_las_diferentes_comisiones_sectoriales.pdf?x42051
Livas-García, A. (2015). Análisis de insumo-producto de energía y observaciones
sobre el desarrollo sustentable, caso mexicano 1970-2010. Ingeniería,
Investigación y Tecnología, 16(2), 239–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
riit.2015.03.008