Reducing energy and carbon footprint through diversified rainfed cropping systems

被引:3
|
作者
Kantwa, Sita Ram [1 ]
Choudhary, Mukesh [1 ]
Agrawal, Rajiv Kumar [1 ]
Dixit, Anoop Kumar [1 ]
Kumar, Sunil [2 ]
Chary, G. Ravindra [3 ]
机构
[1] ICAR Indian Grassland & Fodder Res Inst, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India
[2] ICAR Indian Inst Farming Syst Res, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, India
[3] ICAR Cent Res Inst Dryland Agr, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
来源
ENERGY NEXUS | 2024年 / 14卷
关键词
Carbon footprint; Crop diversification; Cropping system; Energy budgeting; GREENHOUSE-GAS EMISSIONS; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE; MITIGATION; STRATEGIES; ROTATION; FORAGE; CROPS; YIELD;
D O I
10.1016/j.nexus.2024.100306
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
Agriculture is the second largest contributor (20 %) to total anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the world. There is a need to identify energy and carbon efficient cropping systems that reduce GHG emission and improve environmental quality. Using life cycle assessment (LCA), we evaluated the four cropping systems namely fallow - chickpea (F-C); Sesbania - mustard (Ses-M); blackgram - chickpea (B-C); sorghum + cowpea - mustard (S + C-M) cultivated during the 2018-2022 period. The energy use pattern and the input-output relationship were analysed. Three measures were utilized to quantify carbon footprints: CFa, which denotes emissions per unit area; CFb, indicating emissions per kilogram of yield; and CFe, representing emissions per unit of economic output. The result indicates that non-renewable sources of energy (diesel and fertilizer) contributed more than similar to 80 % of the total energy consumed in the different cropping systems. The total energy requirement was the highest for S + C-M (16,972 MJ ha(-1)), followed by Ses-M (14,365 MJ ha(-1)), B-C (11,132 MJ ha(-1)) and F-C (8679 MJ ha(-1)) cropping systems. The S + C-M cropping system also had the highest energy use efficiency (9.13) followed by F-C (6.03), B-C (5.41) and Ses-M (5.41). The fallow-chickpea cropping system had the lowest values of CFa, CFb, and CFe however, the highest carbon efficiency (10.7) and the carbon sustainability index (9.7) were computed in S + C-M cropping system. Our findings indicate that thoughtfully structured, varied crop systems that integrate legumes and forage crops have the potential to significantly reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions, while sustaining or potentially improving overall productivity within these systems.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] The role of microbial fertilizers in diversified cropping systems
    Romero-Figueiras, Taniad
    Andres-Meza, Pablo
    Murguia-Gonzalez, Joaquin
    Espinosa-Calderon, Alejandro
    Maldonado-Saavedra, Octavio
    Leyva-Ovalle, Otto Raul
    ECOSISTEMAS Y RECURSOS AGROPECUARIOS, 2024, 11 (03):
  • [32] Energy use and carbon footprint in response to the transition from indica rice to japonica rice cropping systems in China
    Xi, Min
    Xu, Youzun
    Zhou, Yongjin
    Wu, Chenyang
    Tu, Debao
    Li, Zhong
    Sun, Xueyuan
    Wu, Wenge
    ENERGY, 2024, 299
  • [33] A syngas network for reducing industrial carbon footprint and energy use
    Roddy, Dermot J.
    APPLIED THERMAL ENGINEERING, 2013, 53 (02) : 299 - 304
  • [34] ECONOMICS OF RAINFED CROPPING SYSTEMS - NORTHEAST THAILAND
    JOHNSON, SH
    CHAROENWATANA, T
    WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 1981, 17 (03) : 462 - 468
  • [35] Reducing the Carbon Footprint of the Water-Energy Binomial through Governance and ICT. A Case Study
    Chazarra-Zapata, Jesus
    Parras-Burgos, Dolores
    Perez-de-la-Cruz, Francisco-Javier
    Ruiz-Canales, Antonio
    Molina-Martinez, Jose Miguel
    WATER, 2020, 12 (11) : 1 - 18
  • [36] Canola productivity and carbon footprint under different cropping systems in eastern Canada
    Ma, Bao-Luo
    Liang, Chang
    Herath, Aruna
    Caldwell, C. D.
    Smith, Donald L.
    NUTRIENT CYCLING IN AGROECOSYSTEMS, 2023, 127 (02) : 191 - 207
  • [37] Energy Efficiency, Monetary Costs, and Sustainability of Brazilian Rainfed and Irrigated Rice Cropping Systems
    Elen Presotto
    Gabrielli do Carmo Martinelli
    Gabriela Allegretti
    Edson Talamini
    Biophysical Economics and Sustainability, 2021, 6 (3)
  • [38] Canola productivity and carbon footprint under different cropping systems in eastern Canada
    Bao-Luo Ma
    Chang Liang
    Aruna Herath
    C. D. Caldwell
    Donald L. Smith
    Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 2023, 127 : 191 - 207
  • [39] Energy budgeting and carbon footprint of pearl millet - mustard cropping system under conventional and conservation agriculture in rainfed semi-arid agro-ecosystem
    Choudhary, Mukesh
    Rana, K. S.
    Bana, R. S.
    Ghasal, P. C.
    Choudhary, G. L.
    Jakhar, Praveen
    Verma, R. K.
    ENERGY, 2017, 141 : 1052 - 1058
  • [40] Impact of conservation agriculture and weed management on carbon footprint, energy efficiency, and sustainability in maize-wheat cropping systems
    Kumar, Sachin
    Rana, Surinder Singh
    Abdelrahman, Kamal
    Uddin, Md Galal
    Fnais, Mohammed S.
    Abioui, Mohamed
    ENERGY, 2024, 309