Strategies for reducing the carbon footprint of field crops for semiarid areas. A review
- 1.3k Downloads
The Earth’s climate is rapidly changing largely due to increasing anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Agricultural practices during crop production, food processing, and product marketing all generate GHG, contributing to the global climate change. The general public and farmers are urging the development and adoption of effective measures to reduce GHG emissions from all agricultural activities and sectors. However, quantitative information is not available in regard to what strategies and practices should be adopted to reduce emission from agriculture and how crop productivity would affect the intensity of GHG emission. To provide the potential solution, we estimated the carbon footprint [i.e., the total amount of GHG associated with the production and distribution of a given food product expressed in carbon dioxide equivalence (CO2e)] for some of the major field crops grown on the Canadian prairie and assessed the effect of crop sequences on the carbon footprint of durum wheat. Key strategies for reducing the carbon footprint of various field crops grown in semiarid areas were identified. Carbon footprints were estimated using emissions from (1) the decomposition of crop straw and roots; (2) the manufacture of N and P fertilizers and their rates of application; (3) the production of herbicides and fungicides; and (4) miscellaneous farm field operations. Production and application of N fertilizers accounted for 57% to 65% of the total footprint, those from crop residue decomposition 16% to 30%, and the remaining portion of the footprint included CO2e from the production of P fertilizer and pesticides, and from miscellaneous field operations. Crops grown in the Brown soil zone had the lowest carbon footprint, averaging 0.46 kg CO2e kg−1 of grain, whereas crops grown in the Black soil zone had a larger average carbon footprint of 0.83 kg CO2e kg−1 of grain. The average carbon footprint for crops grown in the Dark Brown soil zone was intermediate to the other two at 0.61 kg CO2e kg−1 of grain. One kilogram of grain product emitted 0.80 kg CO2e for canola (Brassica napus L.), 0.59 for mustard (Brassica juncea L.) and flaxseed (Linum usitatissimum L.), 0.46 for spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), and 0.20 to 0.33 kg CO2e for chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), dry pea (Pisum sativum L.), and lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.). Durum wheat (T. aestivum L.) preceded by an N-fixing crop (i.e., pulses) emitted total greenhouse gases of 673 kg CO2e, 20% lower than when the crop was preceded by a cereal crop. Similarly, durum wheat preceded by an oilseed emitted 744 kg CO2e, 11% lower than when preceded by a cereal. The carbon footprint for durum grown after a pulse was 0.25 kg CO2e per kg of the grain and 0.28 kg CO2e per kg of the grain when grown after an oilseed: a reduction in the carbon footprint of 24% to 32% than when grown after a cereal. The average carbon footprint can be lowered by as much as 24% for crops grown in the Black, 28% in the Dark Brown, and 37% in the Brown soil zones, through improved agronomic practices, increased N use efficiency, use of diversified cropping systems, adoption of crop cultivars with high harvest index, and the use of soil bioresources such as P-solublizers and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in crop production.
KeywordsCarbon footprint Legumes Oilseeds Broadleaf crops Biochar Crop diversification Carbon sequestration Straw management Input N-fixation
- Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) (2009) North American Fertilizer Prices, Production and Consumption, in: Korol M., Larivière É. (Eds.), Fertilizer Pricing in Canada, http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1179252532274&lang=eng#table3.9
- Choudhary DK, Prakash A, Wray V, Johri BN (2009) Insights of the fluorescent pseudomonads in plant growth regulation. Curr Sci India 97:170–179Google Scholar
- Dyer J.A., Vergé X.P.C., Desjardins R.L., Worth E.D., McConkey B.G. (2010) The impact of increased biodiesel production on the greenhouse gas emissions from field crops in Canada, Energy Sust. Devel. (in press).Google Scholar
- Environment Canada. (2010) National Inventory submission: Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada, Greenhouse Gas Division, Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON. http://unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/items/5270.php
- Forster P, Ramaswamy V, Artaxo P, Berntsen T, Betts R, Fahey DW, Haywood J, Lean J, Lowe DC, Myhre G (2007) Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 129–234Google Scholar
- Gan YT, Kutcher R, Menalled F, Lafond L, Brandt S (2010) Crop diversification and intensification with broadleaf crops in cereal-based cropping systems in the Northern Great Plains of North America. In: Malhi SS, Gan YT, Schoenau JJ, Lemke RL, Liebig MA (eds) Recent Trends in Soil Science and Agronomy Research in the Northern Great Plains of North America. Research Signpost, Trivandrum, Kerala, India, p 427Google Scholar
- IPCC. (2006) 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry and other Land Use. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Paris, France. http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol4.htm.
- Janzen HH, Desjardins RL, Asselin JMR, Grace B (1998) The health of our air: Toward sustainable agriculture in Canada. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, p 98Google Scholar
- Laird D, Fleming P, Wang B, Karlen D (2009) Impact of biochar amendments on soil quality for a typical midwestern agricultural soil, Poster presentation. North American Biochar Conference, Boulder, Colorado, USAGoogle Scholar
- Liang B.C., McConkey B.G., Campbell C.A., Johnston A.M., Moulin A.P. (2002) Short-term crop rotation and tillage effects on soil organic carbon on the Canadian prairies. An international symposium on agricultural practices and policies for carbon sequestration, Soil. Sci. Soc. Am. J., Special Publication, 287–293.Google Scholar
- Prasad R (2009) Efficient fertilizer use: The key to food security and better environment. J Trop Agric Food Sci 47:1–17Google Scholar
- Rees WE (1992) Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out, Environ. Urbanisation 4, 121–130, doi: 10.1177/095624789200400212.
- Reino JL, Guerrero RF, Hernández-Galán R, Collado IG (2008) Secondary metabolites from species of the biocontrol agent Trichoderma. Physiol Rev 7:89–123Google Scholar
- Sieling K, Kage H (2010) Efficient N management using winter oilseed rape - A review, Agron. Sustain. Dev. 30, 271–279. doi: 10.1051/agro/2009036.
- Swift MJ, Vandermeer J, Ramakrishnan PS, Anderson JM, Ong CK, Hawkins BA (1996) Biodiversity and agroecosystem function. In: Mooney HA, Cushman JH, Medina E, Sala OE, Schulze ED (eds) Functional Roles in Biodiversity: A Global Perspective. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 261–290Google Scholar
- Wackernagel M. (1994) Ecological footprint and appropriated carrying capacity: A tool for planning toward sustainability. (PhD thesis), Vancouver, Canada: School of Community and Regional Planning, The University of British Columbia. OCLC 41839429.Google Scholar
- Wiedmann T, Minx J (2008) A definition of ‘carbon footprint’. In: Pertsova CC (ed) Ecological Economics Research Trends: Chapter 1. Nova, Hauppauge NY, USA, pp 1–11Google Scholar
- Zentner R.P., Brandt S.A., Nagy C.N., Frick B. (2009) Economics and energy use efficiency of alternative cropping strategies for the Dark Brown soil zone of Saskatchewan, Saskatchewan Agriculture Development Fund Final Report: Project 20070029. http://www.agr.gov.sk.ca/apps/adf/adf_admin/reports/20070029.pdf