Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Maintaining Agricultural Sustainability through Carbon Footprint Management


Affiliations
1 Department of Agronomy, Dr Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa 848 125, India
2 ICAR-Indian Institute of Water Management, Bhubaneswar 751 023, India
3 Department of Agronomy, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour 813 210, India
4 Department of Agronomy, Dr Kalam Agricultural College, Kishanganj 855 117, India
 

Global awareness of climate change issues, particularly changes in air temperature, has increased dramatically over the last half a century. Concerns regarding ecosystem sustainability and human existence on Earth arise due to population expansion, rising surface temperatures and increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Agriculture accounts for approximately 18% of the total GHG emissions, largely in the form of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. As a result, limiting GHG emissions is critical to alleviating the consequences of climate change, which is attainable if the concept of carbon footprint is understood. Cereal production produces more GHG emissions than other farming methods, including vegetables and fruits. ‘Carbon footprint’ is a popular term in agriculture and environmental research due to its involvement in environmental impact assessments and global climate change. GHG emissions are influenced by changes in land use, soil type and agricultural management approaches. Therefore, it is important to consider how agricultural management practices, particularly those involving the soil and related systems, affect the relationships between photosynthesis and GHG emissions. This study deals with the concept of carbon footprint in agriculture and various mitigation measures for its management.

Keywords

Agricultural Management, Carbon Footprint, Climate Change, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Soil Health.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Babur, E. and Dindaroglu, T., Seasonal changes of soil organic carbon and microbial biomass carbon in different forest ecosystems. In Environmental Factors Affecting Human Health, IntechOpen, 2020, vol. 1, pp. 1–21.

  • Udara Willhelm Abeydeera, L. H., Wadu Mesthrige, J. and Samara-singhalage, T. I., Global research on carbon emissions: a scientometric review. Sustainability, 2019, 11, 3972; doi:10.3390/su11143972.

  • Gao, T., Liu, Q. and Wang, J., A comparative study of carbon foot-print and assessment standards. Int. J. Low-Carbon Technol., 2013, 9(3), 237–243; doi:10.1093/ijlct/ctt041.

  • Ozlu, E. and Arriaga, F. J., The role of carbon stabilization and minerals on soil aggregation in different ecosystems. Catena, 2021, 202, 105303; doi:10.1016/j.catena.2021.105303.

  • Qi, J. Y., Yang, S. T., Xue, J. F., Liu, C. X., Du, T. Q., Hao, J. P. and Cui, F. Z., Response of carbon footprint of spring maize production to cultivation patterns in the Loess Plateau, China. J. Clean. Prod., 2018, 187, 525–536; doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.184.

  • Wilson, D. C. et al., Global Waste Management Outlook, United Nations Environment Programme, Vienna, Austria, 2015, p. 346.

  • Rees, W. E., Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out. Environ. Urban., 1992, 4, 121–130.

  • Wiedmann, T. and Minx, J., A definition of ‘carbon footprint’. Ecol. Econ. Res. Trends, 2008, 1, 1–11.

  • Lal, R. and Follett, R. F., Soil Carbon Sequestration and the Greenhouse Effect, Soil Science Society of America Special Publication 57, 2nd edn, Madison, WI, USA, 2009, vol. 57, pp. 321–346.

  • Blanco-Canqui, H., Hergert, G. W. and Nielsen, R. A., Cattle manure application reduces soil compatibility and increases water retention after 71 years. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 2015, 79(1), 212–223; doi:10.2136/sssaj2014.06.0252.

  • Gu, J., Nicoullaud, B., Rochette, P., Grossel, A., Hénault, C., Cellier, P. and Richard, G., A regional experiment suggests that soil texture is a major control of N2O emissions from tile-drained winter wheat fields during the fertilization period. Soil Biol. Biochem., 2013, 60, 134–141; doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.01.029.

  • Ozlu, E. and Kumar, S., Response of soil organic carbon, pH, electrical conductivity, and water stable aggregates to long-term annual manure and inorganic fertilizer. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 2018, 82, 1243–1251; doi:10.2136/sssaj2018.02.0082.

  • FAOSTAT, Emissions agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy, 2020; https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/GT.

  • Jaiswal, B. and Agrawal, M., Carbon footprints of agriculture sector. In Carbon Footprints, Environmental Footprints and Eco-design of Products and Processes (ed. Muthu, S.), Springer, Singapore, 2020, pp. 81–99; doi:10.1007/978-981-13-7916-1_4.

  • Hamelin, L., Jørgensen, U., Petersen, B. M., Olesen, J. E. and Wenzel, H., Modelling the carbon and nitrogen balances of direct land use changes from energy crops in Denmark: a consequential life cycle inventory. GCB Bioenergy, 2012, 4(6), 889–907; doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2012.01174.x.

  • Andren, O. and Katterer, T., ICBM: the introductory carbon balance model for exploration of soil carbon balances. Ecol. Appl., 1997, 7, 1226–1236.

  • Coleman, K. and Jenkinson, D. S., RothC-26.3 – a model for the turnover of carbon in soil. In Evaluation of Soil Organic Matter Models, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1996, pp. 237–246.

  • Goglio, P. et al., A comparison of methods to quantify greenhouse gas emissions of cropping systems in LCA. J. Clean. Prod., 2018, 172, 4010–4017; doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.133.

  • Nguyen, D. H., Biala, J., Grace, P. R., Scheer, C. and Rowlings, D. W., Greenhouse gas emissions from sub-tropical agricultural soils after addition of organic by-products. Springer Plus, 2014, 3, 491; doi:10.1186/2193-1801-3-491.

  • Yadav, G. S. et al., Energy budget and carbon footprint in a no-till and mulch-based rice–mustard cropping system. J. Clean. Prod., 2018, 191, 144–157; doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.173.

  • Yousefi, M., Khoramivafa, M. and Damghani, A. M., Water foot-print and carbon footprint of the energy consumption in sunflower agroecosystems. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 2017, 24(24), 19827–19834; doi:10.1007/s11356-017-9582-4.

  • Devakumar, A. S., Pardis, R. and Manjunath, V., Carbon footprint of crop cultivation process under semiarid conditions. Agric. Res., 2018, 7(2), 167–175; doi:10.1007/s40003-018-0315-9.

  • Yadav, G. S. et al., Energy budgeting for designing sustainable and environmentally clean/safer cropping systems for rainfed rice fallow lands in India. J. Clean. Prod., 2017, 158, 29–37; doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.170.

  • Sah, D. and Devakumar, A. S., The carbon footprint of agricultural crop cultivation in India. Carbon Manage., 2018, 9(3), 213–225; doi:10.1080/17583004.2018.1457908.

  • Jiang, Z., Zhong, Y., Yang, J., Wu, Y., Li, H. and Zheng, L., Effect of nitrogen fertilizer rates on carbon footprint and ecosystem service of carbon sequestration in rice production. Sci. Total Environ., 2019, 670, 210–217; doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.188.

  • Zhang, D., Shen, J., Zhang, F., Li, Y. E. and Zhang, W., Carbon footprint of grain production in China. Sci. Rep., 2017, 7(1), 4126; doi:10.1038/s41598-017-04182-x.

  • Jat, S. L. et al., Energy auditing and carbon footprint under long-term conservation agriculture-based intensive maize systems with diverse inorganic nitrogen management options. Sci. Total Environ., 2019, 664, 659–668; doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.01.425.

  • Hedayati, M., Brock, P. M., Nachimuthu, G. and Schwenke, G., Farm-level strategies to reduce the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of cotton production: an Australian perspective. J. Clean. Prod., 2019, 212, 974–985; doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.190.

  • Raucci, G. S., Moreira, C. S., Alves, P. A., Mello, F. F. C., Frazão, L. D. A., Cerri, C. E. P. and Cerri, C. C., Greenhouse gas assessment of Brazilian soybean production: a case study of Mato Grosso State. J. Clean. Prod., 2015, 96, 418–425; doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.02.064.

  • Yodkhum, S., Gheewala, S. H. and Sampattagul, S., Life cycle GHG evaluation of organic rice production in northern Thailand. J. Environ. Manage., 2017, 196, 217–223; doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.03.004.

  • Forleo, M. B., Palmieri, N., Suardi, A., Coaloa, D. and Pari, L., The eco-efficiency of rapeseed and sunflower cultivation in Italy. Joining environmental and economic assessment. J. Clean. Prod., 2018, 172, 3138–3153; doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.094.

  • Gerber, P. J. et al., Tackling climate change through livestock – a global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy, 2013.

  • Johnson, K. A. and Johnson, D. E., Methane emissions from cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 1995, 73(8), 2483–2492.

  • Hristov, A. N. et al., Special topics – mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: I. A review of enteric methane mitigation options. J. Anim. Sci., 2013, 91(11), 5045–5069.

  • Liu, C., Cutforth, H., Chai, Q. and Gan, Y., Farming tactics to reduce the carbon footprint of crop cultivation in semiarid areas. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev., 2016, 36(4), 69; doi:10.1007/s13593-016-0404-8.

  • Farooq, M., Hussain, M., Ul-Allah, S. and Siddique, K. H. M., Physiological and agronomic approaches for improving water-use efficiency in crop plants. Agric. Water Manage., 2019, 219, 95–108; doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2019.04.010.

  • Yao, Z. et al., Urea deep placement reduces yield-scaled green-house gas (CH4 and N2O) and NO emissions from a ground cover rice production system. Sci. Rep., 2017, 7(1), 11415; doi:10.1038/s41598-017-11772-2.

  • Wassmann, R., Hosen, Y., Sumfleth, K. and Setyorini, D., Methane emission from rice fields with different irrigation practices in Central Luzon (Philippines). Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst., 2009, 83(3), 235–255.

  • Neue, H. U., Wassmann, R., Lantin, R. S., Alberto, M. C. and Aduna, J. B., Reducing methane emission from rice production in Asia. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 2016, 216, 46–58.

  • Gao, N., Wei, Y., Zhang, W., Yang, B., Shen, Y., Yue, S. and Li, S., Carbon footprint, yield and economic performance assessment of different mulching strategies in a semi-arid spring maize system. Sci. Total Environ., 2022, 826, 154021; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154021.

  • Pandey, D. and Agrawal, M., Carbon footprint estimation in the agriculture sector. In Assessment of Carbon Footprint in Different Industrial Sectors. Volume 1, Ecoproduction (ed. Muthu, S.), Springer, Singapore, 2014, pp. 25–47; doi:10.1007/978-981-4560-41-2_2.

  • Skinner, C., Gattinger, A., Krauss, M., Krause, H. M., Mayer, J., van der Heijden, M. G. and Mader, P., The impact of long-term organic farming on soil-derived greenhouse gas emissions. Sci. Rep., 2019, 9(1), 1702; doi:10.1038/s41598-018-38207-w.

  • Bonilla, D. P., Serra, I. N., Raffaillac, D., Martínez, C. C. and Justes, E., Carbon footprint of cropping systems with grain legumes and cover crops: a case-study in SW France. Agric. Syst., 2018, 167, 92–102; doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2018.09.004.

  • Powlson, D. S., Stirling, C. M., Thierfelder, C., White, R. P. and Jat, M. L., Does conservation agriculture deliver climate change mitigation through soil carbon sequestration in tropical agro-ecosystems? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 2016, 220, 164–174; doi:10.1016/j.agee.2016.01.005.

  • Bhatia, A., Pathak, H., Jain, N., Singh, P. K. and Tomer, R., Green-house gas mitigation in rice–wheat system with leaf color chart-based urea application. Environ. Monit. Assess., 2012, 184(5), 3095–3107; doi:10.1007/s10661-011-2174-8.


Abstract Views: 51

PDF Views: 23




  • Maintaining Agricultural Sustainability through Carbon Footprint Management

Abstract Views: 51  |  PDF Views: 23

Authors

Sumit Sow
Department of Agronomy, Dr Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa 848 125, India
Shivani Ranjan
Department of Agronomy, Dr Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa 848 125, India
Biswaranjan Behera
ICAR-Indian Institute of Water Management, Bhubaneswar 751 023, India
Mainak Ghosh
Department of Agronomy, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour 813 210, India
Sanjay Kumar
Department of Agronomy, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour 813 210, India
Swaraj Kumar Dutta
Department of Agronomy, Dr Kalam Agricultural College, Kishanganj 855 117, India

Abstract


Global awareness of climate change issues, particularly changes in air temperature, has increased dramatically over the last half a century. Concerns regarding ecosystem sustainability and human existence on Earth arise due to population expansion, rising surface temperatures and increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Agriculture accounts for approximately 18% of the total GHG emissions, largely in the form of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. As a result, limiting GHG emissions is critical to alleviating the consequences of climate change, which is attainable if the concept of carbon footprint is understood. Cereal production produces more GHG emissions than other farming methods, including vegetables and fruits. ‘Carbon footprint’ is a popular term in agriculture and environmental research due to its involvement in environmental impact assessments and global climate change. GHG emissions are influenced by changes in land use, soil type and agricultural management approaches. Therefore, it is important to consider how agricultural management practices, particularly those involving the soil and related systems, affect the relationships between photosynthesis and GHG emissions. This study deals with the concept of carbon footprint in agriculture and various mitigation measures for its management.

Keywords


Agricultural Management, Carbon Footprint, Climate Change, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Soil Health.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv125%2Fi9%2F939-944