Cost-effectiveness analysis of water-saving irrigation technologies based on climate change response: A case study of China

Abstract

This study provides a cost-effectiveness analysis of four water-saving irrigation techniques that are widely implemented in China to address the impacts of climate change: sprinkler irrigation, micro-irrigation, low-pressure pipe irrigation and channel lining. The aim is to thoroughly understand the economic feasibility of water-saving irrigation as an approach to coping with climate change. Based on the cost-effectiveness analysis, this study finds that water-saving irrigation is cost-effective in coping with climate change, and has benefits for climate change mitigation and adaptation, and for sustainable economic development. For the cost-effectiveness ratio of mitigation and adaptation, only that of channel lining is negative (for mitigation is -43.02 to -73.41US$/t, for grain yield increase -34.35 to -20.13US$/t, and for water saving -0.020 to -0.012US$/m3). Sprinkler irrigation has the highest incremental cost for mitigation (476.03-691.64US$/t), because when sprinkler irrigation is used, there may be additional energy needs to meet water pressure requirements, which may increase greenhouse gas emissions compared to traditional irrigation. For mitigation, in districts where the pumping head for pressure is lower than the critical energy saving head, sprinkler irrigation should be avoided. Micro-irrigation has the highest incremental cost for adaptation followed by sprinkler irrigation and low-pressure pipe irrigation, but when considering the revenues from improved adaptation, all of the measures assessed are economically feasible. The results suggest that for mitigation and adaptation objectives, micro-irrigation performs best. From an economic perspective, channel lining is recommended. Therefore, a balanced development of channel lining and micro-irrigation according to different geographical conditions is recommended. © 2013 The Authors

Medidas de adaptación al cambio climático en una comunidad indígena del norte de Colombia

“…Los métodos de riego operaron bajo el uso del sistema fotovoltaico para la extracción del agua del pozo y el riego por goteo solar representó una alternativa para el ahorro de agua, siendo eficiente para enfrentar, adaptarse y mitigar los efectos del cambio climático. Para los objetivos de mitigación y adaptación, los sistemas de goteo artesanales generan mejores resultados (Zou et al 2013).…”

Irrigar – Aplicativo Computacional Para O Dimensionamento Econômico De Sistemas De Irrigação Por Aspersão Convencional

“…Os custos de implantação correspondem aos de componentes e serviços necessários para a instalação do sistema, como tubulações, motobomba, instalações elétricas, mão de obra de instalação e outros. Em contrapartida, os custos de operação correspondem aos necessários para o funcionamento do sistema, como os de manutenções e principalmente com energia elétrica (KIMMICH, 2013;ZOU et al, 2013).…”

Co-benefits and trade-offs in the water–energy nexus of irrigation modernization in China

“…Hoff 2012), however, they often remain absent in planning and operation. One example is the potential for co-benefits or trade-offs to occur when attempting to reduce water application in irrigated agriculture, because energy is generally required for increased pumping, pressurizing and conveyance: situations with groundwater use for irrigation might provide co-benefits via energy savings from reduced pumping and water application (Zou et al 2013); while situations with surface water might induce trade-offs between reductions in water application and increases in emissions when energy-intensive irrigation technology is deployed. Outcomes can be quantified and explored using a water-energy nexus perspective (WEF 2011, Sanders and Webber 2012, Hightower et al 2013, Scott 2013, DoE 2014, Finley and Seiber 2014, Frumhoff et al 2015, Healy et al 2015, Iseman and Tidwell 2015.…”