Impact of conservation agriculture practices on energy use efficiency and global warming potential in rainfed pigeonpea–castor systems

Pratibha, G.; Srinivas, I.; Rao, K. V.; Raju, B. M. K.; Thyagaraj, C.R.; Korwar, G. R.; Venkateswarlu, B.; Shanker, Arun K.; Choudhary, Deepak; Rao, K. S.; Srinivasarao, Ch.

doi:10.1016/j.eja.2015.02.001

Cited by 97 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the use of irrigation methods such as the drip irrigation and the adoption of no tillage techniques with natural mulch to reduce the soil evaporation losses [60], should be considered by the farmers as good practices going towards a sustainable agriculture. N 2 O emission from soils is one of the key GHG source in agriculture [35], and our study reveals that the GWP in the presence of manured cover crops was 28% higher than for GM− treatment. This GWP increase was generated by the direct and indirect N 2 O released in the biomass residues.…”

Section: Environmental Sustainability Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…Pampuro et al [38] also showed that if during the composting process the materials are adequately turned and aerated the CH 4 emissions are reduced. Moreover, in calculations the CH 4 emission was not included since during the processes (in our conditions) this emission is much less than N 2 O, as reported by Pratibha et al [35]. Also, since we re-composted the materials and considering their nature, the amounts of the ammonia should be considered negligible [37].…”

Section: Greenhouse Gases Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…To assess the environmental impact and the sustainability of the different fertilization strategies implemented in the field trial, the global warming potential (GWP) analysis was applied [35]. The GWP is the total array of GHG emissions (CO 2 , N 2 O and CH 4 ), which is produced directly and indirectly during the cultivation cycles.…”

Section: Greenhouse Gases Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The direct and indirect N 2 O emissions from the fertilizer application and the plant biomass decomposition were estimated by IPCC methodology [39], by using the coefficients reported in Table 3. The direct soil N 2 O emissions (N 2 ODirect), in terms of CO 2 equivalents, from the application of N fertilizer (NF) and the N derived from the green manure and crop residues biomass degradation (NB) were estimated following the equation by Pratibha et al [35]:…”

Section: Greenhouse Gases Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Recycling Agricultural Wastes and By-products in Organic Farming: Biofertilizer Production, Yield Performance and Carbon Footprint Analysis

Diacono¹,

Persiani²,

Testani

et al. 2019

Sustainability

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Circular Economy concept implies the re-design of existing production systems in agriculture, by promoting agricultural waste recycling. In an organic zucchini—lettuce rotation, two different agroecological tools were considered: biofertilizer and presence or absence of green manure (GM+ and GM−). In particular, we compared: (i) anaerobic digestate from cattle manure, co-composted with vegetable wastes, with the presence of GM (AD GM+); (ii) olive pomace compost, re-composted, with the presence of GM (OWC GM+); (iii) municipal waste compost with GM (MWC GM+); (iv) municipal waste compost without GM (MWC GM−). These materials were tested with a commercial organic fertilizer without GM (COF GM−) as a positive control. The objectives were: (i) assessing the environmental sustainability of biofertilizers through carbon footprint analysis by greenhouse gas—GHG—emissions; (ii) evaluating the agronomic performance on the vegetable rotation, by energy output assessment. The total carbon emissions of biofertilizers production was 63.9 and 67.0 kg of CO2 eq Mg−1 for AD and OWC, respectively. The co-composting and re-composting processes emitted 31.4 and 8.4 kg CO2 per Mg of compost, respectively. In AD the ventilation phase of composting accounted for 37.2% of total emissions. The total CO2 emission values for the two-crop cycles were the highest in COF GM− and the lowest in OWC GM+, due to different fertilizer sources. On the average of the treatments, the input that induced the highest CO2 emission was irrigation (37.9%). The energy output assessment for zucchini and lettuce highlighted similar performance for all the treatments. Our findings demonstrated the validity of the tested processes to recycle agro-industrial wastes, and the potential of agroecological practices (GM) to mitigate GHG emissions.

show abstract

Section: Environmental Sustainability Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 68%

Section: Greenhouse Gases Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Greenhouse Gases Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Greenhouse Gases Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Recycling Agricultural Wastes and By-products in Organic Farming: Biofertilizer Production, Yield Performance and Carbon Footprint Analysis

Diacono¹,

Persiani²,

Testani

et al. 2019

Sustainability

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the next few years, it will be necessary to produce enough food for a growing population, with decreasing natural resources per inhabitant, and causing minimum environmental degradation. 1 Greenhouse cultivation is the most intensive manner of production. 2 Worldwide, the most important crop is the tomato, with Almeria (Spain) being the leading producer area of fresh tomato in Europe.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost–benefit analysis of tomato in soilless culture systems with saline water under greenhouse conditions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND The current need to produce food for a growing population, from diminishing natural resources, such as water and energy, and with minimum environmental degradation, demands the optimization of production. We compare the economic feasibility of tomato production in an open system with a perlite substrate, a closed system with the nutrient film technique (NFT), and a hydroponic crop (deep flow technique, DFT) using three levels of salinity that are found within the normal range for irrigation water quality in southeastern Spain. RESULTS Production with DFT resulted in an increase in the cost of phytosanitary treatments and the cost of maintenance. Production with perlite resulted in an increase in the cost of irrigation water and fertilization, and the use of NFT resulted in an increase in energy costs. The point of price equilibrium was exceeded in the three soilless systems when using low salinity water, and in perlite, with intermediate salinity water. CONCLUSION Profitability was reduced in the following order: perlite > NFT > DFT. There were positive results when using irrigation water with low salinity, and in the case of perlite, with intermediate salinity. In every case, salinity reduced the profitability of the operation, and this was greater when NFT was employed. The analysis of these soilless systems should be continued to determine the possibility of reducing cultivation costs. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry

show abstract

Dry direct‐seeded rice has higher energy and carbon production efficiencies without reducing economic benefits

Jin

2023

J Sci Food Agric

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Water and energy shortages and food security challenges associated with global warming are essential issues affecting human survival and development. Rice is one of the world's top three staple food crops. In the present study, the energy footprint (EF), carbon footprint (CF), energy production efficiency (EPE), carbon production efficiency (CPE), and economic benefit (EB) of dry direct‐seeded rice (DSR), wet direct‐seeded rice (WSR), and transplanted rice (TPR), respectively, were integrated and assessed. Results The yield of WSR and TPR was 9.64% and 13.76% higher than that of DSR, respectively. However, DSR has less irrigation and less intensive field tillage; therefore, its energy input, and CF, were 37.47% and 44.29%, and 29.35% and 34.77%, lower than those of WSR and TPR, respectively; the EPE and CPE were obviously improved; and the EB was not lower than that of WSR and TPR. Current rice production relies heavily on non‐renewable energy inputs such as nitrogen fertilizer, diesel, and machinery. Therefore, the key to improving EPE, CPE, and EB in rice production at the same time as reducing CF was to improve water use efficiency and decrease the intensity of paddy tillage. Conclusion The DSR has higher social, economic, and ecological benefits and can be the preferred rice planting method for rice production areas. © 2023 Society of Chemical Industry.

show abstract

Impact of conservation agriculture practices on energy use efficiency and global warming potential in rainfed pigeonpea–castor systems

Cited by 97 publications

References 57 publications

Recycling Agricultural Wastes and By-products in Organic Farming: Biofertilizer Production, Yield Performance and Carbon Footprint Analysis

Recycling Agricultural Wastes and By-products in Organic Farming: Biofertilizer Production, Yield Performance and Carbon Footprint Analysis

Cost–benefit analysis of tomato in soilless culture systems with saline water under greenhouse conditions

Dry direct‐seeded rice has higher energy and carbon production efficiencies without reducing economic benefits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About