1996
DOI: 10.1016/0045-6535(96)00223-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Methane budget from paddy fields in India

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Later on a value of 3.0 Tg yr −1 was estimated on the basis of measurements done up to 1990 at various rice growing regions in the country (Mitra, 1991;Parashar et al, 1991). Parashar et al (1996) further revised the budget to be 4.0 Tg yr −1 with a range between 2.7 to 5.4 Tg yr −1 . Gupta et al (2002) using average emission factors for all paddy water regimes, which included harvested areas having soils with high organic carbon and organic amendments, estimated a budget of 5.0 Tg yr −1 .…”
Section: Scaling Up Ghg Emissionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Later on a value of 3.0 Tg yr −1 was estimated on the basis of measurements done up to 1990 at various rice growing regions in the country (Mitra, 1991;Parashar et al, 1991). Parashar et al (1996) further revised the budget to be 4.0 Tg yr −1 with a range between 2.7 to 5.4 Tg yr −1 . Gupta et al (2002) using average emission factors for all paddy water regimes, which included harvested areas having soils with high organic carbon and organic amendments, estimated a budget of 5.0 Tg yr −1 .…”
Section: Scaling Up Ghg Emissionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…of field measurements in India Matthews et al (1991) 21.7 Based on area under rice, crop calendar and daily CH 4 emission rate Taylor et al (1991) 18.4 Assuming a CH 4 -NPP ratio of 5% Khalil and Shearer (1993) 15.3 Extrapolated from a few direct flux measurements Sinha (1995) 1.2 Based on relationship between biomass production and CH 4 emission in rice Parashar et al (1996) 4.0 Extrapolated from several measurements all over India Cao et al (1996) 14.4 Using the Methane Emission Model (MEM) Sass and Fischer (1997) 4.2 Extrapolated from measured data from selected rice-growing areas in India ALGAS (1998) 3.6 Extrapolated from large No. of measurements all over India Matthews et al (2000c) 2.1 Using the MERES simulation model Gupta et al (2002) 5.0 Using CH 4 emission coefficients based on water regime and soil organic C Yan et al (2003) 5.9 Using the region specific emission factors IINC (2004) 4.1 Using the IPCC methodology and IPCC default CH 4 emission coefficients Bhatia et al (2004) 2.9 Using the IPCC methodology and measured CH 4 emission coefficients This study 1.5 Using the validated DNDC model and newly compiled soil, rice area and weather data base tically reduced CH 4 fluxes.…”
Section: Scaling Up Ghg Emissionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They also argued for a distinction to be made between 'luxury' and 'survival' emissions, Contestations such as these continued, for example in the deeply normative struggle over the economic valuation of an individual human life in the IPCC's Second Assessment Report (Masood, 1995), and in the contestation between US and Indian scientists over how much methane was estimated to be emitted from India's rice fields (Parashar et al, 1996).…”
Section: A Lineage Of Contestationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nitrogen (99.999% pure) was used as a carrier gas whereas hydrogen and zero air were used for ignition of the flame in the FID. Methane fluxes (CH 4 mg/m 2 /h) were calculated from the temporal increase in the gas concentration inside the box using the equation of Parashar et al (1996).…”
Section: Methane Sampling and Measurementmentioning
confidence: 99%