1 / 27

Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Options from Rice Field

Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Options from Rice Field. Sirintornthep Towprayoon The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi Bangmod, Bangkok, Thailand 10140.

aman
Download Presentation

Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Options from Rice Field

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Options from Rice Field Sirintornthep Towprayoon The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi Bangmod, Bangkok, Thailand 10140 Presented at In-session workshop on Climate Change Mitigation 19 Bonn 2004, Maritim Hotel,Bonn

  2. Background • Rice fields contribute approximately 9-13 percent of the global greenhouse gases • Methane and nitrous oxide are the dominant GHG emission

  3. Mechanism • To implement mitigation options need well understanding of the emission mechanisms • Interaction between rice plant, microbe, the environmental condition in the soil, and the cultural condition of the farmer • Methane produced by methanogen under anaerobic condition in the rice field • Nitrous oxide produced by nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria under the anoxic condition • Rice plant, during reproductive growth excrete some essential nutrient and activated microbial growth

  4. Denier van der Gon, 1996].

  5. fertilizer Growth and development Height, mass,density Rice varieties Emission Production soil properties Root exudates Indigenous Microorganisms

  6. water regimes Height, mass,density Rice varieties Emission Production Anaerobic and anoxic condition Indigenous Microorganisms

  7. Mitigation options • Factor affecting GHG emission • Land preparation • Seed preparation • Rice varieties • Fertilizer application • Water management • Harvesting and fallow period

  8. Land preparation Dry land level Wet land level

  9. Plowing

  10. Seed preparation Direct seeding Pre-germinated seed and seedlings Transplanting or Casting

  11. Harvesting

  12. The choice of mitigation options • Ultimate goal : High yield and GHGs reduction • Economic aspect • Low cost : investment, labor, machinery • Market : positive expandable market, good price • Governmental subsidy • Social aspect • Acceptable by farmers • Easy to implement • Undisturbed farmer way of life

  13. Impact of mitigation options on rice cultivation

  14. Options chosen • Water management • Reduce GHG • Economic : not involved with investment • Easy to implement and being accepted by farmer • Shifting fertilizer application • Reduce GHG • Economic : less invesment

  15. Options of water management • In common practice, water was drained out of the field during vegetative period. • Drainage reduce methane but promote nitrous oxide • Shifting drainage time from vegetative period to reproductive period help reduce methane production and emission • Shorten drainage day also help reduce nitrous oxide emission

  16. Methane emission and soil redox potential from 4 different drainage rice fields

  17. Nitrous oxide and methane emission from 4 different drainage rice fields

  18. Comparison to local method

  19. Yield and GHG Emission • Area of irrigated rice field (local practice) is 3 times greater than area of rain fed rice field ( continuous flooding) • Three scenarios have been set up • Continuous flooding and local practice (base case) • Continuous flooding and midseason drainage • Continuous flooding and multiple drainage • All midseason drainage

  20. Estimated economic comparison

  21. Option of fertilizer application • Two time of fertilizer application : basal fertilizer and top dressing fertilizer • In general, urea is use as the common fertilizer • Ammonium sulphate (inhibit methanogen) and ammonium phosphate ( promote rice plant growth ) was applied in substitute to urea

  22. Economic comparison

  23. Reduction and trading

  24. Conclusion(1) • GHG emission from rice field is ‘survival emission’ • The implementation need to be carefully considered • The options should not impact on the farmer’s way of life as well as theirs investment but should promote theirs income

  25. Conclusion(2) • Aprox. 25 percent of GHG reduction could achieve in comparison to base case • Options to reduce GHGs impact on rice yield • Optimizing between GHG reduction and yield need to be concerned

  26. Acknowledgement • Thailand research fund • Ms. Saipin Poonkaew and Ms. Kruamas Smaghan

  27. Thank you for your attention

More Related