Reducing energy and carbon footprint through diversified rainfed cropping systems

• Published in: Energy nexus Vol. 14; p. 100306
• Main Authors: Kantwa, Sita Ram, Choudhary, Mukesh, Agrawal, Rajiv Kumar, Dixit, Anoop Kumar, Kumar, Sunil, Chary, G. Ravindra
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 01.07.2024; Elsevier
• Subjects: Carbon footprint; Crop diversification; Cropping system; Energy budgeting; Energy budgeting; Crop diversification; Carbon footprint; Cropping system
• ISSN: 2772-4271; 2772-4271
• DOI: 10.1016/j.nexus.2024.100306

•Non-renewable sources of energy shares ∼80 % of total energy used in the cropping systems.•Fertilizers is a largest contributor to GHG emissions in different cropping systems.•Forage and legume-based cropping system reduced C footprint and increase C efficiency. Agriculture is the second largest contributor (20 %) to total anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the world. There is a need to identify energy and carbon efficient cropping systems that reduce GHG emission and improve environmental quality. Using life cycle assessment (LCA), we evaluated the four cropping systems namely fallow – chickpea (F–C); Sesbania – mustard (Ses–M); blackgram – chickpea (B–C); sorghum + cowpea – mustard (S + C–M) cultivated during the 2018–2022 period. The energy use pattern and the input-output relationship were analysed. Three measures were utilized to quantify carbon footprints: CFa, which denotes emissions per unit area; CFb, indicating emissions per kilogram of yield; and CFe, representing emissions per unit of economic output. The result indicates that non-renewable sources of energy (diesel and fertilizer) contributed more than ∼80 % of the total energy consumed in the different cropping systems. The total energy requirement was the highest for S + C–M (16,972 MJ ha–1), followed by Ses–M (14,365 MJ ha–1), B–C (11,132 MJ ha–1) and F–C (8679 MJ ha–1) cropping systems. The S + C–M cropping system also had the highest energy use efficiency (9.13) followed by F–C (6.03), B–C (5.41) and Ses–M (5.41). The fallow–chickpea cropping system had the lowest values of CFa, CFb, and CFe however, the highest carbon efficiency (10.7) and the carbon sustainability index (9.7) were computed in S + C–M cropping system. Our findings indicate that thoughtfully structured, varied crop systems that integrate legumes and forage crops have the potential to significantly reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions, while sustaining or potentially improving overall productivity within these systems.