Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T22:01:12.972Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An assessment of greenhouse gas emissions: implications for the Australian cotton industry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2010

T. N. MARASENI ,
G. COCKFIELD  and
J. MAROULIS
T. N. MARASENI*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Business and Australian Centre for Sustainable Catchments, University of Southern Queensland (USQ), Toowoomba, Queensland4350, Australia
G. COCKFIELD
Affiliation:
Faculty of Business and Australian Centre for Sustainable Catchments, University of Southern Queensland (USQ), Toowoomba, Queensland4350, Australia
J. MAROULIS
Affiliation:
Faculty of Education and Australian Centre for Sustainable Catchments, University of Southern Queensland (USQ), Toowoomba, Queensland4350, Australia
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: maraseni@usq.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The majority of cotton produced in Australia is exported. The Australian cotton industry must maintain product quality in order to remain globally competitive. In addition, carbon-conscious consumers need reassurance that the system used to grow the product is environmentally sustainable. The aim of the present study was to estimate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions due to various farm inputs in three common types of cotton farming systems on the Darling Downs region, southern Queensland. Analysis revealed that GHG emissions for dryland solid-plant and dryland double-skip cotton farming systems are similar, but emissions are much higher for irrigated solid-plant cotton farming (1367, 1274 and 4841 kg CO2e/ha, respectively). However, if comparisons of GHG emissions are based on yield (per tonne), the positions of dryland double-skip farming and dryland solid-plant farming are reversed, but the position of irrigated cotton farming still remains as the highest GHG emitter. If the cotton industry comes under the Australian Government Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) without any subsidies and preconditions, and with a carbon price of A$25/t CO2e, the costs borne by each system would be A$66.8/t for the irrigated cotton industry, A$39.7/t for the dryland solid-plant cotton industry and A$43.6/t for the dryland double-skip cotton industry. This suggests that irrigated cotton would be more profitable in financial terms but with heavy environmental sustainability costs.

Type
Climate Change and Agriculture
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 148 , Issue 5 , October 2010 , pp. 501 - 510
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

ABARE (Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resources Economics) (2008). Agricultural Commodity Statistics 2008. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Available online at http://abareconomics.com/publications_html/acs/acs_08/acs_08.pdf (accessed 20 April 2009, verified 27 October 2009).Google Scholar
AGO (Australian Greenhouse Office) (2001). National Greenhouse Gas Inventory – 1999. Canberra: Australian Greenhouse Office.Google Scholar
AGO (Australian Greenhouse Office) (2006). Reducing GHG Emissions from Australian Agriculture: The Role of Benchmarking in Driving Best Management Practice. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
Beer, T., Grant, T., Williams, D. & Watson, H. (2002). Fuel-cycle greenhouse gas emissions from alternative fuels in Australian heavy vehicles. Atmospheric Environment 36, 753–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, K. Y., Cowie, A., Kelly, G., Singh, B. & Slavich, P. (2009). Scoping Paper: Soil Organic Carbon Sequestration Potential for Agriculture in NSW. NSW DPI Science and Research Technical Paper. New South Wales, Australia: NSW Department of Primary Industries.Google Scholar
Chauhan, N. S., Mohapatra, P. K. J. & Pandey, K. P. (2005). Improving energy productivity in paddy production through benchmarking – an application of data envelopment analysis. Energy Conversion and Management 47, 1063–1085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, G. & Baillie, C. (2007). Development of Energycalc – a Tool to Assess Cotton On-farm Energy Uses. A Report for the Cotton Research and Development Corporation. NCEA Publication 1002565/1. Toowoomba, Australia: University of Southern Queensland.Google Scholar
Cowie, A. L., Kirschbaum, M. U. F. & Ward, M. (2007). Options for including all lands in a future greenhouse gas accounting framework. Environmental Science and Policy 10, 306–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CRDC (Cotton Development and Research Cooperation) (2009). Australia's Cotton and its Markets. Available online at http://www.crdc.com.au/index.cfm?pageID=23 (accessed 28 April 2009, verified 1 December 2009).Google Scholar
Dalal, R., Wang, W. J., Robertson, G. P., Parton, W. J., Myer, C. M. & Raison, R. J. (2003). Emission Sources of Nitrous Oxide from Australian Agricultural and Forest Lands and Mitigation Options. National Carbon Accounting Technical Report No. 40. Canberra: Australian Greenhouse Office.Google Scholar
DCC (Department of Climate Change) (2008). Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme White Paper: Australia's Low Pollution Future. Canberra: Department of Climate Change.Google Scholar
DCC (Department of Climate Change) (2009 a). Australia's National Greenhouse Gas Accounts: National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Accounting for the Kyoto Target. May 2009. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Available online at http://www.climatechange.gov.au/climate-change/~/media/publications/greenhouse-report/national-greenhouse-gas-inventory-pdf.ashx (verified 1 December 2009).Google Scholar
DCC (Department of Climate Change) (2009 b). National Greenhouse Gas Accounts (NGA) Factors. June 2009. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Available online at http://www.climatechange.gov.au/climate-change/~/media/publications/greenhouse-gas/national-greenhouse-factors-june-2009-pdf.ashx (verified 1 December 2009).Google Scholar
European Commission (2008). EU Action against Climate Change. EU Emissions Trading: An Open System Promoting Global Innovation. Available online at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/pdf/bali/eu_action.pdf (accessed 11 August 2008, verified 28 October 2009).Google Scholar
Gower, S. T. (2003). Patterns and mechanisms of the forest carbon cycle. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 28, 169–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, P. W. & Williams, D. J. (2005). Optimal technological choices in meeting Australian energy policy goals. Energy Economics 25, 691–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunasekera, D., Ford, M. & Tulloh, C. (2007 a). Climate change: issues and challenges for Australian agriculture and forestry. Australian Commodities 14, 493–576.Google Scholar
Gunasekera, D., Kim, Y., Tulloh, C. & Ford, M. (2007 b). Climate change: impacts on Australian agriculture. Australian Commodities 14, 657–676.Google Scholar
Harden, P. (2004). Agronomic Guidelines for Successful Peanut Production. Grain Research and Development Corporation, Australian Government. Available online at http://www.grdc.com.au/director/research/rotationandplanning.cfm?item_id=AC8FD45FB7EDADE152F8F957F6BD970B&pageNumber=16&filter1=&filter2=&filter3=&filter4= (verified 1 December 2009).Google Scholar
Hatfield-Dodds, S., Carwardine, J., Dunlop, M., Graham, P. & Klein, C. (2007). Rural Australia Providing Climate Solutions, Preliminary Report to the Australian Agricultural Alliance on Climate Change. Canberra: CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.Google Scholar
Heenan, D. P., Chan, K. Y. & Knight, P. G. (2004). Long-term impact of rotation, tillage and stubble management on the loss of soil organic carbon and nitrogen from a Chromic Luvisol. Soil and Tillage Research 76, 59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helsel, Z. R. (1992). Energy and alternatives for fertiliser and pesticide use. In Energy in World Agriculture 6 (Ed. Fluck, R. C.), pp. 177–201. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Hülsbergen, K. J., Feil, B., Biermann, S., Rathke, G.-W., Kalk, W. D. & Diepenbrock, W. (2001). A method of energy balancing in crop production and its application in a long-term fertilizer trial. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 86, 303–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IETA (International Emissions Trading Association) (2008). Making the Case for a Federal Greenhouse Gas Offsets Program. Available online at http://www.ieta.org/ieta/www/pages/getfile.php?docID=2968 (accessed 15 June 2008, verified 28 October 2009).Google Scholar
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2007). Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing (Table 2.14). Fourth Assessment Report by Working Group 1. Available online at http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch02.pdf (verified 28 October 2009).Google Scholar
Jaggard, K. W., Qi, A. & Semenov, M. A. (2007). The impact of climate change on sugarbeet yield in the UK: 1976–2004. The Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 145, 367–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lal, R. (2004). Carbon emission from farm operation. Environment International 30, 981–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, J. A., Gaunt, J. & Rondon, M. (2006). Bio-char sequestration in terrestrial ecosystems – a review. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 11, 395–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LWA (Land and Water Australia) (2007). Agriculture, Forestry and Emissions Trading: How do we Participate? Issues Paper May 2007. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
Macedo, I. C., Leal, M. R. C. V. & da Silva, J. E. A. R. (2004). Assessment of GHGs Gas Emissions in the Production and Use of Fuel Ethanol in Brazil. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Government of State of Sao Paulo.Google Scholar
MAF (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry) (2009). A Guide to Forestry in the Emission Trading Scheme. Wellington, New Zealand: MAF. Available online at http://www.maf.govt.nz/sustainable-forestry/ets/guide/page.htm#alert (verified 1 December 2009).Google Scholar
Maraseni, T. N., Cockfield, G. & Apan, A. (2007). A comparison of greenhouse gas emissions from inputs into farm enterprises in Southeast Queensland, Australia. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A 42, 11–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maraseni, T. N., Mushtaq, S. & Maroulis, J. (2009). Greenhouse gas emissions from rice farming inputs: a cross country assessment. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 147, 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, C. & Skjemstad, J. (2004). Greenhouse chemistry not only in the atmosphere. Chemistry in Australia 11, 12–16.Google Scholar
Mudahar, M. S. & Hignett, T. P. (1987). Energy requirements, technology and resources in the fertilizer sector. In Energy in Plant Nutrition and Pest Control (Ed. Helsel, Z. R.), pp. 25–62. Energy in World Agriculture. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
New Zealand Ministry for the Environment (2007). The framework for a New Zealand emissions trading scheme. Available online at http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate/framework-emissions-trading-summary-sep07/index.html (verified 7 December 2009).Google Scholar
NFF (National Farmers’ Federation) (2007). Submission to the Prime Ministerial Task Group on Emissions Trading from the National Farmers’ Federation. Available online at http://www.nff.org.au/get/2437126835.pdf (verified 1 December 2009).Google Scholar
O'Halloran, N. J., Fisher, P. D. & Rab, M. A. (2008). Vegetable Industry Carbon Footprint Scoping Study Preliminary Estimation of the Carbon Footprint of the Australian Vegetable Industry. Discussion Paper 4. Sydney: Horticulture Australia Ltd.Google Scholar
PCA (Peanut Company of Australia) (2008). Peanut Production Guide. Kingaroy, Australia: Peanut Company of Australia. Available online at http://www.pca.com.au/pdfs/2008productionguide.pdf (verified 1 December 2009).Google Scholar
Peltonen-Sainio, P., Jauhiainen, L. & Hannukkala, A. (2007). Declining rapeseed yields in Finland: how, why and what next? The Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 145, 587–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimentel, D., Doughty, R., Carothers, C., Lamberson, S., Bora, N. & Lee, K. (2002). Energy inputs in crop production: comparison of developed and developing countries. In Food Security and Environmental Quality in the Developing World (Eds Lal, L., Hansen, D., Uphoff, N. & Slack, S.), pp. 129–151. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
PMTG (Prime Ministerial Task Group on Emissions Trading) (2007). Report of the Task Group on Emissions Trading. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
Salmond, G. (2002). Summer Crop Notes 2002, Cotton. Dalby, Queensland, Australia: Department of Primary Industry.Google Scholar
Smith, P., Martino, D., Cai, Z., Gwary, D., Janzen, H., Kumar, P., McCarl, B., Ogle, S., O'Mara, F., Rice, C., Scholes, R., Sirotenko, O., Howden, M., Mcallister, T., Pan, G., Romanenkov, V., Schneider, U., Towprayoon, S., Wattenbach, M. & Smith, J. (2008). Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 27, 89–813.Google Scholar
Stout, B. A. (1990). Handbook of Energy for World Agriculture. London: Elsevier Applied Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verge, X. P. C., Kimpe, C. D. & Desjardins, R. L. (2007). Agricultural production, greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation potential. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 142, 255–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vlek, P. L. G., Rodriguez-Khul, G. & Sommer, R. (2003). Energy use and CO2 production in tropical agriculture and means and strategies for reduction and mitigation. Environment Development and Sustainability 6, 213–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, J. & Perry, G. M. (2004). Estimating farm equipment depreciation: which functional form is best? American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86, 483–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanai, Y., Toyota, K. & Okazaki, M. (2007). Effects of charcoal addition on N2O emissions from soil resulting from rewetting air-dried soil in short-term laboratory experiments. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 53, 181–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, H. F., Chen, L. D. & Han, X. Z. (2009). The effects of global warming on soybean yields in a long-term fertilization experiment in Northeast China. The Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 147, 569–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar