What is it about?
The solution to air pollution problems, especially PM2.5 caused by burning agricultural residues after harvest in open fields, focuses on prohibiting this practice. This incurs costs for farmers in hiring machinery for clearing and collecting residues. This latest article from the Environmental Modeling Consultant Center (EMC2), Faculty of Engineering, Kasetsart University, Thailand proposes incentivizing alternatives to burning by utilizing carbon trading mechanisms to generate income. Burning in open fields produces several types of air pollutants with higher Global Warming Potential than carbon dioxide. This includes Black Carbon, a PM2.5 particulate, which is typically not included as a greenhouse gas in IPCC assessments. Therefore, avoiding burning by using machinery for plowing, residue collection/shredding, and covering results in a net reduction of greenhouse gas emissions compared to open burning. This allows rice, corn, and sugarcane cultivation to earn Avoidance Carbon Credits. If residues are composted onsite rather than removed and processed into biochar (a higher investment process), the net greenhouse gas emissions are negative. Comparing the carbon released from composting process with stable carbon stored in soil (from using compost in soil) also allows for Removal Carbon Credits. This approach allows agricultural operations to achieve positive net income after deducting all expenses from selling both types of carbon credits. In another scenario, processing residues into biochar (a potentially high-cost investment) results in negative net greenhouse gas emissions when compared to emissions from the biochar production process to stable carbon in biochar. Investors in biochar production (whether farmers or not) can earn positive income from selling Removal Carbon Credits along with revenue from selling biochar and bio-oil produced. In this case, biochar producers typically face a payback period. In the future, it's possible that projects of this type will be considered and registered to help mitigate PM2.5 problems and comply with forthcoming climate change legislation.
Featured Image
Photo by Mads Schmidt Rasmussen on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Open burning of crop residues is widespread in many countries, contributing significantly to air pollution, particularly PM2.5. While banning this practice is often suggested, it imposes costs on farmers and adds financial risk, as crop yields do not always guarantee good income. This approach could be more ineffective. With many countries aiming for carbon neutrality, establishing carbon credit projects could provide incentives for alternatives to burning, potentially reducing air pollution over time.
Perspectives
The practice of open burning of crop residues affects both economic viability and global environmental health. Economically, it adds costs for farmers who must find alternatives. Globally, it contributes significantly to air pollution, emitting pollutants like PM2.5, exacerbating climate change and posing health risks. By promoting sustainable alternatives through carbon credit incentives, countries can reduce emissions, improve air quality, and advance towards carbon neutrality goals, fostering both environmental and economic benefits on a global scale.
Assoc. Prof. Sanya - Sirivithayapakorn
Kasetsart University
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Alternative crop residue management practices to mitigate the environmental and economic impacts of open burning of agricultural residues, Scientific Reports, June 2024, Springer Science + Business Media,
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-65389-3.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
