4.8 Article

Trends in Water Use, Energy Consumption, and Carbon Emissions from Irrigation: Role of Shifting Technologies and Energy Sources

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 54, 期 23, 页码 15329-15337

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.0c02897

关键词

-

资金

  1. INFEWS grant from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Developing Pathways Toward Sustainable Irrigation across the United States Using Process-based Systems Models (SIRUS) [2018-67003-27406]
  2. National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture [2016-6800725066]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Novel low-pressure irrigation technologies have been widely adopted by farmers, allowing both reduced water and energy use. However, little is known about how the transition from legacy technologies affected water and energy use at the aquifer scale. Here, we examine the widespread adoption of low-energy precision application (LEPA) and related technologies across the Kansas High Plains Aquifer. We combine direct energy consumption and carbon emission estimates with life cycle assessment to calculate the energy and greenhouse gas (GHG) footprints of irrigation. We integrate detailed water use, irrigation type, and pump energy source data with aquifer water level and groundwater chemistry information to produce annual estimates of energy use and carbon emissions from 1994 to 2016. The rapid adoption of LEPA technologies did not slow pumping, but it reduced energy use by 19.2% and GHG emissions by 15.2%. Nevertheless, water level declines have offset energy efficiency gains because of LEPA adoption. Deeper water tables quadrupled the proportion of GHG emissions resulting from direct carbon emissions, offsetting the decarbonization of the regional electrical grid. We show that low-pressure irrigation technology adoption, absent policies that incentivize or mandate reduced water use, ultimately increases the energy and carbon footprints of irrigated agriculture.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据