From Research to Implementation: IRRI's Activities on GHG Mitigation in Rice Cultivation

Björn Ole SanderInternational Rice Research Institute

Flooded field is left to dry out

When water level drops to a threshold (15cm below soil surface), the field is

irrigated again

Perforated tube for

observing water level in

the soil

AWD saves up to 30% of irrigation water

Mitigation potential of AWD -results from farmers’ fields

0

2

4

6

8

10

CF AWD

t CO

2-eq

/ha*

seas

on

Bulacan 1

5.3

1.8

-66%

0

2

4

6

8

10

CF AWDt C

O2-

eq/h

a*se

ason Bulacan 2

7.8

1.8

-77%

0

2

46

8

10

CF AWD

t CO

2-eq

/ha*

seas

on Tarlac

-70%3.7

1.1

0

2

4

6

8

10

CF AWD

t CO

2-eq

/ha*

seas

on Nueva Ecija-65%

8.6

3.0

Sander et al., in preparation

Global average mitigation potential of AWD: 48% (IPCC, 2006)

Mitigation potential of AWD -results from central Vietnam

02468

101214161820

CF AWD CF AWD CF AWD

GWP kg CO2 eq. ha-1

b) HM: Dai Quang

SA 2011 WS 2012 SA 2012

02468

101214161820

CF AWD CF AWD "CF"AWD

N2OCH4

GWP kg CO2 eq. ha-1

a) DL: Nam Phuoc

SA 2011 WS2012 SA2012

Tirol-Padre et al., 2017, doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-2624-9

Developed EFs for two rice growing environments in central Vietnam: 4.1 kg/ha/d (delta lowland)2.0 kg/ha/d (hilly midland)

Scaling FactorAWD = 0.71

Emission Hotspots in Vietnam

• Using landscape-DNDC ( KIT)to identify emission hotspots

• Target mitigation actions

• Use as tool to improve national inventory ( training)

Supporting scale-out of AWD -Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC)

Online information platform: GHGmitigation.irri.org

Goal :Support of national plans and development programs with evidence-based information and strategies to reduce CH4emission from rice

Stakeholder influence mapping - NetMapParticipatory approach to identify key influencer in complex stakeholder networks Development of engagement strategies, information campaigns Input for Agent-based modeling

Question: Who influences the adoption of AWD?

Collaboration with Inst. for Policy and Strategy of MARD

Climatic AWD suitability maps, MRD• Based on PhenoRice, precipitation, soil texture, salinity risk

(biophysical factors only, methodology: Nelson et al., 2015)

• Target AWD dissemination activities

• Current improvement: Including flood risk data

Jan-Apr. harvest May-Aug. harvest Sept.-Dec. harvest

Next envisaged steps towards large scale adoption

• Identify most suitable 500k ha for AWD

• Identify high priority provinces, develop plans w/ provincial governments

• Engage more strongly w/ private sector, integrate low-emissions rice production in contract farming ( Sustainable Rice Platform)

Other mitigation options in rice production (AWD+)

• Mid-season drainage• Fertilizer deep placement• Coated urea• Short-duration varieties• Low-emissions straw management• Site-specific nutrient management• Biochar• Laser land leveling• Solar bubble dryer• …

Emissions from straw burningEm

issi

on ra

te (m

g CH

4kg

-130

sec-1

) Emission rate (m

g N2 O

kg-130sec -1)

Time (min)

a

aa

a

b

c

• Not much info on GHG from burning• Baseline data for full assessment• Measured in flow-through equipment • CH4 dependent on moisture content

GHG emissions of straw mngmt options

• Field experiments comparing emissions from incorporation of straw vs. burning of straw

• Lower GHG emissions from burning BUT burning leads to toxic air pollution

a) Straw incorporation b) Straw burning

High GHGemissions

Toxic airpollution

Romasanta et al., 2017, AgEE

Straw removal• Straw removal reduces GHG emissions compared to

incorporation

• Straw can be used/ sold as by-product

• Partial straw removal can be intermediate solution: 1) retain soil health 2) reduce GHG3) create profit

Straw removal BurningIncorp.

Thank you very much!

More informationClimateChange.irri.orgGHGmitigation.irri.orgB.Sander@irri.org