scholarly journals Water Footprint of soybean, cotton, and corn crops in the western region of Bahia State

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 971-978
Author(s):  
Marisa Rodrigues Costa ◽  
Michel Castro Moreira ◽  
Demetrius David da Silva ◽  
Kalesson Martins de Alencar ◽  
Clívia Dias Coelho

ABSTRACT Water catchment to subsidize agricultural activities is estimated at 70% of world consumption. In the western region of Bahia, the main agricultural center of the state, there is intensive use of water for the production of agricultural commodities. In regions with high water demand, quantification of the use of this resource can be performed using anthropic pressure indicators, such as the Water Footprint. Thus, this work determined the Water Footprint of the soybean, cotton, and corn crops produced in the western region of Bahia State. In order to determine the Water Footprint, data of the environmental characteristics and crop production in the region were used, were obtained from different Brazilian public and private institutions. The calculation of Water Footprint of the crops was performed by the sum of the green, blue, and gray components. The average Water Footprint between 2012 and 2017 for soybean corresponded to 1,972.3 m3 t-1, with cotton at 1,825.2 m3 t-1, and corn 512.4 m3 t-1. The analyses of the results and the comparison with the values of the Water Footprint of other regions demonstrate that the edaphoclimatic conditions of the western region of Bahia are propitious to the development of these crops.

2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 763-809 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. M. Mekonnen ◽  
A. Y. Hoekstra

Abstract. This study quantifies the green, blue and grey water footprint of global crop production in a spatially-explicit way for the period 1996–2005. The assessment is global and improves upon earlier research by taking a high-resolution approach, estimating the water footprint of 126 crops at a 5 by 5 arc min grid. We have used a grid-based dynamic water balance model to calculate crop water use over time, with a time step of one day. The model takes into account the daily soil water balance and climatic conditions for each grid cell. In addition, the water pollution associated with the use of nitrogen fertilizer in crop production is estimated for each grid cell. The crop evapotranspiration of additional 20 minor crops is calculated with the CROPWAT model. In addition, we have calculated the water footprint of more than two hundred derived crop products, including various flours, beverages, fibres and biofuels. We have used the water footprint assessment framework as in the guideline of the water footprint network. Considering the water footprints of primary crops, we see that global average water footprint per ton of crop increases from sugar crops (roughly 200 m3 ton−1), vegetables (300 m3 ton−1), roots and tubers (400 m3 ton−1), fruits (1000 m3 ton−1), cereals} (1600 m3 ton−1), oil crops (2400 m3 ton−1) to pulses (4000 m3 ton−1). The water footprint varies, however, across different crops per crop category and per production region as well. Besides, if one considers the water footprint per kcal, the picture changes as well. When considered per ton of product, commodities with relatively large water footprints are: coffee, tea, cocoa, tobacco, spices, nuts, rubber and fibres. The analysis of water footprints of different biofuels shows that bio-ethanol has a lower water footprint (in m3 GJ−1) than biodiesel, which supports earlier analyses. The crop used matters significantly as well: the global average water footprint of bio-ethanol based on sugar beet amounts to 51 m3 GJ−1, while this is 121 m3 GJ−1 for maize. The global water footprint related to crop production in the period 1996–2005 was 7404 billion cubic meters per year (78% green, 12% blue, 10% grey). A large total water footprint was calculated for wheat (1087 Gm3 yr−1), rice (992 Gm3 yr−1) and maize (770 Gm3 yr−1). Wheat and rice have the largest blue water footprints, together accounting for 45% of the global blue water footprint. At country level, the total water footprint was largest for India (1047 Gm3 yr−1), China (967 Gm3 yr−1) and the USA (826 Gm3 yr−1). A relatively large total blue water footprint as a result of crop production is observed in the Indus River Basin (117 Gm3 yr−1) and the Ganges River Basin (108 Gm3 yr−1). The two basins together account for 25% of the blue water footprint related to global crop production. Globally, rain-fed agriculture has a water footprint of 5173 Gm3 yr−1 (91% green, 9% grey); irrigated agriculture has a water footprint of 2230 Gm3 yr−1 (48% green, 40% blue, 12% grey).


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hongrong Huang ◽  
La Zhuo ◽  
Pute Wu

<p>Agricultural infrastructure plays important roles in boosting food production and trade system in developing countries, while as being a ‘grey solutions’, generates increasingly risks on the environmental sustainability. There is little information on impacts of agricultural infrastructure developments on water consumption and flows, (i.e. water footprint and virtual water flows) related to crop production, consumption and trade especially in developing countries with high water risk. Here we, taking mainland China over 2000-2017 as the study case, identified and evaluated the strengths and spatial heterogeneities in main socio-economic driving factors of provincial water footprints and inter-provincial virtual water flows related to three staple crops (rice, wheat and maize). For the first time, we consider irrigation (II), electricity (EI) and road infrastructures (RI) in the driving factor analysis through the extended STIRPAT (stochastic impacts by regression on population, affluence and technology) model. Results show that the II, EI and RI in China were expanded by 33.8 times, 4.5 times and 2.4 times, respectively by year 2017 compared to 2000. Although the II was the most critical driver to effectively reduce the per unit water footprint, especially the blue water footprint in crop production (i.e., increasing water efficiency), the developments of II led to the bigger total water consumption. Such phenomenon was observed in Jing-Jin region, North Coast and Northwest China with water resource shortage. The EI and RI had increasing effects on provincial virtual water export, and the corresponding driving strengths varied across spaces. Obviously, the visible effects from the agricultural infrastructures on regional water consumption, water productivity and virtual water patterns cannot be neglected. </p>


2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 8355-8372 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. M. Mekonnen ◽  
A. Y. Hoekstra

Abstract. Hydropower accounts for about 16% of the world's electricity supply. It has been debated whether hydroelectric generation is merely an in-stream water user or whether it also consumes water. In this paper we provide scientific support for the argument that hydroelectric generation is in most cases a significant water consumer. The study assesses the blue water footprint of hydroelectricity – the water evaporated from manmade reservoirs to produce electric energy – for 35 selected sites. The aggregated blue water footprint of the selected hydropower plants is 90 Gm3 yr−1, which is equivalent to 10% of the blue water footprint of global crop production in the year 2000. The total blue water footprint of hydroelectric generation in the world must be considerably larger if one considers the fact that this study covers only 8% of the global installed hydroelectric capacity. Hydroelectric generation is thus a significant water consumer. The average water footprint of the selected hydropower plants is 68 m3 GJ−1. Great differences in water footprint among hydropower plants exist, due to differences in climate in the places where the plants are situated, but more importantly as a result of large differences in the area flooded per unit of installed hydroelectric capacity. We recommend that water footprint assessment is added as a component in evaluations of newly proposed hydropower plants as well as in the evaluation of existing hydroelectric dams, so that the consequences of the water footprint of hydroelectric generation on downstream environmental flows and other water users can be evaluated.


2018 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
pp. 05009
Author(s):  
Weiwei Yao ◽  
Yuansheng Chen ◽  
Xiaoyi Ma ◽  
Xiaobin Li

According the current hydropower development plan in China, numbers of hydraulic power plants with height over 300 meters will be built in the western region of China. These hydraulic power plants would be in crucial situation with the problems of high water head, huge discharge and narrow riverbed. Spillway is the most common structure in power plant which is used to drainage and flood release. According to the previous research, the velocity would be reaching to 55 m/s and the discharge can reach to 300 m3/s.m during spillway operation in the dam height over 300 m. The high velocity and discharge in the spillway may have the problems such as atomization nearby, slides on the side slope and river bank, Vibration on the pier, hydraulic jump, cavitation and the negative pressure on the spill way surface. All these problems may cause great disasters for both project and society. This paper proposes a novel method for flood release on high water head spillway which is named Rumei hydropower spillway located in the western region of China. This paper has following components: Determining the type and the layout of the spillway through the perspectives of air entrainment, flow jet angle and water energy dissipation in flushing pond structure. The physical hydraulic model has been used to evaluate spillway design effects.


2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. M. Mekonnen ◽  
A. Y. Hoekstra

Abstract. Hydropower accounts for about 16% of the world's electricity supply. It has been debated whether hydroelectric generation is merely an in-stream water user or whether it also consumes water. In this paper we provide scientific support for the argument that hydroelectric generation is in most cases a significant water consumer. The study assesses the blue water footprint of hydroelectricity – the water evaporated from manmade reservoirs to produce electric energy – for 35 selected sites. The aggregated blue water footprint of the selected hydropower plants is 90 Gm3 yr−1, which is equivalent to 10% of the blue water footprint of global crop production in the year 2000. The total blue water footprint of hydroelectric generation in the world must be considerably larger if one considers the fact that this study covers only 8% of the global installed hydroelectric capacity. Hydroelectric generation is thus a significant water consumer. The average water footprint of the selected hydropower plants is 68 m3 GJ−1. Great differences in water footprint among hydropower plants exist, due to differences in climate in the places where the plants are situated, but more importantly as a result of large differences in the area flooded per unit of installed hydroelectric capacity. We recommend that water footprint assessment is added as a component in evaluations of newly proposed hydropower plants as well as in the evaluation of existing hydroelectric dams, so that the consequences of the water footprint of hydroelectric generation on downstream environmental flows and other water users can be evaluated.


2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 1577-1600 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. M. Mekonnen ◽  
A. Y. Hoekstra

Abstract. This study quantifies the green, blue and grey water footprint of global crop production in a spatially-explicit way for the period 1996–2005. The assessment improves upon earlier research by taking a high-resolution approach, estimating the water footprint of 126 crops at a 5 by 5 arc minute grid. We have used a grid-based dynamic water balance model to calculate crop water use over time, with a time step of one day. The model takes into account the daily soil water balance and climatic conditions for each grid cell. In addition, the water pollution associated with the use of nitrogen fertilizer in crop production is estimated for each grid cell. The crop evapotranspiration of additional 20 minor crops is calculated with the CROPWAT model. In addition, we have calculated the water footprint of more than two hundred derived crop products, including various flours, beverages, fibres and biofuels. We have used the water footprint assessment framework as in the guideline of the Water Footprint Network. Considering the water footprints of primary crops, we see that the global average water footprint per ton of crop increases from sugar crops (roughly 200 m3 ton−1), vegetables (300 m3 ton−1), roots and tubers (400 m3 ton−1), fruits (1000 m3 ton−1), cereals (1600 m3 ton−1), oil crops (2400 m3 ton−1) to pulses (4000 m3 ton−1). The water footprint varies, however, across different crops per crop category and per production region as well. Besides, if one considers the water footprint per kcal, the picture changes as well. When considered per ton of product, commodities with relatively large water footprints are: coffee, tea, cocoa, tobacco, spices, nuts, rubber and fibres. The analysis of water footprints of different biofuels shows that bio-ethanol has a lower water footprint (in m3 GJ−1) than biodiesel, which supports earlier analyses. The crop used matters significantly as well: the global average water footprint of bio-ethanol based on sugar beet amounts to 51 m3 GJ−1, while this is 121 m3 GJ−1 for maize. The global water footprint related to crop production in the period 1996–2005 was 7404 billion cubic meters per year (78 % green, 12 % blue, 10 % grey). A large total water footprint was calculated for wheat (1087 Gm3 yr−1), rice (992 Gm3 yr−1) and maize (770 Gm3 yr−1). Wheat and rice have the largest blue water footprints, together accounting for 45 % of the global blue water footprint. At country level, the total water footprint was largest for India (1047 Gm3 yr−1), China (967 Gm3 yr−1) and the USA (826 Gm3 yr−1). A relatively large total blue water footprint as a result of crop production is observed in the Indus river basin (117 Gm3 yr−1) and the Ganges river basin (108 Gm3 yr−1). The two basins together account for 25 % of the blue water footprint related to global crop production. Globally, rain-fed agriculture has a water footprint of 5173 Gm3 yr−1 (91 % green, 9 % grey); irrigated agriculture has a water footprint of 2230 Gm3 yr−1 (48 % green, 40 % blue, 12 % grey).


Author(s):  
Abdulmalik Alghamdi ◽  
Mohammed Alzahrani ◽  
Abdulla Alhamami ◽  
Adel Altalhi ◽  
Ali Alkhathami ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document