The Potential Environmental Benefits of Hybrid Rice Varieties
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 8-2012 The otP ential Environmental Benefits of Hybrid Rice Varieties Haxhire Myrteza University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Agronomy and Crop Sciences Commons, and the Environmental Public Health Commons Recommended Citation Myrteza, Haxhire, "The otP ential Environmental Benefits of yH brid Rice Varieties" (2012). Theses and Dissertations. 528. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/528 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF HYBRID RICE VARIETIES THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF HYBRID RICE VARIETIES A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Agricultural Economics By Haxhire Myrteza University of Arkansas Bachelor of Science in Economics, 2009 August 2012 University of Arkansas ABSTRACT With water insufficiency being already a major issue and potential carbon policies on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, Arkansas rice producers may need to undergo some changes in regards to rice cultivar selection. The purpose of this study is to estimate the environmental benefits of cultivating hybrid rice varieties as opposed to conventional and Clearfield rice varieties. To accomplish this goal, water use and GHG emissions were estimated on per acre (ac) and per bushel (bu) basis for most commonly cultivated rice varieties in Arkansas. The study focuses particularly on six main rice stations in the State of Arkansas. The hypothesis of this study is that hybrid rice varieties use less water and emit less GHG on both per ac and per bu, which would make them the ideal choice to meet the increasing demand for rice while reducing water use and GHG emission from its production. This study found that hybrid rice varieties have statistically lower water-use/bu and GHG emissions/bu than conventional and Clearfield. This thesis is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council Thesis Director: ________________________ Dr. L. Lanier Nalley Thesis Committee: ________________________ Kristofor R. Brye ________________________ Michael P. Popp ________________________ Brad Watkins THESIS DUPLICATION RELEASE I hereby authorize the University of Arkansas Libraries to duplicate this thesis when needed for research and/or scholarship. Agreed ________________________________ Haxhire Myrteza Refused ________________________________ Haxhire Myrteza ACKNOWLEDGMENTS All praises and thanks are to Allah (God) Who granted me strength, patience and dedicated/encouraging people, all of which facilitated my affairs in completing this thesis. In addition, I would like to express my gratitude to all faculty, staff, relatives and friends who helped me get through this project. Firstly, I would like to thank Dr. Lawton Lanier Nalley for his encouragement, guidance, suggestions, and constructive critique from beginning of this project until the thesis defense. Without his assistance, the thesis process would have been long, frustrating and most likely not completed on time. My thanks also go to Brad Watkins, Kristofor R. Brye, and Michael P. Popp for being on the thesis committee. Their comments, questions, and direction on the preliminary draft of this thesis have helped me to develop a better concept of the thesis. I would also thank the Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness staff, Alicai Minden, Melinda Dunlap, and Karen Strain for their help with the abundant paperwork before and after the defense. Finally, I would like to thank my husband Ariful Islam for his patience, understanding, and support during the writing process of this thesis. DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to my family: my parents Jetnor and Hemedie Myrteza, and my two sisters Ediola and Gentiana, whose support and motivation were encouraging throughout the Master’s program and specifically during the thesis preparation process. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. LITERATURE REVIEW 7 A. Rice Introduction 7 B. Water-Use 8 1. Water-Use in Rice Production 9 2. Increasing Water-Use Efficiency in Rice Production 12 2.1 Increasing Rice Yield per Unit of Water Input 13 2.2 Reducing Unproductive Water Outflows 14 2.2.1 Land Preparation Period 15 2.2.2 Rice Establishment Methods 17 2.2.3 Soil and Water Management 19 C. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions 24 1. GHG Emissions in Rice Production 24 1.1 Life Cycle Analysis 25 1.2 Methane (CH4) 26 1.3 Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 28 2. Mitigating GHG Emission in Rice Production 28 2.1 Irrigation Methods 29 2.2 Fertilizer Amendment 31 2.3 Soil Characteristics 32 2.4 Cultivation Practices 33 2.5 Cultivar Selection 34 D. Rice Types 35 III. DATA AND METHODOLOGY 37 A. Data 37 1. Arkansas Rice Performance Trials (ARPT) Data 38 2. Data Used to Estimate Evapotranspiration 39 2.1 Data Used to Estimate Evaporation 39 2.2 Data Used to Estimate Transpiration 40 3. Data Used to Estimate CO2 from Irrigation 41 4. Methane Data 41 B. Methodology 41 1. Water Use 41 1.1 Evaporation (E) 42 1.1.1 Energy Balance Method of Evaporation 42 1.1.2 Net Radiation (Rn) 43 1.1.3 Net Solar (Rns) 43 1.1.4 Net Longwave Radiation (Rnl) 44 1.1.5 Actual Vapour Pressure (ea) 45 1.1.6 Saturation Vapour Pressure at the Air Temperature T [e°(T)] 45 1.1.7 Clear-Sky Solar Radiation (Rso) 46 1.1.8 Extraterrestrial Radiation For Daily Periods (Ra) 46 1.1.9 Days on Flood and Drainage Date 48 1.2 Transpiration (T) 51 1.3 Evapotranspiration (ET) 52 2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 54 2.1 Life Cycle Analyses 54 2.2 Carbon Emission Calculations 55 2.2.1 Carbon Equivalent Values 55 2.2.2 Total GHG Emissions Excluding CO2 from Irrigation and CH4 56 2.2.3 Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Irrigation 58 2.2.4 Methane Emissions from Flooding 60 IV. RESULTS 65 A. Water-Use 65 1. Evaporation (E) 65 2. Transpiration (T) 72 3. Evapotranspiration (ET) 80 4. Statistical Results 94 B. GHG Emissions 97 1. GHG Emissions Estimates Taken from McFadden et al. (2011) 99 2. GHG Emissions from Irrigation 99 3. GHG Emissions from Methane 106 4. Total GHG Emissions 114 5. Statistical Results 128 C. Summary of the Results 132 1. Water-Use 132 2. GHG Emissions 139 V. CONCLUSION 146 A. Summary 146 B. Limitation of the Study 147 C. Future Research 148 VI. REFERENCES 149 VII. APPENDIX 158 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Data from ARPT at the Stuttgart Rice Research & Extension Center for the Growing Year 2010 39 Table 2. Daily Averaged Data from NASA Climatology Resource for Agroclimatology Utilized to Estimate Evaporation at the Stuttgart ARPT Station in 2010 40 Table 3. Days on Flood and Drainage Date for Nine Rice Varieties at the Stuttgart Rice Research and Extension Center for the Growing Year 2010 50 Table 4. Evapotranspiration Derived from Estimated Evaporation and Transpiration at Stuttgart Rice Research and Extension Center for the Growing Year 2010 53 Table 5. Carbon Equivalent Emission Factors by Input 56 Table 6. Average per ac Input Requirements by Cultivar ON Slit-Loam Solis 58 Table 7. Evaporation in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Stuttgart ARPT Station in 2010 66 Table 8. Evaporation in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Rohwer ARPT Station in 2010 67 Table 9. Evaporation in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Keiser ARPT Station in 2010 68 Table 10. Evaporation in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Newport ARPT Station in 2010 69 Table 11. Evaporation in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Colt ARPT Station in 2010 70 Table 12. Evaporation in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Coring ARPT Station in 2010 71 Table 13. Transpiration in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Stuttgart ARPT Station in 2010 73 Table 14. Transpiration in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Rohwer ARPT Station in 2010 74 Table 15. Transpiration in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Keiser ARPT Station in 2010 75 Table 16. Transpiration in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Newport ARPT Station in 2010 76 Table 17. Transpiration in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Colt ARPT Station in 2010 77 Table 18. Transpiration in ac-in/ac for Rice Varieties at the Coring ARPT Station in 2010 78 Table 19. The Ratio of Yield (bu/ac) to Evapotranspiration (ac-in/ac) for Rice Varieties at the Stuttgart ARPT Station in 2010 82 Table 20. The Ratio of Yield (bu/ac) to Evapotranspiration (ac-in/ac) for Rice Varieties at the Rohwer ARPT Station in 2010 84 Table 21. The Ratio of Yield (bu/ac) to Evapotranspiration (ac-in/ac) for Rice Varieties at the Keiser ARPT Station in 2010 86 Table 22. The Ratio of Yield (bu/ac) to Evapotranspiration (ac-in/ac) for Rice Varieties at the Newport ARPT Station in 2010 88 Table 23. The Ratio of Yield (bu/ac) to Evapotranspiration (ac-in/ac) for Rice Varieties at the Colt ARPT Station in 2010 90 Table 24. The Ratio of Yield (bu/ac) to Evapotranspiration (ac-in/ac) for Rice Varieties at the Coring ARPT Station in 2010 92 Table 25. Statistical Differences on Water-Use/ac Between Cultivar Types (Conventional, Clearfield, & Hybrid) at 95% Level for Six ARPT Station in 2010 95 Table 26. Statistical Differences on Yield/Water-Use Between Cultivar Types (Conventional, Clearfield, & Hybrid) at 95% Level for Six ARPT Station in 2010 96 Table 27.