Search

Abstract: There are significant concerns about the longer term impact of climate change and climate variability on water availability in Australia. Modern irrigation technologies are seen as a way to manage climate change impacts and improve water security. However, while modern irrigation technologies may save volumes of water, it is likely that they will result in increased on-farm energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, suggesting potential conflicts in terms of mitigation and adaptation policies. Five irrigation technology transformation scenarios—three historical and two adoption—were developed to evaluate industry-wide tradeoffs between water savings, energy consumption (and GHG emissions), and economic returns associated with irrigation technology transformations under current Australian Government water resource policies. Three of the five scenarios tested showed tradeoffs between water savings and GHG emissions, with water savings through conversion of irrigation systems increasing both energy consumption and GHG emissions. For example, 120GL/year of water savings achieved through drip irrigation adoption for cotton cropping would increase energy consumption by 889TJ/year and GHG emissions by 250,000tCO2e/year. A carbon price of $20/tCO2e would result in additional costs nationally of about $5m/year. However, this study also indicated that significant benefit in terms of water savings and GHG reduction can be achieved when replacing older inefficient and energy-intensive systems, such as hand shift and roll-line sprinkler systems, especially when these are replaced with drip irrigation systems. We suggest priority should be given to replacing such systems while implementing the on-farm infrastructure investment policy. The findings of the study support the use of an integrated approach to avoid possible conflicts in designing national climate change mitigation and adaptation policies, both of which are being developed in Australia. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The Australian Government is meeting the challenge of water scarcity and climate change through significant on-farm infrastructure investment to increase water use efficiency and productivity, and secure longer term water supplies. However, it is likely that on-farm infrastructure investment will alter energy consumption and therefore generate considerable greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, suggesting potential conflicts in terms of mitigation and adaptation policies. In particular, the introduction of a price on carbon may influence the extent to which new irrigation technologies are adopted. This study evaluated trade-offs between water savings, GHG emissions and economic gain associated with the conversion of a sprinkler (hand shift) irrigation system to a drip (trickle) irrigation system for a lettuce production system in the Lockyer Valley, one of the major vegetable producing regions in Australia. Surprisingly, instead of trade-offs, this study found positive synergies – a win–win situation. The conversion of the old hand-shift sprinkler irrigation system to a drip irrigation system resulted in significant water savings of almost 2 ML/ha, as well as an overall reduction in GHG emissions. Economic modelling, at a carbon price of $ 30/t CO2e, indicated that there was a net benefit of adoption of the drip irrigation system of about $ 4620/ML/year. We suggest priority should be given, in the implementation of on-farm infrastructure investment policy, to replacing older inefficient and energy-intensive sprinkler irrigation systems such as hand shift and roll-line. The findings of the study support the use of an integrated approach to avoid possible conflicts in designing national climate change mitigation and adaptation policies, both of which are being developed in Australia. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]