当前位置: X-MOL 学术Earths Future › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Financial Feasibility of Water Conservation in Agriculture
Earth's Future Pub Date : 2021-02-07 , DOI: 10.1029/2020ef001726
C. Siderius 1, 2 , H. Biemans 3 , D. Conway 1 , W. Immerzeel 4 , J. Jaegermeyr 5, 6, 7 , B. Ahmad 8 , P. Hellegers 3
Affiliation  

Global water use for food production needs to be reduced to remain within planetary boundaries, yet the financial feasibility of crucial measures to reduce water use is poorly quantified. Here, we introduce a novel method to compare the costs of water conservation measures with the added value that reallocation of water savings might generate if used for expansion of irrigation. Based on detailed water accounting through the use of a high‐resolution hydrology‐crop model, we modify the traditional cost curve approach with an improved estimation of demand and increasing marginal cost per water conservation measure combination, adding a correction to control for impacts on downstream water availability. We apply the method to three major river basins in the Indo‐Gangetic plain (Indus, Ganges and Brahmaputra), a major global food producing region but increasingly water stressed. Our analysis shows that at basin level only about 10% (Brahmaputra) to just over 20% (Indus and Ganges) of potential water savings would be realized; the equilibrium price for water is too low to make the majority of water conservation measures cost effective. The associated expansion of irrigated area is moderate, about 7% in the Indus basin, 5% in the Ganges and negligible in the Brahmaputra, but farmers' gross profit increases more substantially, by 11%. Increasing the volumetric cost of irrigation water influences supply and demand in a similar way and has little influence on water reallocation. Controlling for the impact on return flows is important and more than halves the amount of water available for reallocation.

中文翻译:

农业节水的财务可行性

需要减少用于粮食生产的全球用水量以保持在地球范围之内,但是减少用水量的关键措施在财务上的可行性却很难量化。在这里,我们介绍了一种新颖的方法,可以将节水措施的成本与增加节水的附加值进行比较,如果将节水用于灌溉,则可以重新分配节水。在通过使用高分辨率水文作物模型进行详细的水核算的基础上,我们修改了传统的成本曲线方法,以改进需求估算并增加每个节水措施组合的边际成本,并增加了对对下游影响的控制修正可用水量。我们将这种方法应用于印度洋—恒河平原的三个主要流域(印度河,恒河和雅鲁藏布江),一个主要的全球食品产区,但水资源压力越来越大。我们的分析表明,在流域层面上,仅节水的潜力大约只有10%(印度洋和恒河)到20%以上(印度河和恒河)。水的均衡价格过低,无法使大多数节水措施具有成本效益。灌溉面积的相应增加是适度的,印度河流域约为7%,恒河约为5%,而雅鲁藏布江则微不足道,但农民的毛利润增长幅度更大,达11%。灌溉水体积成本的增加以类似的方式影响供需,对水的再分配几乎没有影响。控制对回流的影响很重要,并且可用于再分配的水量要减少一半以上。我们的分析表明,在流域层面上,仅节水的潜力大约只有10%(印度洋和恒河)到20%以上(印度河和恒河)。水的均衡价格过低,无法使大多数节水措施具有成本效益。灌溉面积的相应增加是适度的,印度河流域约为7%,恒河约为5%,而雅鲁藏布江则微不足道,但农民的毛利润增长幅度更大,达11%。灌溉水体积成本的增加以类似的方式影响供需,对水的再分配几乎没有影响。控制对回流的影响很重要,并且可用于再分配的水量要减少一半以上。我们的分析表明,在流域层面上,仅节水的潜力大约只有10%(印度洋和恒河)到20%以上(印度河和恒河)。水的均衡价格过低,无法使大多数节水措施具有成本效益。灌溉面积的相应增加是适度的,印度河流域约为7%,恒河约为5%,而雅鲁藏布江则微不足道,但农民的毛利润增长幅度更大,达11%。灌溉水体积成本的增加以类似的方式影响供需,对水的再分配几乎没有影响。控制对回流的影响很重要,并且可用于再分配的水量要减少一半以上。水的均衡价格过低,无法使大多数节水措施具有成本效益。灌溉面积的相应增加是适度的,印度河流域约为7%,恒河约为5%,而雅鲁藏布江则微不足道,但农民的毛利润增长幅度更大,达11%。灌溉水体积成本的增加以类似的方式影响供需,对水的再分配几乎没有影响。控制对回流的影响很重要,并且可用于再分配的水量要减少一半以上。水的均衡价格过低,无法使大多数节水措施具有成本效益。灌溉面积的相应增加是适度的,印度河流域约为7%,恒河约为5%,而雅鲁藏布江则微不足道,但农民的毛利润增长幅度更大,达11%。灌溉水体积成本的增加以类似的方式影响供需,对水的再分配几乎没有影响。控制对回流的影响很重要,并且可用于再分配的水量要减少一半以上。毛利润增长幅度更大,增长了11%。灌溉水体积成本的增加以类似的方式影响供需,对水的再分配几乎没有影响。控制对回流的影响很重要,并且可用于再分配的水量要减少一半以上。毛利润增长幅度更大,达到11%。灌溉水体积成本的增加以类似的方式影响供需,对水的再分配几乎没有影响。控制对回流的影响很重要,并且可用于再分配的水量要减少一半以上。
更新日期:2021-03-04
down
wechat
bug