IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v11y2021i4p363-d537669.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

China’s Tea Industry: Net Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Mitigation Potential

Author

Listed:
  • Long Liang

    (The Strategy Research Institute of Rural Revitalization, Guizhou University of Finance and Economics, Guiyang 550025, China)

  • Bradley G. Ridoutt

    (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Clayton South, VIC 3169, Australia
    Department of Agricultural Economics, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa)

  • Liyuan Wang

    (Shanghai Academy of Agricultural Science, Shanghai 201403, China)

  • Bin Xie

    (College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China)

  • Minghong Li

    (Economic Crops Station of Luzhou City, Luzhou 646000, China)

  • Zhongbai Li

    (Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of Panzhou City, Panzhou 553537, China)

Abstract

Tea is an important cash crop and a beverage that is widely consumed across the world. In China (the largest producer of tea), the industry is growing, and there is a need to understand current greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and sequestrations and the potential for mitigation so that climate action can be strategically undertaken. Life cycle assessment and carbon footprint methods were used to quantify emissions in tea cultivation and processing in the 16 major producing regions for the year 2017. The system boundary was from cradle to factory gate, which was divided into three subsystems, namely agricultural materials production, tea production and tea processing. Several units of analysis were chosen: the production region (province), the production area (ha) and the product (kg loose tea), etc. Total GHG emissions were 28.75 Mt CO 2 eq, which were mainly attributable to energy use in tea processing (41%), fertilizer production (31.6%) and soil emissions (26.7%). This equated to 12.0 t CO 2 eq per ha and 10.8 kg CO 2 eq per kg processed tea. Production in Hubei, Yunan, Guizhou, Sichuan and Fujian provinces contributed almost two thirds of industry emissions, representing priority areas for strategic action to reduce GHG emissions. At the same time, the total carbon sink amounted to 21.37 MtCO 2 , representing 74.3% of total GHG emissions. The proportions stored in soil, biomass, and tea production were 49.3%, 30.0%, and 20.7%, respectively. If best recommended management practices for fertilizer application were adopted and biomass was used as a source of energy for tea processing, the GHG emissions reduction potential was 16.66 Mt CO 2 eq, or 58% of total emissions. The GHG emissions associated with tea production and processing in China appeared high by comparison to other regions of the world. However, considering the carbon sink and emissions reduction potential, the tea industry should be viewed as an important sector for climate action. Moreover, the potential for substantial GHG emissions reduction through the adoption of improved practices seems very realistic. There may also be additional opportunities for GHG emissions reduction through the development of organic tea cultivation systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Long Liang & Bradley G. Ridoutt & Liyuan Wang & Bin Xie & Minghong Li & Zhongbai Li, 2021. "China’s Tea Industry: Net Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Mitigation Potential," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:4:p:363-:d:537669
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/4/363/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/4/363/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wen Wang & Liping Guo & Yingchun Li & Man Su & Yuebin Lin & Christian Perthuis & Xiaotang Ju & Erda Lin & Dominic Moran, 2015. "Greenhouse gas intensity of three main crops and implications for low-carbon agriculture in China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 128(1), pages 57-70, January.
    2. Josep G. Canadell & E. Detlef Schulze, 2014. "Global potential of biospheric carbon management for climate mitigation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 5(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. repec:dau:papers:123456789/14382 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Verena Seufert & Navin Ramankutty & Jonathan A. Foley, 2012. "Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture," Nature, Nature, vol. 485(7397), pages 229-232, May.
    5. Taulo, J.L. & Sebitosi, A.B., 2016. "Material and energy flow analysis of the Malawian tea industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1337-1350.
    6. Timothy D. Searchinger & Stefan Wirsenius & Tim Beringer & Patrice Dumas, 2018. "Assessing the efficiency of changes in land use for mitigating climate change," Nature, Nature, vol. 564(7735), pages 249-253, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jun Li & Jiali Xing & Rui Ding & Wenjiao Shi & Xiaoli Shi & Xiaoqing Wang, 2023. "Systematic Evaluation of Nitrogen Application in the Production of Multiple Crops and Its Environmental Impacts in Fujian Province, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, March.
    2. Liselot Koelman & Inge Huybrechts & Sander Biesbroek & Pieter van ‘t Veer & Matthias B. Schulze & Krasimira Aleksandrova, 2022. "Dietary Choices Impact on Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Determinants and Correlates in a Sample of Adults from Eastern Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-10, March.
    3. Salvatore Camposeo & Gaetano Alessandro Vivaldi & Giovanni Russo & Francesca Maria Melucci, 2022. "Intensification in Olive Growing Reduces Global Warming Potential under Both Integrated and Organic Farming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-19, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maurer, Rainer, 2023. "Comparing the effect of different agricultural land-use systems on biodiversity," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    2. Debuschewitz, Emil & Sanders, Jürn, 2021. "Bewertung der Umweltwirkungen des ökologischen Landbaus im Kontext der kontroversen wissenschaftlichen Diskurse," 61st Annual Conference, Berlin, Germany, September 22-24, 2021 317076, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    3. Bellassen Valentin & Drut Marion & Diallo Abdoul & Antonioli Federico & Donati Michele & Brečić Ružica & Ferrer-Pérez Hugo & Gauvrit Lisa & Hoang Viet & Nguyen An & Knutsen Steinnes Kamilla & Vittersø, 2021. "The Carbon and Land Footprint of Certified Food Products," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 19(2), pages 113-126, December.
    4. Bellassen, Valentin & Drut, Marion & Hilal, Mohamed & Bodini, Antonio & Donati, Michele & de Labarre, Matthieu Duboys & Filipović, Jelena & Gauvrit, Lisa & Gil, José M. & Hoang, Viet & Malak-Rawlikows, 2022. "The economic, environmental and social performance of European certified food," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Anna Kuczuk & Katarzyna Widera, 2021. "A Greater Share of Organic Agriculture in Relation to Food Security Resulting from the Energy Demand Obtained from Food—Scenarios for Poland until 2030," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-19, October.
    6. Haijiang Wu & Stéphan Marette, 2020. "Local and Global Welfare When Regulating Organic Products: Should Local Regulation Target Production or Consumption?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-19, July.
    7. Jie Zhao & Ji Chen & Damien Beillouin & Hans Lambers & Yadong Yang & Pete Smith & Zhaohai Zeng & Jørgen E. Olesen & Huadong Zang, 2022. "Global systematic review with meta-analysis reveals yield advantage of legume-based rotations and its drivers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    8. Movedi, Ermes & Valiante, Daniele & Colosio, Alessandro & Corengia, Luca & Cossa, Stefano & Confalonieri, Roberto, 2022. "A new approach for modeling crop-weed interaction targeting management support in operational contexts: A case study on the rice weeds barnyardgrass and red rice," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 463(C).
    9. Wang, Linlin & Li, Qiang & Coulter, Jeffrey A. & Xie, Junhong & Luo, Zhuzhu & Zhang, Renzhi & Deng, Xiping & Li, Linglin, 2020. "Winter wheat yield and water use efficiency response to organic fertilization in northern China: A meta-analysis," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    10. Lucia Mancini, 2013. "Conventional, Organic and Polycultural Farming Practices: Material Intensity of Italian Crops and Foodstuffs," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-23, December.
    11. Daniel P. Roberts & Autar K. Mattoo, 2018. "Sustainable Agriculture—Enhancing Environmental Benefits, Food Nutritional Quality and Building Crop Resilience to Abiotic and Biotic Stresses," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, January.
    12. Atanu Mukherjee & Emmanuel C. Omondi & Paul R. Hepperly & Rita Seidel & Wade P. Heller, 2020. "Impacts of Organic and Conventional Management on the Nutritional Level of Vegetables," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    13. Seck, Abdoulaye & Thiam, Djiby Racine, 2022. "Understanding consumer attitudes to and valuation of organic food in Sub-Saharan Africa: A double-bound contingent method applied in Dakar, Senegal," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 17(1), March.
    14. Erik Nelson & Virginia Matzek, 2016. "Carbon Credits Compete Poorly With Agricultural Commodities In An Optimized Model Of Land Use In Northern California," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(04), pages 1-24, November.
    15. Schindele, Stephan & Trommsdorff, Maximilian & Schlaak, Albert & Obergfell, Tabea & Bopp, Georg & Reise, Christian & Braun, Christian & Weselek, Axel & Bauerle, Andrea & Högy, Petra & Goetzberger, Ado, 2020. "Implementation of agrophotovoltaics: Techno-economic analysis of the price-performance ratio and its policy implications," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    16. Zhen, Wei & Qin, Quande & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2017. "Spatio-temporal patterns of energy consumption-related GHG emissions in China's crop production systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 274-284.
    17. Henrik B. Møller & Peter Sørensen & Jørgen E. Olesen & Søren O. Petersen & Tavs Nyord & Sven G. Sommer, 2022. "Agricultural Biogas Production—Climate and Environmental Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, February.
    18. Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas & Lusk, Jayson & Magnier, Alexandre, 2018. "The price of non-genetically modified (non-GM) food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 38-50.
    19. Zhen, Wei & Qin, Quande & Miao, Lu, 2023. "The greenhouse gas rebound effect from increased energy efficiency across China's staple crops," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    20. Janet MacFall & Joanna Lelekacs & Todd LeVasseur & Steve Moore & Jennifer Walker, 2015. "Toward resilient food systems through increased agricultural diversity and local sourcing in the Carolinas," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(4), pages 608-622, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:4:p:363-:d:537669. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.