CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TRANSACTIONS VOL. 63, 2018 A publication of The Italian Association of Chemical Engineering Online at www.aidic.it/cet Guest Editors: Jeng Shiun Lim, Wai Shin Ho, Jiří J. Klemeš Copyright © 2018, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l. ISBN 978-88-95608-61-7; ISSN 2283-9216 Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Phayao Province - An Agricultural City in Thailand Eva Novita Saria, Kritana Prueksakorna, Jorge Carlos Gonzaleza, Tanwa Arpornthipa, Thanita Areerobb, Chotima Pornsawangc, Sittichai Pimonsreed,* aAndaman Environment and Natural Disaster Research Center, Interdisciplinary Graduate School of Earth System Science and Andaman Natural Disaster Management, Prince of Songkla University, Phuket Campus, 83120, Thailand bFaculty of Technology and Environment, Prince of Songkla University, Phuket Campus, 83120, Thailand cFaculty of Economics, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai Campus, 90110, Thailand dAtmospheric Pollution and Climate Change Research Unit, School of Energy and Environment, University of Phayao, 56000, Thailand. sittichai007@hotmail.com Greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation is one of the major challenges that all countries face. The impacts of GHG emissions cost people and ecosystem everywhere. Hence, it is the responsibility of all parties to tackle this serious problem. For instance, Thailand has agreed to decrease GHG emissions by 20 % from the projected business-as-usual (BAU) level by 2030 despite no commitment to target GHG emissions reduction. As a part of the contribution, this study aimed at preparing a GHG emissions inventory (EI) from the main pollution sources in Phayao province located in the North of Thailand. We investigated annual amount of GHG emissions by using a bottom-up approach. Both primary data from field survey and secondary data from governmental agencies in Thailand were employed in our analysis. From the preliminary study, Phayao’s economy depends on agriculture, like other ASEAN countries. The major sources of GHG generation comprised of rice cultivation, open burning (including crop residue burning and forest fire), road transportation, industry, and livestock (from enteric fermentation and manure management). GHG emissions from rice fields, open burning, road transportation, industry, and livestock were estimated to be 773,325; 1,819,225; 195,497; 4,625 and 133,830 t CO2-eq. Approximately 89 % of GHG emissions were emitted from agricultural sector (biomass open burning and rice cultivation). The results of this study suggest that the proper and effective measures for mitigating GHG emissions from agricultural ecosystems is the first priority to emphasise. 1. Introduction Ocean and land temperatures demonstrate that the Earth has been warmed. This phenomenon is attributed to human-caused GHG emissions. The average global, land, and ocean temperature has now risen about 0.7, 1, and 0.6 °C above normal in the last 100 years (Prasad et al., 2017). Geographically, Thailand is one of the sixteen countries at extreme risk due to climate change impacts over the next thirty years with a higher growth rate of average temperature compared to the world (an increase of ~ 1 °C within ~ 50 years) (ONEP, 2015b). Also, Thailand is one of the seven countries in the Asia with high population, a major factor that can make things difficult for the protection of environment (Klemeš et al., 2017). Anyway, Thailand has committed to a voluntary 7 % - 20 % GHG reduction in the energy and transport sectors by 2020 and 20 % reduction from the projected BAU level (~ 555 Mt CO2-eq) by 2030 (Leggett, 2015). Thailand is an agricultural country (Arunrat et al., 2016), same as most of the ASEAN countries (except Singapore and Brunei) (Shukun and Yanhua, 2014). Agriculture is the 2nd largest contributor to GHG emissions after energy sector (Bordoff, 2016) and this makes it a major source of GHGs emitted to the air from ASEAN. This should be the same with Phayao province, an agricultural city with an estimated population of 0.49 M in 2013 (NSO, 2013) that obtained 422 M USD or 43 % of gross provincial product from agricultural activities (NESDB, 2013). That income was created from ~ 228,920 ha of arable land, accounting for 36.1 % of the whole territory. Rice is the most important crop occupying ~ 132,798 DOI: 10.3303/CET1863028 Please cite this article as: Eva Novita Sari, Kritana Prueksakorn, Jorge Carlos Gonzalez, Tanwa Arpornthip, Thanita Areerob, Chotima Pornsawang, Sittichai Pimonsree, 2018, Inventory of greenhouse gas emissions for phayao province - an agricultural city in thailand, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 63, 163-168 DOI:10.3303/CET1863028 163 ha (58 %) of the total cultivated area in Phayao (Pimmasarn et al., 2013). Other economic crops (e.g., corn, longan, lychee, garlic, and shallot) occupy space less than 10 % of the provincial area (OAE, 2015). Apart from agricultural sector, from the preliminary observation, forest fire, transportation, industry and livestock can also be the main contributors to global warming potential (GWP) in this province. So as to meet the goal to reduce GHG emissions efficiently and cost-effectively, an initial task is to identify environmental hotspots. This study aims to develop a GHG EI for Phayao province, a northern city in Thailand, by using bottom-up approach that takes a detailed look at each potential source in an investigation (Song et al., 2017). 2. Methods 2.1 Activity data Detailed data for the estimation and development of a GHG EI for Phayao province were obtained from many sources including governmental organisations. The summary of activity data and sources of information are presented in Table 1. Major sources of emissions based upon data availability can be categorised as rice field, open burning, transport, industry, and livestock. Aside from on-site data collection, related information for the estimation of GHGs for paddy field was mainly acquired from Phayao Provincial Agricultural Extension Office (DOAE, 2011). The emission factor (EF) values for rice field were adopted from the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC, 2006). To estimate emissions from open burning of all main agricultural residues and forest fire, high-resolution satellite images from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) were utilised to identify the location and size of the burn (NASA, 2012). The EF values from literatures for crop residue burning (rice, and corn) (Kanabkaew and Oanh, 2011) and forest fire were used (Andreae and Merlet, 2001). Actually, forest fire (with or without intention) is a cause of land-use change, a crucial factor that impact on GHG balance (Prueksakorn, 2017). To develop a GHG EI for transport section of Phayao province, data for traffic, car speed, registered car, and fuel amount were obtained from Department of Highway (DOH, 2012), Highway Police Division (HPD, 2012), Department of Land Transport (DLT, 2012), and Ministry of Energy (MOE, 2015). Traffic data observed by DOH was collected from 7.00 am – 7.00 pm, and data for the remaining time to complete the 24 h sampling was further collected on site, manually. The EF values for transport were determined based on fuel used, year of cars, and type of cars, from the research project studied in Bangkok, Thailand (ESMAP, 2009). For industries, the activity data were partly received from Phayao Province Industry Office (PIO, 2012). Additional survey was performed to complete activity data. The values of EF were extracted from the guideline of United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA, 2005). The data for livestock were collected from provincial livestock office and site survey (Muenchan and Pimonsree, 2012). The EF values for livestock were derived from the IPCC (IPCC, 2006). Table 1: The activity data from major sources of GHGs generation in Phayao Emission sources Related data for the estimation The source of data Rice cultivation Open burning Transportation Industry Livestock Registered farmer, area, plantation method Hotspot Traffic Speed of car Registered car Fuel Location, production capacity, Pollution control technology, animals, farm locations, sex, and weight DOAE, 2011 Pimmasarn et al., 2013 NASA, 2012 DOH, 2012 HPD, 2012 DLT, 2012 MOE, 2015 PIO, 2012 Muenchan and Pimonsree, 2012 2.2 Emissions Estimation To estimate GHG emissions in the study period, carbon assessment manual 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for National GHG Inventories is used in this study. GHG substances i.e., CO2, CH4, and N2O are then converted to the single unit – CO2 equivalent (CO2-eq) for 100 years with the conversion factors based on IPCC (2006); 1 time for CO2, 25 times for CH4, and 298 times for N2O. 2.2.1 Rice cultivation The emissions for rice cultivation are estimated by using Eq(1) (IPCC, 2006). E = EF ∙ t ∙ A (1) where E is the amount of CH4 emissions from rice cultivation (t CH4), EF is emission factor (t CH4 ha-1 day-1), A is the cultivation area of rice field (ha), and t is the cultivation period of rice field (day). 164 https://www.google.co.th/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiXy_6-vJPVAhWJQY8KHfjGDlgQFggkMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.epa.gov%2F&usg=AFQjCNEuNvnyFeGx9ALH1PvWKPfqP3KecA https://www.google.co.th/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiXy_6-vJPVAhWJQY8KHfjGDlgQFggkMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.epa.gov%2F&usg=AFQjCNEuNvnyFeGx9ALH1PvWKPfqP3KecA 2.2.2 Biomass burning The emissions for biomass open burning are estimated by using the following Eq(2) and Eq(3). E = M ∙ EF (2) where E is quantities of CO2 or CH4 emissions from burning (t CO2 or t CH4 respectively), M is the quantities of biomass burning (kgdry mass), EF is emission factor from different biomass crops (t CO2 or t CH4 ∙ kgdry mass-1). Two methods are applied to determine the amount of biomass (M). Biomass burning at the forest area was calculated by using Eq(3) and biomass burning at the agriculture area was calculated by using Eq(4). M = A ∙ B ∙ C (3) where A is the burned area (km2), B is the biomass density in the forest area (kgdry biomass ∙ km-2), and C is burning efficiency. M = P ∙ N ∙ D ∙ β ∙ F (4) where P is crop production (kg), N is the residue to crop ratio, D is dry matter to crop residue ratio, β is the fraction burned in the field, and F is the crop specific burn efficiency ratio (IPCC, 2006). 2.2.3 Transportation The estimation for emissions generated from transport was done using Eq(5). E = A ∙ EF (5) where E is quantifies of CO2 emissions from transportation (t CO2), A is activity data (km) of emission source, and EF is the emission factor (t CO2 ∙ km-1). Activity data for this sector can be calculated using Eq(6). A = ∑ [( N ∙ Y ∙ F ) ∙ distance] (6) where N is the number of car, Y is the proportion of car, and F is the fraction of car (IPCC, 2006). 2.2.4 Industry The emissions for industry is calculated by using Eq(7). E = A ∙ EF ∙ ( 1 - ER 100 ) (7) where E is the quantities of CO2 emissions from industry (t CO2), A is activity data (Mg), EF is emission factor (t CO2 ∙ Mg-1), and ER is overall emission reduction efficiency (%) (US EPA, 2005). 2.2.5 Livestock The emissions from livestock can be mainly caused by two activities consisting of enteric fermentation and manure management estimated by using Eq(8) and Eq(9) respectively (IPCC, 2006). E = EF(T) ∙ [N(T)] (8) where E is quantities of CH4 emissions from enteric fermentation and manure management (t CH4), EF(T) is emission factor for the defined livestock population (t CH4 head-1), and N(T) is the number of livestock (while T is the category of livestock). N2OD = [∑ [∑ (N(T)×Nex(T)×MS(T,S)) T ] ×EF3(S) s ] × 44 28 (9) where N2OD is direct N2O emissions from manure management (tCO2-eq), S is manure management system, T is division of livestock, N(T) is the number of head of each category of livestock T, Nex(T) is average N excretion per head of each category of livestock T (kg N animal-1), MS(T,S) is the fraction of total annual nitrogen excretion for each category of livestock T that is managed in manure management system S, EF3(S) is emission factor for direct N2O emissions from manure management system S (t N2O-N kg N-1), 44/28 is the conversion factor which is converted from N2O-N emissions to N2O emissions. 3. Results and discussion 3.1 GHG emissions in Phayao province Within the scope of study, the total annual GHGs emitted from rice field, biomass burning, transportation, industry, and livestock were 2.9 Mt CO2-eq (Table 2). GHG emissions were mostly contributed by biomass open 165 burning (1,819,225 tCO2-eq, 62 % of the total) even though the investigation includes only rice and corn. Other minor crops were omitted due to unavailability of data but it should be acceptable with the similarity to China’s case that rice and corn were the major sources (90 %) of air pollutions from all kinds of crop residues (Huang et al., 2012). Apart from biomass burning, GHG emissions can also be produced during the cultivation process (Arunrat et al., 2016), especially CH4 from rice field (Guo et al. 2017). This also corresponds to the study result in Vietnam (Delafield, 2015) that agriculture is the biggest contributor to GHG production. GHGs from other major processes were emitted with the following shares: 6.7 % from transportation, 0.2 % from industry, and 4.6 % from livestock. Table 2: GHG emission (t y-1) generated from major sources in Phayao Emission sources CO2 CO2-eq CH4 CO2-eq N2O CO2-eq Total CO2-eq Rice field Open burning Transportation Industry Livestock Total 1,675,050 195,497 4,625 1,875,172 1,675,050 195,497 4,625 1,875,172 30,933 5,767 4,371.2 41,071.2 773,325 144,175 109,280 1,026,780 82.4 82.4 24,555 24,555 773,325 1,819,225 195,497 4,625 133,830 2,926,502 3.2 Comparison with other cases in ASEAN Benchmarks for the verification and interpretation of GHG emissions generated in Phayao province are presented in Table 3, mainly from case studies in ASEAN countries. Table 3: Comparisons with studies in ASEAN Emission Sources Region & References Area (ha) Population (Persons) CO2-eq from CO2 CO2-eq from CH4 CO2-eq from N2O Rice field Biomass burning This study Vietnam (Torbick et al., 2017) This study Phichit (Arunrat et al., 2016) Rice residue for irrigated area Rice residue for rainfed area 228,920 1,078,783 7.3 2.1a 3.0a 3.4 10.7 0.6 Transportation Industry Livestock This study Malaysia (Ong et al., 2011) Brunei (Dotse et al., 2016) This study Thailand (ONEP, 2015a) This study Philippines (Lingad et al., 2014) 6,335 329,750 5,765 0.49 x 106 1.76 x 106 0.39 x 106 1.1a 2.5 4.2 4,625a 18.2 x 106 a 26,018a 0.02 0.01 109,280 0.03 0.08 24,555 a from all GHGs (CO2, CH4 and N2O) Note: All units for rice field are in t CO2-eq ha-1 y-1, for biomass burning are in t CO2-eq ha-1 y-1, for road transportation are in t CO2-eq vehicle-1 y-1 from industry are in t CO2-eq y1, and from livestock are in t CO2-eq y-1 For the comparison of GHGs emitted from rice field, the case of Vietnam is chosen (Torbick et al., 2017). The gap of values is about 3 times (per plantation area) which is possible due to the difference of estimation techniques. The data collected in this study is based on bottom up approach while the data in Vietnam’s case is based on satellite remote sensing. Further comparison using the same approach is important. The case of Phichit province, Thailand (Arunrat et al., 2016) was chosen for the comparison of GHGs emitted from biomass burning. The gap of values (5 to 7 times) is a lot larger than that of cultivation. This is because the GHGs value presented in this study is for overall biomass while in the Phichit’s case is only for rice straw. Forest fire has the highest rate of emitting GHGs per weight compared to all other types of biomass especially since the forest fire from this study is in the tropical zone (high-density) (Permadi et al, 2013). Comparing by type (forest and agricultural biomass) is highly necessary for the distinction. For the comparison of transportation sector, the cases of Malaysia (Ong et al., 2011) and Brunei (Dotse et al., 2016) are selected. The number of vehicle of this study, Malaysia’s case, and Brunei’s case are 193,374, 16,813,943, and 399,800. GHGs emitted from transportation sector in Malaysia and Brunei’s cases are around 2 and 4 times higher compared to the results from this study. The gaps of values are not low, but they are in possible ranges. The shortest reason to explain about this difference is the higher gross domestic product (GDP), implying more activities of the country, 166 possibly causing more traffic density. GDP of Thailand is usually >20 % lower than that of Malaysia and Brunei (US-ASEAN, 2016). A lot more accurate analysis and explanation can be obtained if road distance, study size, vehicle type, vehicle year, fuel type, and fuel consumption are interpreted. Most of GHG emissions are produced by fossil fuels generated from transportation as stated by Lee et al. (2017), it constitutes 20 % of 2013 total world CO2 emissions. For industrial sector, due to the variety of industrial types with the varieties of energy type and chemicals used, it is not easy to find a fair comparison. GHGs values are presented in terms of the ratio with its national number, which is 2.5 x 10-4. This low fraction implies that industry is a small economic sector in this agricultural province. For the last sector – livestock, it is compared with Salikneta farm – Philippines’ case. The number of animals for this study and Philippines’ case are 19,275 and 726 heads. The gap of GHG values is about 194 times (6.9 and 0.04 t CO2-eq per head for this study and Philippines’ case). The reason of this big gap is the animal type, especially for cow – the major contributor to GWP (Lingad et al., 2014). The number of cow for this study and Philippines’ case are 747 and 6 heads (124.5 times – close value to the gap of GHGs). Even this is not a fair comparison either, this analysis emphasises the significant release of GHGs from cow. 4. Conclusions This paper focuses on illustrating GHG emissions from rice cultivation, biomass burning, road transportation, industry and livestock – considered as major contributors in Phayao Province, Thailand – from 2012 - 2013. Almost 90 % of GHG emissions were emitted from agricultural sector (biomass open burning and paddy cultivation) even though the data in this part are incomplete compared to other sectors. From this study, the initial and most effective mitigation should be the control of open burning which is the biggest contributor to GWP. If the control is successful, the side benefit is to control smog problem that is a serious environmental problem in ASEAN. The verification of investigation is also performed but due to space constraint, more data and analysis are necessary for the comprehensive explanation and reliability before any further mitigation is initiated. Acknowledgments The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Siratat Pradit, Teerawalee Panyarattanachai, Siriruk Pimmasarn, Nakarin Chaikaew, Nannaphat Manosuwan, Punnakan Suansawan, Phankaseam Phimphisarn, Patipat Vongruang and Teva Muenchan in conducting this research. References Andreae M.O., Merlet P., 2001, Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 15(4), 955-966. Arunrat N., Wang C., Pumijumnong N., 2016, Alternative cropping systems for greenhouse gases mitigation in rice field: a case study in Phichit province of Thailand, Journal of Cleaner Production, 133, 657–671. Bordoff J., 2016, How agriculture can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, The Wall Street Journal accessed 05.07.2017. Delafield A., 2015, Implementation of UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol and CDM in Vietnam accessed 10.04.2017. DOAE (Department of Agricultural Extension), 2011, Performance Report for the Registration of Rice Growers 10.8.2011 (in Thai). DOH (Department of Highway), 2012, Traffic count data, Dohphrae accessed 09.07.2012 (in Thai). Dotse S.Q., Dagar L., Petra M.I., De Silva L.C., 2016, Evaluation of national emissions inventories of anthropogenic air pollutants for Brunei Darussalam, Atmospheric Environment, 133, 81-92. DLT (Department of Land Transport), 2012, Car registration, Phayao Provincial Transport Office accessed 10.07.2012 (in Thai). ESMAP (Energy Sector Management Assistance Program), 2009, Developing Integrated Emission Strategies for Existing Land Transport (DIESEL) Bangkok, Thailand, United Nation of Development Program (UNDP) and World Bank. Guo J., Song Z., Zhu Y., Wei W., Li S., Yu Y., 2017, The characteristics of yield-scaled methane emission from paddy field in recent 35-year in china: A meta-analysis, Journal of Cleaner Production, 161, 1044-1050. Klemeš J.J., Liu X., Varbanova P.S., 2017, Virtual greenhouse gas and water footprints reduction: emissions, effluents and water flows embodied in international trade, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 56, 55-60, DOI: 10.3303/CET1756010. 167 HPD (Highway Police Division), 2012, Highway District Police Station 5 Operation Division 5 accessed 29.07.2012. Huang X., Li M., Li J., Song Y., 2012, A high-resolution emission inventory of crop burning in fields in china based on modis thermal anomalies/fire products, Atmospheric Environment, 50, 9–15. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), 2006, Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories accessed 10.10.2016. Kanabkaew T., Oanh N.T.K., 2011, Development of spatial and temporal emission inventory for crop residue field burning, Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 16(5), 453–464. Leggett J.A., 2015, Greenhouse Gas Pledges by Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change accessed 07.07.2017. Lingad S.J., Fuentebella V.A., Lee A., 2014, The Impacts of Agricultural Carbon Footprint in Salikneta, San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan, DLSU Research Congress, 6th-8th March, Manila, Philippines. MOE (Ministry of Energy), 2015, Report for fuel use of Thailand accessed 09.12.2015 (in Thai). Muenchan T., Pimonsree S., 2012, The Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Enteric Fermentation and Manure Management of Livestock Farms in Phayao province, Master Thesis, University of Phayao, Thailand (in Thai). NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), 2012, Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) accessed 02.02.2012. NESDB (National Economic and Social Development Board), 2013, Gross Regional Product and Gross Provincial Product accessed 28.10.2017. NSO (National Statistics Office), 2013, Provincial Statistic Report accessed 28.10.2017 (in Thai). OAE (Office of Agricultural Economics), 2015, Agricultural Statistics of Thailand 2015 accessed 10.06.2017 (in Thai). ONEP (Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning), 2015a, Thailand’s First Biennial Update Report Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning, Bangkok, Thailand. ONEP (Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning), 2015b, Thailand’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning, Bangkok, Thailand. Ong H.C., Mahlia T.M.I., Masjuki H.H., 2011, A Review on emissions and mitigation strategies for road transport in Malaysia, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15, 3516–3522. Permadi D.A., Oanh N.T.K., 2013, Assessment of biomass open burning emissions in Indonesia and potential climate forcing impact, Atmospheric Environment, 78, 250–258. PIO (Phayao Province Industry Office), 2012, Production Capacity and Pollution Control Technology accessed 19.03.2012 Pimmasarn S., Chaikaew N., Pimonsree S., 2013, Estimating methane emissions from rice fields in Phayao province, Naresuan Phayao Journal, 6(2), 116-127 (in Thai). Prasad P.V.V., Thomas J.M.G., Narayanan S, 2017, Plants and the Environment: Global Warming Effects, Encyclopedia of Applied Plant Sciences, Elsevier, Manhattan, USA. Prueksakorn K., Keson J., Wongsai S., Wongsai N., Sari E.V., 2017, Estimation of carbon stocks from land-use change due to tourism in Phuket Island, Thailand, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 56, 331-336, DOI: 10.3303/CET1756056. Shukun W., Yanhua Z, 2014, An Analysis of the Impact of Guangxi Agricultural Finance, Loan and Insurance on the Trade between Guangxi and CAFTA accessed 06.06.2017. Song J., Niu B., Wang D., Zhang F., 2017, Quantifying the measurement uncertainty of the nopaline synthase terminator in mixed samples of genetically modified rice using a bottom-up approach, Food Control, 73, 1548–1555. Lee C.T., Hashim H., Ho C.S., Fan Y.V., Klemeš J.J., 2017, Sustaining the low-carbon emission development in Asia and beyond: sustainable energy, water, transportation and low-carbon emission technology, Journal of Cleaner Production, 146, 1-13. Torbick N., Salas W., Chowdhury D., Ingraham P., Trinh M., 2017, Mapping rice greenhouse gas emissions in the Red River Delta, Vietnam, Carbon Management, 99-108. US-ASEAN, 2016, Growth Projections, ASEAN Matters for America – America Matters for ASEAN, US-ASEAN Business Council, INC. accessed 03.05.2017 US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency), 2005, Emissions factors & AP-42, Technology Transfer Network Clearinghouse for Inventories & Emissions Factors, US EPA, USA. 168