Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Global warming potential of intensive wheat production in the Yaqui

Valley, Mexico: a resource for the design of localized mitigation
strategies
Mara Fernanda Lares-Orozco a, Agustn Robles-Mora a, *, Enrico A. Yepez a,
Robert M. Handler b
a
b

n, Sonora, 85130, Mexico

Department of Water and Environmental Sciences, Technological Institute of Sonora, 5 de Febrero 818 Sur, Cd. Obrego
Sustainable Futures Institute, Michigan Technological University, 1400 Townsend Dr., Houghton, MI, 49931, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 10 September 2015
Received in revised form
14 March 2016
Accepted 17 March 2016
Available online 8 April 2016

A reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from productive activities can contribute to climate
change mitigation by diminishing the future impacts on natural and socioeconomic systems. Nitrous
oxide is one of the most important GHGs and agriculture represents its main anthropogenic source.
Using a standardized life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, this study aims to identify and quantify
the GHG emissions associated with the different stages of wheat production using local information to
develop localized climate change mitigation strategies in one of the most intensive agricultural areas in
the world. A set of mitigation scenarios created based on inputs and information obtained directly from
producer's associations and farmers were evaluated. These scenarios range from the traditional approaches to the more innovative strategies currently being applied. They are considered to maintain the
same yields considering changes mainly in fertilization, tillage and machinery efciency. We found that
the main source of GHGs in wheat production in the Yaqui Valley is fertilizing, with an average of 83% of
the life cycle emissions in all the production scenarios proposed. The second contributing activity is
tillage, accounting for 13% of Global Warming Potential (GWP) in conventional systems and 1% with no
tillage strategies. Results show that the manufacture of fertilizers accounted for 42% of the fertilizing
emissions and 35% of the total life cycle emissions of wheat. In addition, by using more efcient tractors
that decreased diesel inputs, emissions from conventional tillage can be reduced by 33% and emissions
from no tillage can be reduced by 24%. The application of the LCA methodology allowed providing a more
detailed quantication of the GHG and environmental impacts of different wheat production processes.
Compared to other studies, the mitigation strategies developed from this work have a better chance of
being adopted by producers because there were developed based on the actual practices proposed by the
farmers and consider existing approaches currently being promoted by producer's associations for cost
reduction purposes. In this sense, the results of this LCA suggest that implementation of innovation
strategies in fertilizing, tillage, and machinery efciency can both reduce costs and mitigate GHG
emissions in intensive wheat production systems all over the world.
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Life cycle assessment (LCA)
Carbon footprint
Greenhouse gas emissions
Tillage strategies
Nitrogen fertilization
Intensive wheat production

1. Introduction
Anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHGs) are considered to be
the main contributor in the increase of radiative forcing (RF)1 over

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: agustin.robles@itson.edu.mx (A. Robles-Mora).
1
Radiative forcing is the change in energy ux caused by a driver and is calculated at the tropopause or at the top of the atmosphere in watts per square meter
(W m
2) (IPCC, 2013).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.128
0959-6526/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

the last century. The raised RF has led to a considerable uptake of

energy by the earth's climate system, which is linked directly to the
warming of the atmosphere and ocean, loss of ice and snow, rise of
sea levels and the changes in the global water cycle (IPCC, 2013). Of
the different GHGs in the atmosphere, carbon dioxide (CO2) is the
largest contributor accounting for approximately 76% of the total.
However, other important GHGs are methane (CH4) and nitrous
oxide (N2O) which account for 16 and 6.2% of the emissions
respectively (IPCC, 2013). Combined together, these three GHGs
account for about 98% of the total GHGs in the atmosphere. N2O is

M.F. Lares-Orozco et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

considered a very important GHG because it has a lifetime of 121

years in the atmosphere and 264 times more global warming potential than CO2 (IPCC, 2013). N2O not only contributes to global
warming, but also leads to the depletion of stratospheric ozone
(Crutzen, 1970; Ravishankara et al., 2009; Rowland, 2006). Agriculture is the largest anthropogenic source of N2O (Bouwman et al.,
2002b; IPCC, 2013; Reay et al., 2012), with the application of nitrogen fertilizers being the main source of generation (Adom et al.,
2012; Ahrens et al., 2008; Matson, 2012).
Despite the anthropogenic impacts associated to agriculture,
this activity is a critical component of any nation's economic
development and one of the keys to attain global food security. It is
the major land use across the world with more than 1.5 billion
hectares (around 12% of the world's land area) being harvested each
year to fulll the needs of the growing population (FAO, 2013).
However, providing access to food at the global scale is a challenge
because current food production rates are not keeping pace with
ongoing population growth. This situation has led to a reduction in
the private and public grain reserves (Godfray et al., 2010; Howden
et al., 2007; Schmidhuber and Tubiello, 2007). Currently, cereals
alone provide around 50% of world food calories and since the
Green Revolution,2 the world has witnessed a slow growth in their
production (Fischer et al., 2014). Given that a 44% increase in the
demand of cereals is projected from 2005 to 2050, in order to
supply this demand, production will have to grow by 60% from 2010
to 2050 (Alexandratos and Bruinsma, 2012; Fischer et al., 2014). The
increase in cereal production will likely come from an increase in
both crop area and yields. However, a considerable expansion of
agriculture areas worldwide is difcult given its current extension
and these expansions will come with a signicant risk of damage
the remaining natural ecosystems. In that sense, future agricultural
growth should rely more on higher productivity through increased
yields rather than promoting the expansion of crop area (Fischer
et al., 2014; Lobell et al., 2005).
The agriculture, forestry and other land use sector (AFOLU), as
determined by the IPCC, contribute a quarter of the global GHG
emissions, with agriculture generating an estimated global average
of 5.0e5.8 Gt CO2 eq yr
1 (IPCC, 2014b). Reaching their maximum
potential yield is the main goal of most farming systems in the
world and is the reason for the existence of several agricultural
research centers, such as the International Maize and Wheat
Improvement Center (CIMMYT). A more intensive agricultural
production system can relieve pressure on land expansion, however, it will require higher inputs (FAO, 2013). Intensication of
agricultural activities requires increasing the use of fertilizers,
machinery, pesticides, water and transportation in order to achieve
higher yields. Implementing this type of systems may improve
yields, but there are severe environmental and public health costs
associated with these practices (Gregory et al., 2002; Tilman et al.,
2002). Unsustainable intensive agricultural systems can result in
environmental impacts such as soil erosion and impacts on soil
properties (Wright and Hons, 2005), depletion of water resources
(Ward and Pulido-Velazquez, 2008), impact on water quality (i.e.
eutrophication, acidication, contamination by heavy metals and
agrochemicals) (Ahrens et al., 2008; Vitousek et al., 2009), contribution to climate change through GHG emissions (Bouwman et al.,
2002a; Burney et al., 2010) as well as impacts on human
health associated with application of pesticides (Mostafalou
and Abdollahi, 2013; Weisenburger, 1993), heavy metals (Meza-

2
The Green Revolution refers to the period of dramatic increase in wheat and
rice production in Asia in the 1960s with the introduction of high-yielding semidwarf varieties of these crops and the use of nitrogen fertilizers, irrigation and
pesticides (Fischer et al., 2014; Matson, 2012).

523

Montenegro et al., 2013), nitrate and nitrite contamination

(Jamaludin et al., 2013) and tropospheric ozone formation (Shindell
et al., 2012). In order to reach a sustainable intensication, innovation strategies should be implemented to both improve the
system's efciency and to reduce its environmental and public
health impacts (FAO, 2013; Godfray et al., 2010; Matson, 2012;
Tscharntke et al., 2012).
A rst step in developing innovation strategies is to quantify the
GHGs and environmental impacts associated with agricultural
practices throughout the world and particularly in areas where
intensive production is taking place. Some regions have a greater
contribution to agriculture, such as the state of Sonora located in
northwest Mexico. According to Mexico's National GHG Inventory
from 1990 to 2010, agriculture accounted for 12.3% (92.18 Million
tons (Mt) CO2 eq) of the country's GHG emissions (CICC, 2012). In
Sonora, this percentage climbs to 17.5% (3.7 Mt CO2 eq) highlighting

n Anaya et al.,
the relevance of agriculture in this region (Chaco
2010). Sonora is the main wheat producer in Mexico. With
approximately 305,000 irrigated hectares, the state of Sonora alone
produces more than 2 million tons, 62.2% of the country's total
(INEGI, 2014b). However, due to the wide scope of the existing GHG
inventories, the share of emissions this intensive wheat production
contributes to the state's inventory is unknown and therefore the
design of mitigation strategies is restricted to a generalized regional
scale. Using a standardized Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology, this study aims to identify and quantify the GHG emissions
associated with different stages of wheat production using local
information to develop localized climate change mitigation strategies in one of the most intensive agricultural areas in the world.
LCAs are commonly used to assess environmental impacts of a

e, 2002).
product or process throughout the stages of its life (Guine
By developing a LCA, all of the emissions and impacts of the
analyzed process can be both identied and quantied for each
activity or stage. LCAs have been widely used for GHG emissions in
farming systems to assess the global warming potential (GWP) in
different production stages or activities (Adom et al., 2012; Biswas
et al., 2008; Brentrup et al., 2004a; Fallahpour et al., 2012;
Meisterling et al., 2009; Schmidt, 2008). Several authors have
applied the LCA methodology to estimate emissions for wheat
production in different environments. Most studies have focused
on either fertilization strategies (Brentrup et al., 2004b; Charles
et al., 2006; Fallahpour et al., 2012; Goglio et al., 2014, 2012) or
soil preparation practices (Srensen et al., 2014; Zaher et al., 2013).
Until very recently, LCAs have started to be applied using approaches for analyzing wheat production management scenarios
that combine changes in tillage and fertilization strategies. For
example, Wang et al. (2015) analyzed a winter wheatesummer
maize rotation in the North China Plains to identify the best management practices for that region. This study considered different
fertilizing, tillage, and irrigation scenarios, but did not analyze the
interactions between these components. Their results indicate that
the main contribution of emissions came from irrigation, attributed
to the high amount of electricity required for pumping water.
Another recent study conducted by Alhajj Ali et al. (2015) analyzed
experimental wheat production in a wheatefaba bean rotation
cycle in Italy with the goal of optimizing the environmental performance of wheat production. The LCA on wheat production
conducted by these authors considered different tillage systems
combined with different fertilization rates. Although both of these
recent studies provide relevant information, the results do not
apply to many other regions of the world because of the variable
climate and environmental conditions in which wheat is produced.
For example, the study conducted in North China evaluated the
production of wheat irrigated primarily with groundwater in
comparison with other regions that rely mostly of surface water.

524

M.F. Lares-Orozco et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

The case study of Alhajj Ali et al. (2015) in Italy used fertilization
strategies that are considerably lower in comparison with most
regions in the world (0, 30, 60 and 90 kg N ha
1). This is believed to
be a result of the temperate climate that allows producers in that
region to obtain higher yields with much lower inputs. Both of
these studies provide a new perspective on how to optimize wheat
production to minimize GHGs. However, their results can't be
extrapolated to other regions because of the remarkable differences
in climate conditions and production characteristics.
Currently, there are no preexisting studies on the design of
localized GHG mitigation strategies for intensive agriculture in
Mexico using a LCA approach. The central goal of this work is to
apply the LCA methodology to identify and quantify the GHG
emissions associated to the different stages of the intensive wheat
production practices in northwest Mexico. To achieve this, this
study evaluated the GWP of different mitigation scenarios that
were created based on inputs and information obtained directly
from wheat producer's associations and farmers. These scenarios
ranged from the traditional to the more innovative strategies
currently being applied in the largest wheat producing irrigation
district in Mexico (the Yaqui Valley). The scenarios that were
created considered changes in fertilization, tillage strategies and
machinery efciency combined to maintain the same crop yields.
This approach allowed researchers to identify the main processes
contributing to agriculture's GHG emissions and to present viable
alternatives that can be adopted by farmers. The results of this
analysis will be a useful resource in the design of adequate and
specic mitigation strategies for local wheat producers and other
regions with similar climate and wheat production characteristics
in the world.
2. Methods
2.1. Study region
The Yaqui Valley is one of the largest irrigation districts in
Mexico. Located in the southern region of the state of Sonora, it is
an irrigated valley inside the Yaqui River Basin (Fig. 1). Known as
the birthplace of the Green Revolution, the Yaqui Valley has been
the focus of agricultural studies since the 1950s. This region is
representative of the global wheat mega-environment 1 (WME1),
as established by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement
Center (CIMMYT). The WME1 occupies approximately 34 Million
hectares in the developing world and is considered the most
important WME for food security reasons (Fischer et al., 2014). Each
year, in the Yaqui Valley around 160,000 ha of wheat are harvested,
representing the main economic activity in the region. Wheat
production in this area is one of the most intensive agricultural
activities in the world. The yields have increased dramatically since
1950 from 1.4 to 7.2 tons per hectare in the 2011e2012 cycle
(Fischer et al., 2014). This increase in production comes mostly from
the increased fertilization rates (an average of 250 kg of N ha
1 for
the 2011e2012 cycle) and where more than 50% of the nitrogen is
applied before sowing, causing high volatilization rates (Matson,
2012).
2.2. Goal and scope
Following the ISO 14040 (ISO, 2006) guidelines, a life cycle
assessment (LCA) was conducted for different wheat production
strategies in the Yaqui Valley. The goal of the LCA was to determine
the GWP for different wheat production strategies, ranging from
conventional to the more innovative methods employed in the
Yaqui Valley. Eight different scenarios were created using information from the local producers (Table 1). The conventional

practices for the region are represented in the rst scenario (Scenario 1). The rest of the scenarios proposed represent a certain level
of innovation according to what the producers themselves
considered to be a realistic possibility to change their practices.
These innovative strategies were based primarily on the reduction
of costs and their potential to mitigate GHGs. By analyzing the
proposed scenarios, this study aims to create a decision-making
framework that provides producers and policymakers with accurate local information for the design of adequate mitigation strategies for the Yaqui Valley. The producers will also be able to select
from the strategies proposed according to the adequacy of how
they are able to implement them or invest to follow them.
2.2.1. Functional unit
The functional unit of the study is 1 ha of wheat with an average
yield of 6.5 ton ha
1 for all the scenarios analyzed. The GWP per ton
of wheat was also calculated to enable comparisons with other
studies.
2.2.2. System boundaries
The diagram in Fig. 2 shows the system boundaries using a
cradle-to-farm gate scope. The processes included in the analysis
comprise the extraction, processing, manufacturing and transport
of materials (seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, energy and water) and
infrastructure (tractors, agricultural implements and infrastructure) and all the eld activities involved in the production and
harvest of wheat (tillage, fertilization, sowing, mechanical and
chemical protection, irrigation and harvesting).
2.2.3. Data sources and quality
Input and eld production information was obtained from the
data for the production and the reduction cost strategies proposed
by the Association of Producer Organizations of Southern Sonora
(AOASS) for the 2013e2014 cycle (AOASS, 2014). Currently around
1440 producers are afliated to AOASS representing 136,000 ha in
southern Sonora and approximately 479,500 tons of wheat each
year. The inputs and yields for this cycle are representative of the
past ve cycles in the Yaqui Valley (average 6.45 ton ha
1 from
2008 to 2013). Data for pre-farm activities and processes were
obtained from Ecoinvent 3 database (Weidema et al., 2013), modied to represent local production activities where possible.
2.3. Life cycle inventory
The main focus of the analysis is on the discretization of the
GWP of the different agricultural activities and the changes simulated for the eight production scenarios presented in Table 1.
2.3.1. Tillage systems and fuel consumption
The soil preparation scenarios analyzed were a traditional and a
no tillage system. The traditional tillage system comprises a series
of soil preparation activities that can vary between producers and
cycles. Table 2 (section a) shows the activities included in conventional tillage strategies and the number of times each activity is
carried out per cycle. For example, in a conventional tillage, harrowing is conducted up to three times per cycle: the rst time right
after the previous harvesting season, the second right after the
rainy season (summer) to avoid soil compaction, and a nal harrow
to incorporate the fertilizer applied (typically before sowing using a
broadcaster). It also includes a single plowing to loosen soil and for
weed control, rolling to even the surface and the creation of furrows in the eld. Additional to these activities, two cultivating labors to help control weeds are also considered in the conventional
tillage strategy. In contrast, the no tillage system considers only an

M.F. Lares-Orozco et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

525

Fig. 1. Yaqui Valley Irrigation District located in north western Mexico, an area of 232,500 ha that currently devotes an average of 160,000 ha for wheat production.

Table 1
Wheat production scenarios analyzed for the Yaqui Valley. Scenario 1 represents the
conventional production practices and Scenario 8 the most innovative practices
proposed by producers.
Scenario

Fertilizationa

Tillageb

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

High fertilization
High fertilization
High fertilization
High fertilization
Low fertilization
Low fertilization
Low fertilization
Low fertilization

Conventional
Conventional
No tillage
No tillage
Conventional
Conventional
No tillage
No tillage

a
b
c

Machineryc
tillage
tillage

tillage
tillage

Old generation tractor

New generation tractor
Old generation tractor
New generation tractor
Old generation tractor
New generation tractor
Old generation tractor
New generation tractor

HF high fertilization rates; LF low fertilization rates.

CT conventional tillage; NT no tillage.
OGT old generation tractor; NGT new generation tractor.

herbicide application to limit weed growth without any of the

tillage activities previously described.
The fuel consumption considered for each eld operation varies
according to the agricultural operation itself and the tractor that is
being used in each scenario. Each eld operation has a different fuel
consumption according to the specic power requirements, this is
represented by the number of hectares a tractor can perform of
each operation per hour (ha h
1). To assess the impact of machinery
use in production of wheat, two different tractors of 120 H.P. each
were considered. The tractors evaluated are an old generation
tractor (OGT) with an average fuel consumption of 29 L per hour
and a new generation tractor (NGT) with an average consumption

s-Jime

nez et al., 2011). The
rate of 15 L per hour (AOASS, 2014; Corte
fuel consumption rates (FCR) (kg ha
1), shown in Table 2, were
calculated by multiplying the amount of hectares worked per hour

for each process (ha h
1), the tractor's consumption rate (lt h
1)
and the fuel density (kg lt
1). The total consumption TC (kg ha
1)
for each labor was obtained by multiplying the FCR by the number
of times each activity is performed in each process. Emissions from
fuel combustion were estimated using emission factors from the
combustion of diesel by agricultural machinery from literature
(IPCC, 2006; Weidema et al., 2013). Using the total consumption
and the combustion emissions estimated, the standard global
processes of agricultural operations from Ecoinvent 3 were modied
to reect the agricultural operations in the Yaqui Valley.
2.3.2. Fertilization
Wheat production in the Yaqui Valley is well known for the high
application rates of inorganic fertilizers. Urea (CO(NH2)2), monoammonium phosphate ((NH4)H2PO4) and ammonia (NH3) are the
main fertilizers applied in the valley. More than 50% of the nitrogen
is applied before sowing and the rest is applied along with the irrigations as shown in Table 3. Two fertilizing strategies were
considered, a conventional fertilization (High Fertilization e HF)
and an innovation strategy with lower nitrogen input (Low Fertilization e LF). The amounts of inorganic fertilizer applied at each
stage as well as the nitrogen content on each strategy (Table 3)
were obtained from the data for the 2013e2014 production cycle
information and the cost reduction strategies proposed by AOASS
(AOASS, 2014). The fertilization strategy considered in this study is
high (296.6 kg N ha
1) when compared to fertilization rates in
other regions in the world that range from 90 to 240 kg N ha
1
(Alhajj Ali et al., 2015; Brentrup et al., 2004a; Charles et al., 2006;
Fallahpour et al., 2012; Goglio et al., 2012; Srensen et al., 2014;
Wang et al., 2015). The amounts considered here are an average
of the nitrogen based fertilizers applied by the producers in the
Yaqui Valley (AOASS, 2014; Fischer et al., 2014). The innovation

526

M.F. Lares-Orozco et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

Fig. 2. System boundaries for the LCA including wheat production processes, inputs, output.

Table 2
Fuel consumption for each labor activity in the wheat production system for an old generation tractor (OGT), a new generation tractor (NGT).
Field operations

Conventional tillage
No. of
times

a) Soil Preparation
Harrowing
Plowing
Rolling
Furrowing
Cultivating
Terrestrial chemical
protection
b) Other Activities
Fertilizing
Sowing
Furrow covering
Construction of
irrigation canals
Ridge removal
Terrestrial chemical
protection
Combine harvesting
Total
a
b

No tillage

OGT
a

FCR (kg ha

NGT

1

1

TC (kg ha

1

FCR (kg ha

TC (kg ha

1

No. of
times

OGT
a

NGT

1

FCR (kg ha

3
1
1
1
2
0

16.7
35.8
8.4
8.4
8.4
5

50.1
35.8
8.4
8.4
16.8
0

8.7
18.4
4.3
4.3
4.3
2.6

26.1
18.4
4.3
4.3
8.6
0

0
0
0
0
0
1

16.7
35.8
8.4
8.4
8.4
5

1
1
1
1

8.4
8.4
8.4
4.2

8.4
8.4
8.4
4.2

4.3
4.3
4.3
2.2

4.3
4.3
4.3
2.2

1
1
1
1

8.4
8.4
8.4
4.2

1
1

4.2
5

4.2
5

2.2
2.6

2.2
2.6

1
1

14.4

14.4
172.5

14.4

14.4
96

1

TC (kg ha
0
0
0
0
0
5

FCRa (kg ha
1)

TCb (kg ha
1)

8.7
18.4
4.3
4.3
4.3
2.6

0
0
0
0
0
2.6

8.4
8.4
8.4
4.2

4.3
4.3
4.3
2.2

4.3
4.3
4.3
2.2

4.2
5

4.2
5

2.2
2.6

2.2
2.6

14.4

14.4
58

14.4

14.4
36.9

FCR Fuel Consumption Rate.

TC Total Consumption Rate.

Table 3
Fertilizer application rates per hectare in the different production stages of wheat in the Yaqui Valley for a conventional (HF) and an innovative (LF) fertilization strategies.
Stage

Pre-sowing
Pre-sowing
1st Irrigation
2nd Irrigation
Total

Product

Monoammonium phosphate (MAP)

Urea
Ammonia
Ammonia

Conventional (HF)

Innovation (LF)

kg ha
1

[N]

kg N ha
1

kg ha
1

[N]

kg N ha
1

100
300
100
80

11%
46%
82%
82%

11
138
82
65.6
296.6

100
200
80
40

11%
46%
82%
82%

11
92
65.6
32.8
201.4

strategy proposes lower nitrogen rates (201.4 kg N ha
1) maintaining the same yields, which has been deemed feasible by prior

s-Jime

nez et al., 2011; Fischer et al., 2014; Ortizresearch (Corte
Monasterio and Raun, 2007). Information for fertilizer production
was assessed using the Ecoinvent 3 database. Table 3 summarizes
the different fertilizer application rates used in this study for the
different processes in the production of wheat in the Yaqui Valley.

2.3.3. Other processes

Other processes included in the analyses were sowing, chemical protection application, irrigation and harvesting. For sowing,
the amount of seeds applied per hectare differs between the
different production scenarios being evaluated. The amount of
seeds considered were 180 kg ha
1 for the conventional tillage
system and 120 kg ha
1 applied in the no tillage system. An

M.F. Lares-Orozco et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

adequate seed density can help reduce costs, maintain yields,

prevent diseases and reduce effects of weeds (Rawson and

mez-Macpherson, 2000). Chemical protection, irrigation and
Go
harvesting did not vary between production scenarios and were
therefore considered the same for every scenario analyzed. The
most common pesticides used for chemical protection are
described in Table 4. The active ingredients for each pesticide
were selected from the Ecoinvent 3 database; when they were not
available, the chemical class was used to represent the pesticide
applied. Chemical protection process considers one terrestrial
application of pesticides and three air applications (crop dusting).
An average fuel consumption rate for crop dusting was obtained
from producers and from the crop dusting associations

n de Aerofumigadores Unidos del Yaqui y Mayo, pers.
(Asociacio
comm., 2014). Emissions from crop dusting were estimated using
factors from literature (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District, 2013). Irrigation in the Yaqui Valley is mostly by gravity
irrigation systems with supercial water coming from an upstream reservoir which is part of the Yaqui River Basin. An amount
of 7500 m3 of water per hectare is considered distributed in four
irrigations, one when sowing and three complementary in other
stages. Harvesting is analyzed using a combined harvester with a
fuel consumption of 25 L per hour (AOASS, 2014).
2.3.4. Direct eld emissions
Emissions to air derived from the use of inorganic fertilizers
include ammonia (NH3), nitrous oxide (N2O), nitrogen oxides (NOx)
and CO2 from urea. Because of the lack of regional emission factors,
emissions of N2O, and CO2 from urea were estimated using the IPCC
2006 guidelines with an emission factor of 1% of the applied N to
soils for direct N2O emissions and 20% of the urea for the CO2
emissions. Ammonia (NH3) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions
were estimated using the emission factors from Nemecek and
Schnetzer (2011). Agricultural emissions to water include phosphorus (P) from erosion, phosphate (PO4) from runoff and from
lixiviation, nitrate (NO3) leaching and heavy metal emissions from
lixiviation and erosion. Emissions to soils considered include heavy
metals and pesticides. Both emissions to water and soil were estimated using the methodologies proposed in Nemecek and
Schnetzer (2011).

527

3.1.1. Tillage and fuel consumption

The GWP for the life cycle of the tillage activities was analyzed
by itself to assess the contribution of innovative soil preparation
strategies and machineries in mitigating GHG emissions. The four
soil preparation strategies proposed were (a)conventional tillage
with an old generation tractor (CT [OGT]); (b)conventional tillage
with a new generation tractor (CT [NGT]); (c)no tillage with an old
generation tractor (NT [OGT]) and (d)no tillage with a new generation tractor (NT [NGT]). Soil preparation processes contribute an
average of 560 kg CO2 eq ha
1 in conventional tillage systems
compared to only 34 kg CO2 eq in the no tillage systems. Fig. 3
shows the contribution of GHG emissions for each labor activity
to this stage. No-till systems require an herbicide application
instead of all the other activities. This translates to an overall
reduction of 94% of the stage emissions when using the no tillage
system regardless of the type of tractor being used. This decrease is
attributed to the high amount of fossil fuels required in the conventional tillage operations as described in Section 2.3.1. At the
same time, by increasing the efciency of the machinery used, the
amount of fossil fuels required and the GHG emissions associated
with combustion decreases. By switching from an old generation
tractor to a newer one the fuel consumption in soil preparation
activities is 48% lower. Because of the decrease in diesel inputs,
emissions from conventional tillage can be reduced by 33% and
emissions from no tillage can be reduced by 24% only by using more
efcient tractors.
3.1.2. Fertilization
Life cycle GHG emissions from fertilization for 1 ha of wheat are
shown in Fig. 4. The results show that the GWP contribution for this
stage using a conventional fertilization rate (296.6 kg N ha
1) is
3.87 ton CO2 eq ha
1. When using a lower fertilization rate

3. Results
3.1. Life cycle impact assessment (GWP)
The GWP in kg CO2 eq (carbon dioxide equivalents) per hectare
of wheat for the main contributing stages and for the eight scenarios evaluated was obtained using the characterization factors

Consultants,
from the method IPCC, 2013 100a in SimaPro 8 (PRE
2014). To obtain the GWP of the wheat production process, all the
air emissions listed in the inventory are multiplied with the characterization factors of the direct GWP values in a timeframe of 100
years for climate-active chemicals on the basis of IPCC 2007 Fifth
Assessment Report.

Fig. 3. GWP per hectare for the tillage strategies analyzed with different tractors.
CT[OGT]: conventional tillage with an old generation tractor; CT[NGT]: conventional tillage with a new generation tractor; NT[OGT]: no tillage with an old generation tractor and NT[NGT]: no tillage with new generation tractor.

Table 4
Chemical protection products used for the LCA for 1 ha of wheat in the Yaqui Valley.

Insecticide
Herbicide
Herbicide
Fungicide
Herbicide

Product

Active ingredient

Applied product

Dimetoato 400 CE
Topik 240 EC
Situi
Folicur 250 EW
Faena

Dimethoate
Clodinafop-propargyl cloquintocet-mexyl
Metsulfuron methyl thifensulfuron methyl
Tebuconazole
Glyphosate

2 lt ha
1
1 lt ha
1
0.03 kg ha
1
1 lt ha
1
3 lt ha
1

528

M.F. Lares-Orozco et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

Table 6
Results of the GWP per hectare and per ton of wheat for each scenario analyzed. The
values in bold are the results for Scenario #1 and Scenario #8. Yield is 6.5 ton ha
1 in
all the scenarios.

Fig. 4. Contribution of GWP from each activity to the fertilization stage in both
fertilizing strategies.

(201.4 kg N ha
1) the amount descends to 2.82 ton CO2 eq ha
1. This
reects in a reduction of 27% of the fertilization stage emissions.
The main contribution to the fertilizing stage comes from soil
emissions (1.91 0.32 ton CO2 eq ha
1) accounting for 57% of the
stage GHG emissions. However, emissions from the production of
the fertilizers alone (1.4 0.23 ton CO2 eq ha
1) represent 42% of
the stage GWP. Although fertilizers are not produced in the Yaqui
Valley, high amounts of energy are required for their
manufacturing, coming mainly from natural gas usage. These
emissions contribute considerably to the life cycle of every hectare
of wheat produced.
3.1.3. Production scenarios
The overall results of the life cycle assessment in terms of the
GWP per hectare and per ton of wheat for each scenario analyzed
are presented in Tables 5 and 6. As expected, the conventional
scenario (1) has the highest GWP of all. The most innovative scenario of wheat production is scenario 8 and considers lower
fertilization rates, a no tillage system and the use of new generation
tractors in all agricultural activities. The implementation of these
strategies (scenario 8) can reduce the GWP of wheat by 36%
compared to the scenario 1.
The LCA results (Fig. 5 and Table 5) indicate that the main production activity contributing to wheat's GWP is fertilizing with an
average across all scenarios of 83% (3.35 0.55 ton CO2 eq ha
1) of
emissions, coming mainly from soil emissions and fertilizer production. Soil preparation activities contribute an average of 13%
(0.56 0.13 ton CO2 eq ha
1) for the total GWP when using conventional tillage systems and only 1% (0.034 0.005 ton CO2 eq

Scenario

GWP (kg CO2 eq)

1 ha

1 ton

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

4997.8
4708.8
4316.2
4236.6
3960.9
3672.0
3279.3
3199.8

768.9
724.4
664.0
651.8
609.4
564.9
504.5
492.3

HF CT OGT
HF CT NGT
HF NT OGT
HF NT NGT
LF CT OGT
LF CT NGT
LF NT OGT
LF NT NGT

ha
1) when using no tillage strategies. Other processes have lower

contributions in the GWP. Sowing represents an average of 5.2%
(0.21 0.03 ton CO2 eq ha
1), harvesting accounts for 3.3% of the
emissions (0.13 0.004 ton CO2 eq ha
1) and activities like irrigation and chemical protection contribute to less than 1% of the
GWP (0.029 and 0.034 ton CO2 eq ha
1 respectively).
4. Discussion
4.1. Tillage strategies
Several authors have analyzed the importance of tillage practices in wheat's GWP. Alhajj Ali et al. (2015) performed an LCA on
wheat production in Italy under different management practices.
Their analysis included three different tillage systems (conventional tillage, reduced tillage and no tillage) but didn't consider
different types of tractor. Their results show an average GWP of 1.17
ton CO2 eq ha
1 for conventional tillage systems; 1.12 ton CO2 eq
ha
1 in reduced tillage and 0.83 ton CO2 eq ha
1 in no tillage systems (Alhajj Ali et al., 2015). Compared to the Yaqui Valley, their
results are considerably lower in all the scenarios, mainly because
of the lower nitrogen inputs (0, 30, 60 and 90 kg N ha
1 for their
study compared to our rates of 201.4 and 296.6 kg N ha
1) and the
climatic conditions of the region (temperate climate). Despite the
differences to this region, their results also suggest that no-till
strategies have lower impacts and GHG emissions. Srensen et al.
(2014) presented an LCA emphasizing in comparing different
tillage systems in crop rotation in Denmark. The winter wheat
system evaluated had a fertilizing input of 196 kg N ha
1 and yields
of 6.907 ton ha
1. Results show that the GWP was 655, 589 and
628 kg CO2 eq ton
1 for CT, RT and NT systems respectively. Even
when they attribute the largest change in GHG contribution between tillage methods to carbon mineralization, they found that
compared to the conventional tillage, their energy input was
reduced by 26% when using reduced tillage and 41% with no-till
systems. Goglio et al. (2012) and Zaher et al. (2013) analyzed the

Table 5
Results of the GWP of each production stage for the eight scenarios analyzed. GWP is in kg CO2 eq per hectare of wheat. Soil preparation stage includes cultivating activities;
chemical protection includes both terrestrial an aerial application.
Scenario

GWP of production stages (kg CO2 eq ha
1)

Soil preparation

Fertilizing

Sowing

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

667.46
448.96
38.36
29.21
667.46
448.96
38.36
29.21

3873.75
3858.40
3873.75
3858.40
2836.91
2821.56
2836.91
2821.56

250.41
219.70
197.93
167.22
250.41
219.70
197.93
167.22

(13.4%)
(9.5%)
(0.9%)
(0.7%)
(16.9%)
(12.2%)
(1.2%)
(0.9%)

(77.5%)
(81.9%)
(89.8%)
(91.1%)
(71.6%)
(76.8%)
(86.5%)
(88.2%)

(5.0%)
(4.7%)
(4.6%)
(4.0%)
(6.3%)
(6.0%)
(6.0%)
(5.2%)

Irrigation and drainage

Chemical protection

Harvesting

32.81
25.20
32.81
25.20
32.81
25.20
32.81
25.20

38.80
29.66
38.80
29.66
38.80
29.66
38.80
29.66

134.51
126.90
134.51
126.90
134.51
126.90
134.51
126.90

(0.7%)
(0.5%)
(0.8%)
(0.6%)
(0.8%)
(0.7%)
(1.0%)
(0.8%)

(0.8%)
(0.6%)
(0.9%)
(0.7%)
(1.0%)
(0.8%)
(1.2%)
(0.9%)

(2.7%)
(2.7%)
(3.1%)
(3.0%)
(3.4%)
(3.5%)
(4.1%)
(4.0%)

M.F. Lares-Orozco et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

529

Fig. 5. a) Results for the GWP of each scenario proposed expressed as GWP in kg of CO2 eq; b) Percentage of contribution from each production stage to the GWP of the eight
scenarios.

mitigation potential of reducing tillage practices in dry-land wheat

systems but with no irrigation and found that for their system,
regarding N2O emissions, there are no substantial differences between CT and NT practices. However, converting from CT to NT can
mitigate emissions from fuel usage and increase soil organic carbon
(SOC) sequestration. The potential for reducing energy inputs in
wheat production by implementing reduced and no-tillage strategies has been addressed outside of LCAs by a considerable number
of studies (Arvidsson, 2010; Koga et al., 2003; Mileusni

c et al., 2010;
Safa and Samarasinghe, 2012; Tabatabaeefar et al., 2009). One of
the main differences found in these studies are the effects of tillage
practices in the yields when implementing reduced or no-till
strategies. In this study the tillage strategies proposed are not
considered to have a signicant change in the yields for the Yaqui

s-Jime

nez et al., 2011). Despite of the tillage
Valley region (Corte
strategies used, new technological improvements in machinery can
result in signicantly lower fuel consumption and GHG mitigation.
Here, our analysis found that fuel consumption in conventional
tillage required 48% less fuel (58 kg of diesel) and emissions were
reduced by 33% when using a new generation tractor instead of an
older one. Similarly, Mileusni
c et al. (2010) analyzed fuel consumption in different tillage systems and using different tractors.
Their results indicate that new more efcient tractors can reduce
fuel consumption rates ranging from 6 to 30% depending on the
type of tractor (size engine) and the intensity of the operation.
4.2. Fertilization
Our results indicate that the stage of fertilizing is the largest
source of GHG emissions in wheat's life cycle (83%). Application of
fertilizers in soils accounted for 57% of the stage GHG emissions and
47% of the wheat's life cycle GWP. Emissions from the production of
the fertilizers represent 42% of the stage GHG emissions and 35% of
the total GWP. Similar to our results, other authors have reported
that the main contribution to GWP comes from fertilizing. For
example, Wang and Dalal (2015) argue that up to 80% of the life
cycle emissions are accounted by fertilization. They estimate that
between 44 and 48% are associated to N2O emissions. Likewise,
Adom et al. (2012) found that around 65% of the stage emissions
come from eld application of fertilizers and 35% due to fertilizer
manufacture. In agreement to this, Biswas et al. (2008) reported
that the production of fertilizers was the largest source of GHG
emissions in their LCA representing 35% of the GWP. Goglio et al.
(2014) analyzed GHG from different cropping systems and their
results show that increases in fertilization resulted in an increase of
28% of the GWP. The scenarios analyzed in our study suggest that by
reducing the rates of inorganic fertilizer from 296.6 to 201.4 kg of N
ha
1, each hectare of wheat has the potential to mitigate an

estimated amount of 1.59 ton CO2 eq, which represents a 27%

reduction in emissions. In this sense, our results are in accordance
with several studies that identied the relevance of N2O emissions
because of their high inuence on GWP for agriculture activities
throughout the world.
4.3. GWP of wheat production systems
The results shown in Table 5 indicate that the conventional
production scenario S1 with higher fertilization rates
(296.6 kg N ha
1) has a GWP of 769 kg CO2 eq ton
1. This GWP is
similar to the estimates reported by Fallahpour et al. (2012) from
an irrigated wheat system in the semiarid region of Iran where
emissions per ton were approximately 900 kg CO2 eq with an
average yield of 6.27 ton ha
1 and nitrogen inputs of
220e240 kg N ha
1. Results from the more innovative scenarios
evaluated with lower fertilization rates (201.4 kg N ha
1) have an
estimated GWP that ranges from 492 to 609 kg CO2 eq ton
1.
These results are comparable to more efcient wheat production
systems. For example, Brentrup et al. (2004b) analyzed wheat
production systems comparing different nitrogen application
rates in the United Kingdom. In their LCA, the GWP increases
linearly as fertilizing inputs were augmented. Their higher input
scenario (288 kg N ha
1) is comparable to the conventional rates
estimated in this work (296.6 kg N ha
1). However, due to the
weather conditions mostly, the yield obtained in the production
of wheat in their study for higher inputs (9.11 ton ha
1) is
considerably higher compared to the yields obtained historically
in Yaqui Valley (6.5 ton ha
1). For this reason, even when their
GWP per hectare is 4181 kg CO2 eq, because of the high efciency
in the production, the GWP per ton of wheat is only 460 kg CO2 eq
in their study, comparable to our most innovative scenario
analyzed (S8 e 492.3 kg CO2 eq ton
1). Similarly, a recent study
from Wang et al. (2015) analyzing the GWP of wheat production
in North China Plain reported values of GWP per hectare
(2.99e4.59 ton CO2 eq ha
1) comparable to the ones reported in
this study (3.19e4.99 ton CO2 eq ha
1). However, because of the
higher yields of their region, that system is more efcient and
their GWP per ton of wheat is lower than in the Yaqui Valley.
Other studies in more temperate climates have also reported
similar yields to the Yaqui Valley but using considerably lower
fertilization rates (140 kg N ha
1) and an overall GWP of 2417 kg
CO2 eq per hectare or 381 kg CO2 eq per ton of wheat (Charles
et al., 2006). These comparisons reinforce the notion that to
achieve a sustainable intensication of wheat production, any
increase in nitrogen inputs should be accompanied by a considerable increase in wheat yields in order to justify the emissions
per ton of wheat generated.

530

M.F. Lares-Orozco et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

4.4. Proposed GHG mitigation strategies for wheat production in

the Yaqui Valley
Recently, Mexico has been developing its national environmental policy. In 2012 the General Law of Climate Change (LGCC)
was enacted, establishing the obligation by State governments to
design mitigation and adaptation strategies against climate
change. Each state is responsible for the development of a State
Action Plan Against Climate Change (PEACC). The rst step in
developing a PEACC is to identify and estimate GHG emissions
through the creation of a State's GHG Inventory. However, due to
the spatial resolution of available data, the methodologies used in
the inventories were established following the IPCC Guidelines


for National Inventories (Tejeda-Martnez and Conde Alvarez,
2008). These inventories use national and state-specic databases to estimate the region's general GHG emissions. The estimated emissions are not disaggregated by county or crop and the
nitrogen application rate considered is an average per hectare
calculated for the whole state. Despite these limitations, these
inventories are important because they help understand agriculture's actual, historical and projected emissions in the state.
However, their spatial resolution and generalization, constrains
the design of strategies to a wide regional scale, which may not
be representative of the specic production practices in the region. In order for these Action Plans to work as a tool to
adequately adapt to, and mitigate climate change they need to
address real local environmental issues. Thus the importance of
good quality GHG emissions analyses that take into account all
the sources and processes associated to specic relevant local
economic activities. Derived from the LCA for the different scenarios analyzed, we present a summary of the best mitigation
practices that can be applied by producers in the Yaqui Valley and
other WME 1 regions. These proposed strategies can be selected
by producers according to the adequacy of how they are able to
implement or invest in them.
Best management practices to reduce GHG emissions:
1. Optimizing inorganic fertilization. Reducing the rates of application of inorganic fertilizer by 32% (296.6e201.4 kg N ha
1)
has the potential to mitigate an estimated amount of 1.59 ton
CO2 eq per hectare from the wheat's life cycle. This can represent reduction of 27% in overall GHG emissions. Strategies of
nitrogen optimization have been suggested previously by
other authors (Matson, 2012). However, farmers have not yet
adopted this practice throughout the region. Adoption of this
practice will have the biggest impact in the reduction of emissions from intensive agricultural practices. In this study,
our approach was to work alongside the producer's associations
to assess fertilization reductions that are viable for the producers and can be adopted as a mitigation and cost reduction
strategy.
2. The use of no tillage or reduced tillage practices when possible.
In some producing areas, the change from conventional
tillage to no-till or reduced tillage practices doesn't affect
the yields directly. In these areas, changing tillage practices
can help reduced up to 94% of the emissions from soil preparation that represents a 13% reduction of the whole system's
GWP.
3. Investing in more efcient tractors. The use of newer machinery
will have a signicant impact on the reduction of fuel inputs and
emissions with any direct impact on yields. Because of the
decrease in diesel inputs (approximately 48% less), emissions
from conventional tillage can be reduced by 33% and emissions
from no tillage can be reduced by 24% only by using more a new
generation tractor instead of an older one.

4.5. Potential limitations of the study

This study focused on analyzing the potential to mitigate GHGs
by comparing different strategies and practices that have been
implemented or proposed by wheat producers in the Yaqui Valley.
Fertilizing is such an important contributor to GWP and causing
signicant environmental impacts that there is always a need to
improve methods to estimate soil emissions and to trace the nal
fate of the fertilizers. To our knowledge there are no other LCA
studies of wheat production in Mexico or in other parts of LatinAmerica. LCAs of wheat systems have been conducted primarily
in more developed countries with more temperate climates
analyzing highly productive systems. However, because of the lack
of studies conducted in the Yaqui valley or in other lesser developed
areas there are no regional or local emission factors related to fertilizer use. We therefore had to rely on generalized estimates of
N2O emission using an IPCC Tier 1 approach. Also, most of
the Yaqui Valley activities consist of intensive, irrigated and nonrotational wheat production, because of this, no signicant land
use changes were considered and soil organic carbon changes were
considered negligible. However, we recommend that future LCAs in
the Yaqui Valley explore land use changes by incorporating the use
of biogeochemical models (Kim et al., 2009) and in situ measuring
(Biswas et al., 2008; Wang and Dalal, 2015; Wang et al., 2015).
These improvements will allow generating more accurate GHG
estimations from soil emissions in intensive agriculture systems
(Goglio et al., 2015; Reay et al., 2012) compared to this initial highlevel analysis of the region.
5. Conclusions
An LCA was conducted to assess the GWP of intensive wheat
production in Mexico. This approach allowed quantication of the
total GHG emissions associated to different production stages and
to estimate the carbon footprint of wheat production in the Yaqui
Valley and in the state of Sonora under different scenarios. Our
results provide a framework for decision makers and stake
holders to design adequate strategies that can be considered in
the region's climate adaptation and mitigation strategies (PEACCs)
and to help Mexico achieve its climate change mitigation goals.
We found that the main source of GHG in wheat production in the
Yaqui Valley is fertilizing with an average of 83% of the life cycle
emissions in all the production scenarios proposed. The second
contributing activity is tillage accounting for 13% of GWP in conventional systems and 1% with no tillage strategies. Results show
that the manufacture of fertilizers accounted for 42% of the
fertilizing emissions and 35% of the total life cycle emissions of
wheat. Although the fertilizer is not produced in the Yaqui Valley,
producers can indirectly mitigate these emissions by applying
lower and more efcient inputs of inorganic fertilizers. This suggests that the design of mitigation strategies for this region should
focus on optimizing the nitrogen inputs and reducing machinery
use.
Our LCA results can be of use for stakeholders and decision
makers to visualize the impact of wheat production beyond the
activities realized directly on the eld. Intensive production systems will be necessary to fulll the worlds demand on cereals. The
use of innovation strategies can help develop sustainable production systems. The mitigation strategies developed from this work
have a better chance of being adopted by producers because there
were developed based on the actual practices proposed by the
farmers and consider existing approaches currently being promoted by producer's associations for cost reduction purposes. In
this sense, the results of this LCA suggest that implementation of
innovation strategies in fertilizing, tillage and machinery efciency

M.F. Lares-Orozco et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

can both reduce costs and mitigate GHG emissions in intensive

wheat production systems all over the world.
Acknowledgments
~ oz and
We greatly appreciate the contribution of Arturo Mun
gratefully acknowledge the support and information provided by
the organization of producers of southern Sonora (AOASS,

n de Organismos Agricultores del Sur de Sonora) and the
Asociacio
crop dusting associations (Organization de Aerofumigadores Unidos del Yaqui y Mayo). Additionally, the authors will like to express

n Produce Sonora, A.C for the nancial
their gratitude to Fundacio
support provided to acquire the SimaPro license, the PROFAPIITSON and the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologa (CONACYT) for the graduate Scholarship granted to the rst author for
the development of this research. The assistance of Francisco Elias
Castro in creating Fig. 1 is acknowledged as well.
References
Adom, F., Maes, A., Workman, C., Clayton-Nierderman, Z., Thoma, G., Shonnard, D.R.,
2012. Regional carbon footprint analysis of dairy feeds for milk production in
the USA. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 17, 520e534. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367012-0386-y.
Ahrens, T.D., Beman, J.M., Harrison, J.A., Jewett, P.K., Matson, P.A., 2008. A synthesis
of nitrogen transformations and transfers from land to the sea in the Yaqui
Valley agricultural region of northwest Mexico. Water Resour. Res. 45, 1e13.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006661.
Alexandratos, N., Bruinsma, J., 2012. World Agriculture Towards 2030/2050: the
2012 Revision, ESA Working Paper No. 12-03 (Rome).
Alhajj Ali, S., Tedone, L., De Mastro, G., 2015. Optimization of the environmental
performance of rainfed durum wheat by adjusting the management practices.
J. Clean. Prod. 87, 105e118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.029.

n de Organismos Agricultores del Sur de Sonora), 2014. ComAOASS (Asociacio

n de una hecta

rea de trigo ciclo oton
~ o-invierno
parativo del costo de produccio
2013/2014. In: Internal Report on Production Costs for the 2013-2014 Wheat
Production Cycle (White. Cd. Obregon, Sonora, Mexico).
Arvidsson, J., 2010. Energy use efciency in different tillage systems for winter
wheat on a clay and silt loam in Sweden. Eur. J. Agron. 33, 250e256. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2010.06.003.
Biswas, W.K., Barton, L., Carter, D., 2008. Global warming potential of wheat production in Western Australia: a life cycle assessment. Water Environ. J. 22,
206e216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-6593.2008.00127.x.
Bouwman, A.F., Boumans, L.J.M., Bajtes, N.H., 2002a. Emissions of N2O and NO from
fertilized elds: summary of available measurement data. Glob. Biogeochem.
Cycles 16, 1058. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001811.
Bouwman, A.F., Boumans, L.J.M., Batjes, N.H., 2002b. Modeling global annual N2O
and NO emissions from fertilized elds. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 16, 1080.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001812.
Brentrup, F., Ksters, J., Kuhlmann, H., Lammel, J., 2004a. Environmental impact
assessment of agricultural production systems using the life cycle assessment
methodology. Eur. J. Agron. 20, 247e264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S11610301(03)00024-8.
Brentrup, F., Ksters, J., Lammel, J., Barraclough, P., Kuhlmann, H., 2004b. Environmental impact assessment of agricultural production systems using the life
cycle assessment (LCA) methodology II. The application to N fertilizer use in
winter wheat production systems. Eur. J. Agron. 20, 265e279. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/S1161-0301(03)00039-X.
Burney, J. a, Davis, S.J., Lobell, D.B., 2010. Greenhouse gas mitigation by agricultural
intensication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 12052e12057. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1073/pnas.0914216107.

n Anaya, D., Giner, M.E., Va

zquez Valles, M., Maldonado, J.A., Roe, S.M.,
Chaco
Anderson, R., 2010. Emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero en Sonora y
proyecciones de casos de referencia 1990-2020 (Ciudad Ju

arez, MEX).
Charles, R., Jolliet, O., Gaillard, G., Pellet, D., 2006. Environmental analysis of intensity level in wheat crop production using life cycle assessment. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 113, 216e225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2005.09.014.

n Intersecretarial de Cambio Clima

tico), 2012. Quinta Comunicacio

n
CICC (Comisio

n Marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Cambio
Nacional ante la Convencio

xico. In: Secretara de Medio Ambiente y Recursos NatClim

atico, Primera. Me

xico.
urales. SEMARNAT, Me

s-Jime

nez, J.M., Fuentes-Da

vila, G., Ortiz-Enriquez, J.E., Tamayo-Esquer, L.M.,
Corte



lix-Valencia, P., Armenta-Ca

rdenas, I.,
Cortez-Mondaca, E., Ortiz-Avalos,
A.A., Fe
2011. Agronoma del Trigo en el Sur de Sonora, First. ed. INIFAP, Ciudad

n, Sonora, MEX.
Obrego
Crutzen, P.J., 1970. The inuence of nitrogen oxides on the atmospheric ozone
content. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 96, 320e325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/
qj.49709640815.

531

Fallahpour, F., Aminghafouri, A., Ghalegolab Behbahani, A., Bannayan, M., 2012. The
environmental impact assessment of wheat and barley production by using life
cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. Environ. Dev. Sustain 14, 979e992. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10668-012-9367-3.
FAO, 2013. FAO Statistical Yearbook 2013: World Food and Agriculture. FAO Statistical Yearbook 2013: World food and agriculture. Rome.
Fischer, R.A., Byerlee, D., Edmeades, G., 2014. Crop Yields and Global Food
Security: Will Yield Increase Continue to Feed the World? ACIAR Monograph No. 158. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research,
Canberra.
Godfray, H.C.J., Beddington, J.R., Crute, I.R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J.F.,
Pretty, J., Robinson, S., Thomas, S.M., Toulmin, C., 2010. Food security: the
challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 327, 812e818. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1126/science.1185383.
Goglio, P., Bonari, E., Mazzoncini, M., 2012. LCA of cropping systems with different
external input levels for energetic purposes. Biomass Bioenergy 42, 33e42.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.03.021.
Goglio, P., Grant, B.B., Smith, W.N., Desjardins, R.L., Worth, D.E., Zentner, R.,
Malhi, S.S., 2014. Impact of management strategies on the global warming
potential at the cropping system level. Sci. Total Environ. 490, 921e933. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.05.070.
Goglio, P., Smith, W.S., Grant, B.B., Desjardins, R.L., McConkey, B.G., Campbell, C.A.,
Nemecek, T., 2015. Accounting for soil carbon changes in agricultural life cycle
assessment (LCA): a review. J. Clean. Prod. 104, 23e39. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.040.
Gregory, P.J., Ingram, J.S.I., Andersson, R., Betts, R.A., Brovkin, V., Chase, T.N.,
Grace, P.R., Gray, A.J., Hamilton, N., Hardy, T.B., Howden, S.M., Jenkins, A.,
Meybeck, M., Olsson, M., Ortiz-Monasterio, J.I., Palm, C.A., Payn, T.W.,
Rummukainen, M., Schulze, R.E., Thiem, M., Valentin, C., Wilkinson, M.J.,
2002. Short communication: environmental consequences of alternative
practices for intensifying crop production. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 88,
279e290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00263-8.

e, J., 2002. Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment Operational Guide to the ISO
Guine
Standards. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Howden, S.M., Soussana, J.-F., Tubiello, F.N., Chhetri, N., Dunlop, M., Meinke, H.,
2007. Adapting agriculture to climate change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104,
19691e19696. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0701890104.
INEGI (Instituo Nacional de Estadstica y Geografa), 2014. El Sector Alimentario en

xico, Estadsticas Sectoriales. INEGI, Me

xico, D.F.
Me
IPCC, 2013. Climate Change 2013: the Physical Science Basis. Contribution of
Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change.
IPCC, 2006. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, 2006
IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. IGES, Japan.
ISO, 2006. ISO 14040:2006eEnvironmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment Principles and Framework. International Organization for Standarization,
Geneva, Switzerland.
Jamaludin, N., Sham, S.M., Ismail, S.N.S., 2013. Health risk assessment of nitrate
exposure in well water of residents in intensive agriculture area. Am. J. Appl. Sci.
10, 442e448. http://dx.doi.org/10.3844/ajassp.2013.442.448.
Kim, S., Dale, B.E., Jenkins, R., 2009. Life cycle assessment of corn grain and corn
stover in the United States. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess 14, 160e174. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-008-0054-4.
Koga, N., Tsuruta, H., Tsuji, H., Nakano, H., 2003. Fuel consumption-derived CO2
emissions under conventional and reduced tillage cropping systems in northern
Japan. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 99, 213e219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S01678809(03)00132-4.
Lobell, D.B., Ortiz-Monasterio, J.I., Asner, G.P., Matson, P. a., Naylor, R.L., Falcon, W.P.,
2005. Analysis of wheat yield and climatic trends in Mexico. F. Crop. Res. 94,
250e256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2005.01.007.
Matson, P.A., 2012. Seeds of Sustainability: Lessons from the Birthplace of the Green
Revolution, rst ed. Island Press, Washington, DC, USA. http://dx.doi.org/
10.5822/978-1-61091-177-1.
Meisterling, K., Samaras, C., Schweizer, V., 2009. Decisions to reduce greenhouse
gases from agriculture and product transport: LCA case study of organic and
conventional wheat. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 222e230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2008.04.009.

s, J.J.,
Meza-Montenegro, M.M., Valenzuela-Quintanar, A.I., Balderas-Corte
~ ez-Estrada, L., Gutie

rrez-Coronado, M.L., Cuevas-Robles, A., Gandol, a.
Yan
J., 2013. Exposure assessment of organochlorine pesticides, arsenic, and
lead in children from the major agricultural areas in Sonora, Mexico. Arch.
Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 64, 519e527. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00244012-9846-4.
Mileusni

c, Z.I., Petrovi

c, D.V., evi

c, M.S., 2010. Comparison of tillage systems according to fuel consumption. Energy 35, 221e228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.energy.2009.09.012.
Mostafalou, S., Abdollahi, M., 2013. Pesticides and human chronic diseases: evidences, mechanisms, and perspectives. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 268, 157e177.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2013.01.025.
Nemecek, T., Schnetzer, J., 2011. Methods of Assessment of Direct Field Emissions for
LCIs of Agricultural Production Systems. Agroscope Reckenholz-T
anikon
Research Station ART, Zurich.
Ortiz-Monasterio, J.I., Raun, W., 2007. Reduced nitrogen and improved farm income
for irrigated spring wheat in the Yaqui Valley, Mexico, using sensor based

532

M.F. Lares-Orozco et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 127 (2016) 522e532

nitrogen management. J. Agric. Sci. 145, 215e222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/

S0021859607006995.

Consultants, 2014. SimaPro Version 8.0.3.
PRE
Ravishankara, A.R., Daniel, J.S., Portmann, R.W., 2009. Nitrous oxide (N2O): the
dominant ozone-depleting substance emitted in the 21st century. Science 326,
123e125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1176985.

mez-Macpherson, H., 2000. Irrigated Wheat. Managing your crop.
Rawson, H.M., Go
Rome.
Reay, D.S., Davidson, E.A., Smith, K.A., Smith, P., Melillo, J.M., Dentener, F.,
Crutzen, P.J., 2012. Global agriculture and nitrous oxide emissions. Nat. Clim.
Chang. 2, 410e416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1458.
Rowland, F.S., 2006. Stratospheric ozone depletion. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B.
Biol. Sci. 361, 769e790. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1783.
Safa, M., Samarasinghe, S., 2012. CO2 emissions from farm inputs case study of
wheat production in Canterbury, New Zealand. Environ. Pollut. 171, 126e132.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2012.07.032.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2013. 2012 Area Source Emissions
Inventory Methodology.
Schmidhuber, J., Tubiello, F.N., 2007. Global food security under climate change.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 19703e19708 doi:0701976104.
Schmidt, J.H., 2008. System delimitation in agricultural consequential LCA. Int. J. Life
Cycle Assess. 13, 350e364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-008-0016-x.
Shindell, D., Kuylenstierna, J.C.I., Vignati, E., Dingenen, R. Van, Amann, M.,
Klimont, Z., Anenberg, S.C., Muller, N., Janssens-maenhout, G., Raes, F.,
glund-isaksson, L.,
Schwartz, J., Faluvegi, G., Pozzoli, L., Kupiainen, K., Ho
Emberson, L., Streets, D., Ramanathan, V., Hicks, K., Oanh, N.T.K., Milly, G.,
Williams, M., 2012. Simultaneously mitigating near-term climate change and
improving human health and food security. Science 335, 183e189. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1210026.
Srensen, C.G., Halberg, N., Oudshoorn, F.W., Petersen, B.M., Dalgaard, R., 2014.
Energy inputs and GHG emissions of tillage systems. Biosyst. Eng. 120, 2e14.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2014.01.004.
Tabatabaeefar, A., Emamzadeh, H., Varnamkhasti, M., Rahimizadeh, R., Karimi, M.,
2009. Comparison of energy of tillage systems in wheat production. Energy 34,
41e45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2008.09.023.



n de ProTejeda-Martnez, A., Conde Alvarez,
A.C., 2008. Gua para la elaboracio

n ante el Cambio Clima

tico (PEACC). Instituto
gramas Estatales de Accio
Nacional de Ecologa.

Tilman, D., Cassman, K.G., Matson, P.A., Naylor, R., Polasky, S., 2002. Agricultural
sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418, 671e677. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature01014.
Tscharntke, T., Clough, Y., Wanger, T.C., Jackson, L., Motzke, I., Perfecto, I.,
Vandermeer, J., Whitbread, A., 2012. Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensication. Biol. Conserv. 151, 53e59.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.01.068.
Vitousek, P.M., Naylor, R., Crews, T., David, M.B., Drinkwater, L.E., Holland, E.,
Johnes, P.J., Katzenberger, J., Martinelli, L.A., Matson, P.A., Nziguheba, G.,
Ojima, D., Palm, C. a., Robertson, G.P., Sanchez, P.A., Townsend, A.R., Zhang, F.S.,
2009. Nutrient imbalances in agricultural development. Science 324,
1519e1520.
Wang, W., Dalal, R.C., 2015. Nitrogen management is the key for low-emission
wheat production in Australia: a life cycle perspective. Eur. J. Agron. 66,
74e82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2015.02.007.
Wang, Z., Zhang, H., Lu, X., Wang, M., Chu, Q., Wen, X., Chen, F., 2015. Lowering
carbon footprint of winter wheat by improving management practices in
North China Plain. J. Clean. Prod. 112, 149e157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2015.06.084.
Ward, F.A., Pulido-Velazquez, M., 2008. Water conservation in irrigation can increase water use. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105, 18215e18220. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0805554105.
Weidema, B.P., Bauer, C., Hischier, R., Mutel, C., Nemecek, T., Reinhard, J.,
Vandenbo, C.O., Wernet, G., 2013. The Ecoinvent Database: Overview and
Methodology, Data Quality Guideline For The Ecoinvent Database Version 3.
www.ecoinvent.org.
Weisenburger, D.D., 1993. Human health effects of agrichemical use. Hum. Pathol.
24, 571e576.
Wright, A.L., Hons, F.M., 2005. Tillage impacts on soil aggregation and carbon and
nitrogen sequestration under wheat cropping sequences. Soil Tillage Res. 84,
67e75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2004.09.017.
ckle, C., Painter, K., Higgins, S., 2013. Life cycle assessment of the poZaher, U., Sto
tential carbon credit from no- and reduced-tillage winter wheat-based cropping systems in Eastern Washington State. Agric. Syst. 122, 73e78. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2013.08.004.