Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, Islamabad

Burning of Crop Residue and its Potential for Electricity Generation

Author(s): Tanvir Ahmed and Bashir Ahmad
Source: The Pakistan Development Review, Vol. 53, No. 3, Special Issue on Energy (Autumn
2014), pp. 275-292
Published by: Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, Islamabad
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24398410
Accessed: 27-02-2020 11:01 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, Islamabad is collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access to The Pakistan Development Review

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 1 Pakistan Development Review
53:3 (Autumn 2014) pp. 275-292

Burning of Crop Residue and its Potential

for Electricity Generation

Tanvir Ahmed and Bashir Ahmad

This paper identified the factors influencing the rice crop residue burning decision of the
farmers and the potential of the burnt residue to generate electricity. For this study, data were
collected from 400 farmers in the rice-wheat cropping system. Effects of different variables on
the burning decision of rice residue are investigated through logit model. A number of factors
had significant effects on the burning decision of crop residue. These included farming
experience of the farmer, Rajput caste, farm size, owner operated farm, owner-cum-tenants
operated farm, silty loam soil type, livestock strength, total cost associated with the handling of
residue and preparation of wheat field after rice, availability of farm machinery for
incorporation, use of residue as feed for animals, use of residue as fuel, intention of the
respondent to reduce turnaround time between harvesting of rice and sowing of wheat,
convenience in use of farm machinery after burning of residue and the geographic location of
farm. The overall quantity of rice straw burnt is estimated to be 1704.91 thousand tonnes in the
rice-wheat cropping areas with a potential to generate electric power of 162.51 MW, This
power generation from crop residues would be a source of income for the farmers along with
generation of additional employment opportunities and economic activities on sustainable
basis. In order to minimise the cost of haulage of rice straw, installation of decentralised power
plants at village level would be a good option. Further, use of rice crop residue as an energy
source can help in reducing foreign exchange requirements for import of furnace oil.

JEL Classification: 044, Q12, Q16, Q42, Q48

Keywords: Bioenergy, Crop Residue, Electricity, Energy, Growth, Rice

1. INTRODUCTION

Most of the villages in Punjab have inadequate electricity supply. The

have to face electricity shut downs because of severe electricity shortage
Pakistan, household sector was the largest consumer of electricity with a
percent while major sources of electricity generation were fossil fuel (64.
hydro (31.9 percent) during 2011-12 [Pakistan (2013)]. Due to pol
Government of Pakistan is not developing new hydro resources for electric
but generates electricity through burning of fossil fuel, which produces gr
Moreover, high oil prices have adverse impacts on the economy of Pakista
important to explore new means of electricity generation.

Tanvir Ahmed <tanvirahe@yahoo.com> is Associate Professor, Department of Econo

Christian College (A Chartered University), Lahore. Bashir Ahmad <bashiruaf@gmail.c
Emeritus, Institute of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Agriculture, Faisal
Authors' Note: This work has been undertaken with the financial support of the South
for Development and Environmental Economics (SANDEE). We are thankful for the tech
guidance provided by several SANDEE advisors and peers for this study.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
276 Ahmed and A h mad

Bioenergy accounts for about 10 percent of

and it is expected that this source will play gre
Research work indicates that open field burn
many countries [Gadde, et al. (2009)]. It has be
teragram (tg) of biomass are burnt in Asia and
burning. Open burning of biomass is emitting
C02, 67 tg of CO and 3.1 tg of methane. Howe
contributing about 0.10 tg of S02, 0.96 tg of N
of CH4 [Streets, et al. (2003)]. A growing co
from its effects on air pollution and climate
such as agricultural residues generates black
which is the second largest contributor to glo
(2009); Chung, et al. (2005); Ramanathan and
radiation and warms the atmosphere at
concentration of black carbon and other pollu
expected to enhance glacier melting. Black car
have also given rise to atmospheric brown clo
aerosols in ABCs decrease the amount of sunli
15 percent and enhance atmospheric solar hea
ABCs and their interactions with greenho
hydrological cycle, glacier melting, agricu
(2012)]. Thus, all it indicates that open fie
undesirable treatment of crop residue from t
treatment of crop residue also worsens the pro
Rice-wheat cropping system is dominant in
comprises of parts of Pakistan, India, Banglad
quantity of rice straw and it is usually not us
(2006)]. Consequently, rice residues are genera
farmers burn it? Research work done shows t
short-term availability of some nutrients i.e.
the loss of plant nutrients [Biederbeck, et a
(2006); IRRI-C1MMYT Alliance Cereal Know
creates health and environmental problems
Graham, et al. (1986); Prasad and Power (199
microbial population [Raison (1979)] and or
Heard, et al. (2006)]. However, incorporation
and nutrient contents of soils and crop yie
(1989); Ganwar, et al. (2006); Hartley and Ke
al. (1999); Hooker, et al. (1982); Bhatnagar,
(2006); Prasad, et al. (1999); Tripathi, et al. (2
There is an increasing interest in conver
due to new emerging technologies and ris
Scarlat, et. al. (2010)]. There are number o
potential of electricity generation throug
power generation plants [Freedman (1983)

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Burning of Crop Residue and ils Potential for Electricity Generation 277

(2002); Jingura and Matengaifa (2008); Karaj, et al. (2010); Hiloidhari and Baruah
(2011); Nguyen, et al. (2013)]. Liquid or gaseous biofuel can be produced from crop
residues like cereals and corn, by using thermo-chemical or biological techniques
[Elmore, et al. (2008)]. Hiloidhari and Baruah (2011) found 16 different types of
crop residue in Sonitpur district of Assam, India. They found rice crop as a dominant
source of residue and about 0.17 million tonnes of residue biomass has a potential to
produce about 17MW power. According to them, decentralised crop residue based
power generation can solve the problem of acute shortage of grid connected power
supply. Similarly, Nguyen, et al. (2013) estimated the electricity generation from
wheat straw instead of coal and natural gas. Their study also indicates that usage of
straw will reduce global warming and use of non-renewable energy. Hence, there is
an increasing recognition that interrelations between agriculture, biomass production,
bio-energy and climate should be better understood in order to estimate the realistic
bioenergy potential [Haberal, et al. (2011)]. According to Freedman (1983), a huge
potential of biomass energy is available in rural areas in the form of rice crop residue.
Potential amount of energy that can be obtained from this residue is 3.70x1010
J/ha/year under traditional methods, 7.93 X 1010 J under labour intensive and 8.36 X
1010 J under capital intensive methods. Accurate estimates of the amounts of
produced crop residues, their disposal pattern (quantity used as feed for animals,
quantity used as fuel for cooking, quantity incorporated into soil, quantity burnt to
clear the field in order to improve the performance of farm machinery for bed
preparation for the next crop, etc.) and the potential amount of crop residue that can
be saved from burning and used for bioenergy generation on sustainable basis is very
important. According to Jingura and Matengaifa (2008), biomass can provide 47
percent of the energy consumption in Zimbabwe and crop residue is its major
component. According to them, estimated annual amount of crop residue in
Zimbabwe is 7.805 Mt and it has an energy potential of 81.5 PJ per year. Thus crop
residue can be used for energy generation besides feeding of animals and
improvement of soil fertility. Moreover, environmental advantage connected with
burning of residue for electricity generation can be revealed from the fact that this
usage does not compete with food or cash crops and no land use change is required
[Barz and Delivand (2011)]. Shyam (2002) identified crop residue as a sustainable
source of energy supply and suggested establishment of decentralised electricity
supply system based on crop residue in rural areas. Likewise, Karaj, et al. (2010)
analysed the existence of potential of electricity generation in Albania through
biomass (bioenergy crops, agricultural and forestry residues and wastes). They
considered generation of steam and biogas from the biomass to run steam generators
and turbines for the generation of electricity. Energy content in biomass was
estimated theoretically by estimating biomass using statistical reports, literature
review and personal investigations. For Albania, it is found that 4.8 million tons of
dry biomass was produced in year 2005 with energy content 11.6 million MWh/a.
This energy content has technical potential of 3 million MWh/a of electrical energy
production. This amount of electrical energy is equal to 45.8 percent of total
electrical consumption of Albania. Study of Ergudenler and Isigigur (1994) identified
agricultural residue as a potential fuel for sustainable electricity generation in Turkey.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 278 Ahmed and Ahmad

According to them, usage of agricultural residue in power plants has less

environmental impacts and results in the reduction of net emissions of C02, S02 and
NOx as compared to thermal power plants in which lignite is major source of fuel.
Open field burning of residue has adverse impact on the soil fertility [Malhi and
Kutcher (2007)] and on the environment because of greenhouse gas emissions. So by
using this residue for electricity generation, one can avoid the problem of greenhouse
gas emissions and intensity of electricity shortage problem. As in Pakistan, no
comprehensive study has been carried out to identify the factors influencing the rice
crop residue burning decision by the farmers and the potential of burnt rice residue
for electricity generation, so this study is conducted to answer this question. The
specific objectives of the study are:

(1) To determine the factors, which influence farmers to make decision of

burning of rice crop residue, and
(2) To find out the quantity of electricity that can be produced by using the rice
straw that is currently being burnt.

The rest of paper is organised as follows. Section 2 describes the methodology

along with model specification and description of data set. Section three discusses the
results of models and key determinants of the rice crop residue burning decision by the
farmers along with potential of the burnt residue for electricity generation. Last section
deals with summary and suggestions for the generation of electricity.

2. METHODOLOGY

The first part of the methodology presents a model to answer the q

farmers burn the rice residue. The second part is concerned with the m
estimating the potential electricity that can be generated from the resid
burnt by farmers. Finally, procedure used for data collection is presented

2.1. Logit Model of Residue Burning Decision

Adoption of burning or non-burning (i.e. complete removal/incorpo
management practice essentially involves a choice by the farmer. Binar
are more appropriate when a choice is made between the two alternativ
(1980); Pindyck and Rubinfeld (2000)]. The linear probability mode
number of deficiencies i.e. variance of the disturbance is heteroscedastic—the
distribution of this term is not normal and it does not constrain the predicted values to lie
between 0 and 1- [Amemiya (1981); Capps and Kramer (1985)]. Problems of the linear
probability model can be overcome through the monotonie transformation (Probit or logit
specification), which guarantees that predictions lie in the unit interval [Capps and
Kramer (1985)]. The choice of model i.e. probit or logit is mainly a question of
convenience [Hanushek and Jackson (1977)]. In this paper, logit model is used. A farmer
will make his choice based on the rule of utility maximisation. According to this rule,
farmer / selects the alternative from the choice set that maximises his utility U,. Since the
researcher does not have complete information about all the factors that are considered
important in the decision making process by farmers while making a choice, so the utility
function (//, is broken down into two components [Guadagni and Little (1983)], i.e.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Burning of Crop Residue and ils Potential for Electricity Generation 119

Uj = Vj + ej Where, U,j is the overall utility of /th farmer fory'th choice,

Vjj is a systematic utility component of /th farmer fory'th choice,

sv is a stochastic component of /th farmer fory'th choice.

The decision maker chooses the alternative from which he gets the maximum
utility. In the binomial or two alternatives case, farmer chooses alternative 1 if and only if.

Un>U,2 or Un+en >Ui2 + si2

In probabilistic terms, the probability that alternative 1 is selected is given by

Pr(l) = Pr(Un > Ui2) = Pr(F„ +£„ > Vi2+zi2) = Pr(e,2 -s„ < Vn-Vi2)

It states that the probability of choosing alternative 1 is equal to the probability of the
difference in stochastic utility of choice 1 and 2 being less than or equal to the
difference in systematic utility of choice 1 and 2. Assuming that s,2 - e,4 has a logistic
distribution, the probability (P,) that farmer i burns residue is a function of an index
variable (Z,) summarising a set of farmer attributes, which can be written as:

z,
P, = F{zt) = -Where Z, = X/ß
l+e'

Where ß is a vector of coefficients; X, is a vector of the /th farmer attributes and e is the
base of natural logarithm. Z, is a dichotomous variable, it takes the value of one if a
farmer has adopted the practice of residual burning and takes the value zero otherwise.
The change in P, with respect to change in Xt is given by:

ÔP, , dF w 5c y ex'ß
dX, dz, ôx, \ 4- nx<V
\ + e'

Where ßt is the Mi element of the parameter vecto

As P, is equal to one if a choice is made an
estimation procedure is maximum likelihood. The
rice residue depends upon various attributes like f
livestock strength, age, education, farming experie
farm, soil type, use of rice residue as feed, fuel, c
rice residue etc. Therefore, the following model i
residue burning:

BURNi = ß0+ß,/lG£; + fi2EXP, + ß^PRlXf + ß^UPMA

+ PARIAN, + ^RAJPUT, + ß9.S'/Z£, + Ç,l0ONW

+ ßl3.S7/.7T, + ßl4CLA ^ + ßl5ANIMAL, + \\J
+ \i[itMACH + ßlt)FEED, + ß20TTTX, + f>2lPBAS
+ ß23REDTURNi + ß24CONMACHi + ß^COLTR

Where, the variables are defined in Table 1.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
280 Ahmed and Ahmad

Table 1

Variable Definitions
Variable Name Description
BURN 1 if farmer adopted the practice of rice crop residue burning; 0
otherwise

AGE Age of farmer in years

K2EXP Farming experience of farmer in years
if farming
PRIM 1 if fanning is the primary
primary occupation;
occupation; 00 otherwise
otherwise
UPMAT 1 if educational level of farmer is up to matric; 0 otherwise
AMATR 1 if education level of farmer is above matric; 0 otherwise
JAT 1 if caste of farmer is Jat; 0 otherwise
ARIAN 1 if caste of farmer is Arian; 0 otherwise
RAJPUT
RAJPUT 11 if
ifcaste
casteof
offarmer
farmerisisRajput;
Rajput;0 otherwise
0 otherwise
SIZE Operational size of farm in acres
OWNER
OWNER 11 if
iffarmer
farmerisisowner
owneroperator;
operator;
0 otherwise
0 otherwise
OWNCT 1 if farmer is owner-cum-tenant; 0 otherwise
FRAGM
FRAGM Number
Numberof ofplaces
placeswhere
where the
the farm
farmland
land
is situated
is situated
SILTL
SILTL 11 if
if the
thedominant
dominantsoil
soiltype
typeis is
silt loam;
silt loam;0 otherwise
0 otherwise
CLAY
CLAY 11 ififthe
thedominant
dominant soil type
soil is clayey;
type 0 otherwise
is clayey; 0 otherwise
ANIMAL Number of animal units on the farm
TCBURN Total cost associated with the handling the residue and preparati
of wheat field after rice
WHTSOWN
WHTSOWN 11 if
if wheat
wheat is
is sown
sown before
beforethe
theend
endof
ofNovember;
November;0 0otherwise
otherwise
MACH 1 if farm machinery is available for incorporation; 0 otherwise
FEED 1 if rice residue is used as feed for animals; 0 otherwise
FUEL 1 if rice residue is used as fuel; 0 otherwise
PBASM Proportion
Proportion of
of rice
rice acreage
acreage allocated
allocatedto
tosuper
superbasmati
basmatiand
and385
385basmati
basmat
to total rice
rice acreage
acreage
INSECT 1 if
if the
the intention
intention of
of respondent
respondentisisto
tocontrol
controlinsects,
insects,weeds
weedsand
and
diseases; 00 otherwise
diseases; otherwise
REDTURN
REDTURN 11 if
if the
the intention
intention of
of respondent
respondentisisto
toreduce
reduceturnaround
turnaroundtime
timebetween
between
harvesting
harvesting of
of rice
rice and
and sowing
sowing of
of wheat;
wheat;00otherwise
otherwise
CONMACH
CONMACH 11 if
if burning
burning of
of residue
residue results
resultsin
inconvenience
convenienceininuse
useof
offarm
farm
machinery;
machinery; 0
0 otherwise
otherwise
COLTRAN Total
Total cost
cost associated
associated with
with collection
collectionand
andtransportation
transportationof
ofrice
rice
residue
residue

GUJRAN
GUJRAN 11 if
if farm
farm is
is located
located in
in Gujranwala
Gujranwaladistrict;
district;00otherwise
otherwise

2.2. Methodology for Determining the Potential of Electricity Generation

from Rice Residue

Following steps are involved for calculating the generation of electricity from rice
residue.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Burning of Crop Residue and its Potential for Electricity Generation 281

2.2.1. Determining the Total Yield of Rice Crop and Residue

Availability of accurate data about the crop residue is very essential for
determining the potential of bioenergy in any country. Previous studies estimated the
straw produced from the main product like grain and used a specific ratio of main
product to straw to estimate the straw produced. Such a ratio of main product to
straw varies from variety to variety and sometime even for a specific product because
of differences in climatic and agronomic conditions under which the main product is
produced. Consequently, the estimate of amount of crop straw produced either
overestimated or underestimated the actual amount of straw produced. This study
uses primary data collected from the farmers for the assessment of the quantity of
straw produced and its disposal pattern. In this study in to order obtain the yield of
rice crop and its residue, farmers were asked about the variety grown, area under
each variety, yield of paddy and straw. This information was used to calculate the
paddy yield and straw yield which came to 1624 kg and 1602 kg, respectively. Thus
the ratio of paddy to straw was 1:0.99. This ratio was quite comparable with the ratio
of 1:1 reported by Jiang, et al. (2012).

2.2.2. Rice Area under Various Residue Management Practices

In the study area, farmers were following different practices to manage the rice
residue. Therefore, farmers were asked about the rice area managed under various residue
management practices i.e. area from which residue was removed 100 percent (REMV),
area from which pural was removed and lower parts of rice plant were burnt (RPBL),
area from which pural was removed and lower parts of stem were burnt (BPLP), area
from which pural was removed and lower parts of stem were incorporated (RPINC) and
the area where the entire residue was incorporated (INC). The area where traditional
manual method was used for harvesting, the residue was removed 100 percent and was
used mainly as feed for animals.

2.2.3. Estimation of Quantity of Rice Residue Burnt

In two practices (i.e. RPBL and BPLP), burning of residue is involved. Moreover,
there is not complete burning of residue in these practices as the lower parts of rice plant
are not dry enough to catch fire. Consequently, we asked farmers about the proportion of
rice residue burnt in these practices. This proportion was used to determine the quantity
of rice residue burnt from the straw yield produced for each variety grown under these
two practices. A weighted average quantity of residue burnt was obtained by weighting
the quantity of straw burnt with the acreage of each variety for the practice RPBL and
BPLP. Finally, quantity of residue burnt per acre under various residue management
practices was weighted according to the acreage under each practice to determine the
quantity of residue burnt per acre of rice harvested. This quantity of residue per acre was
multiplied with the rice acreage in the rice wheat cropping system of Punjab, to estimate
the total quantity of residue burnt. Assuming the same quantity of residue burnt per acre
for the rice-wheat cropping system area, we estimated the total quantity of burnt residue
in Punjab, Pakistan.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 282 Ahmed and A h mad

2.2.4. Estimation of Biomass Power Potent

Conversion of biomass to energy can be d
thermo-chemical and bio-chemical [Jiang,
technology is specifically suitable for loos
common process involves the direct combust
which is used to produce steam and furth
turbines, steam engines or other energy con
with different sizes of combustion can gene
MW with net conversion efficiency from
Nussbaumer (2003)].
In order to estimate the power potential, f

nnnn KxACR, xWAQRBx LHVR

RRPP, = 2 ^
T

Where RRPPis the rice residue biomass power potential of the J-th area; K is the overall
energy conversion efficiency assuming a value of 20 percent [Hiloidhari and Baruah
(2011)]; ACRj is the rice acreage in acres in the J-th area; WAQRB is the weighted
average quantity of rice residue burnt per acre; LHVR is the lower heating value of the
rice straw. It is taken to be 15.03 (G) f1 [Singh, et al. (2008)]; Tis the annual operating
duration in seconds.

2.3. Data

The data for this study were collected during the year 2010 from the
important districts (i.e. Gujranwala and Sialkot) having share of maximum acreag
wheat system of the Punjab [Punjab (2009)]. Ten villages were selected randoml
villages already selected by the Federal Bureau of Statistics from each of the dist
estimation of acreage and yield of various crops. These villages were consider
sampling units (PSU). Farmers within the PSUs were taken as secondary samp
list of farmers was prepared in each village and then 20 fanners were randomly
different sizes in proportion to their number. Total sample comprised of 400 res
the collection of data, a comprehensive questionnaire was constructed, which
after pre-testing. The data were collected by using personal interview method.

3. RESULTS

3.1. Influence of Different Factors on the Decision of Burning of Residue

Descriptive statistics of the variables used in the model are exhibited in Table
The means of the qualitative variables refer to the proportion of respondents
on particular qualitative attributes. For example, approximately 77 percent
respondents are owner operators, roughly 20 percent of the respondents are own
tenants. Similarly, approximately 57 percent of the respondents are Jat, 13 percent
and 6 percent Arian. The continuous variables indicate that each farm has, on ave
about 11.93 acres of land and the collection and transportation cost per acre
residue is Rs 485.84 (Rs 104 = 1 US$).

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Burning of Crop Residue and its Potential for Electricity Generation 283

Table 2

Descriptive Statistics for the Variables Used in Logit Analysis

\ t • i_ i _
Variable
y oiiauiv ivii/cui Mean
Jiu. Std. Dev.
V-J\/ v. tvi Minimum
minium Maximum
jviaA.iuiuin

AGE 47.49 15.637 17 80

EXP 27.63 15.978 1 70
PRIM 0.923 0.268 0 1
UPMAT 0.403 0.491 0 1
AMATR 0.088 0.283 0 1
J AT 0.570 0.496 0 1
AR1AN
ARIAN 0.063 0.242 0 1
RAJPUT 0.128 0.334 0 1
SIZE 11.929 14.934 0.62 100
OWNER 0.765 0.425 0 1
OWNCT 0.198 0.399 0 1
FRAGM 1.508 0.779 1 4
SILTL 0.623 0.485 0 1
CLAY 0.348 0.477 0 1
ANIMAL 8.921 11.406 0 130
TCBURN 3061.639 1246.474 0 7850
WHTSOWN 0.835 0.371 0 1
MACH 0.103 0.304 0 1
FEED 0.740 0.439 0 1
FUEL 0.120 0.325 0 1
PBASM 73.551 38.001 0 100
INSECT 0.330 0.417 0 1
REDTURN 0.095 0.294 0 1
CONMACH 0.580 0.494 0 1
COLTRAN 485.835 478.800 0 4556.794
GUJRAN 0.50 0.501 0 1

The maximum likelihood estimates of the logit model are presented in Table 3.
Likelihood ratio indicates that the amount of variation explained is significantly different
from zero. Pseudo R2 value is 0.433. The probability of burning rice residue was
significantly associated (at 20 percent level) with fourteen variables out of twenty six
variables included in the model. These factors were: (a) Farming experience of the farmer
(EXP), (b) Rajput caste (RAJPUT), (c) Farm size (SIZE), (d) Farmer is owner operator
(OWNER), (e) Farmer is owner-cum-tenant (OWNCT), (f) Soil type is silty loam
(SILTL), (g) livestock strength on the farm (ANIMAL), (h) Total cost associated with the
handling of the residue and preparation of wheat field after rice (TCBURN), (i) Farm k2
machinery availability for incorporation (MACH), (j) Use of residue as feed for animals
(FEED), (k) Use of residue as fuel (FUEL), (1) Intention of the respondent to reduce
turnaround time between harvesting of rice and sowing of wheat (REDTURN), (m)
Burning of residue results in convenient use of farm machinery (CONMACH) and (n)
The geographic location of farm in Gujranwala (GUJRAN) district.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 284 A h med and A h mad

Table 3

Maximum Likelihood Estimates for Lo

Variable
Variable Estimate Change in
Estimate Probability
Change Z statistic
in Probability Z statistic
AGE -0.0191 -0.0048 -1.100
EXP 0.0398* 0.0099 2.290
PRIM -0.5552 -0.1357 -0.910
UPMAT 0.2375 0.0593 0.710
AMA1R
AMAIR -0.4940 -0.1219 -0.720
J AT 0.0191 0.0048 0.050
ARIAN -0.5119 -0.1260 -0.780
RAJPUT 0.9857"
0.9857" 0.2332 1.680
SIZE 0.0766** 0.0191 4.400
OWNER -2.8688* -0.5587 -2.240
OWNCT -2.7415* -0.5349 -2.070
FRAGM -0.0493 -0.0123 -0.220
SILTL 1.1686b 0.2832 1.310
CLAY 0.9606 0.2341 1.080
ANIMAL —0.0261b -0.0065 -1.540
TCBURN 0.0002" 0.0001 1.820
WITHSOWN 0.4141 0.1028 0.940
MACH -0.870 lb -0.2089 -1.550
FEED -2.7507** -0.5530 -6.300
FUEL -0.9806* -0.2335 -2.020
PBASM 0.0026 0.0007 0.640
INSECT 0.1035 0.0259 0.220
REDTURN 1.3046* 0.2945 2.280
CONMACH 1.7715** 0.4149 4.090
COLTRAN -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.160
GUJRAN 0.6672* 0.3186 2.090
CONSTANT 0.7673 1.9147 0.400

The farming experience (EXP) had positive influence on the probability of burning
rice residue. The probability of burning increased by one percent for each one percent
increase in farming experience. A possible explanation for this behaviour is that 53.75
percent and 15.15 percent farmers perceive that residue burning improves the physical
properties and increase soil nutrients of soil, respectively. Moreover, the results of the
study show that 70.50 percent and 64.75 percent of the farmers perceive that burning of
rice residue increases the yield of wheat and rice, respectively. The increase in the yield
of both wheat and rice crops is due to substantial and ready availability of nutrients
through ash to plants due to incomplete burning of rice residue as the temperature desired
for complete burning is not achieved during the burning of residue [Kumar and Goh
(2000)]. Further there is rapid conversion of nutrients from organic form to inorganic
form N, P, K, Ca and Mg [Surekha, et al. (2006)].
The probability of burning of rice residue was increased by 1.91 percent for each
percent increase in farm size (SIZE). This results from the fact that livestock strength per
unit area decreases with increase in farm size and consequently the use of rice residue as
feed falls.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Burning of Crop Residue and its Potential for Electricity Generation 285

Total cost associated with the preparation of field for wheat crop after rice was
significantly related with the increase in probability of rice residue burning. The survey
results show that the total cost associated with the preparation of wheat field after rice
was Rs 3536.79 where the rice straw was burnt in the field compared with Rs 4097.83 for
the incorporation of rice residue practice. This shows that farmers are adopting the
burning practice as the cost associated with burning practice was substantially less than
non-burning practice. Under the prevailing cost conditions, farmers will not stop rice
residue burning practice unless they are compensated appropriately by other measures.
Tenure type i.e. owner operator (OWNER) and owner-cum-tenant (OWNCT) were
significantly associated with the decrease in probability of rice residue burning by 55.87 percent
and 53.49 percent, respectively. This shows that owner operators and owner-cum-tenant have
long-term planning horizon and are concerned more with the sustainability of land resource.
The probability of burning of rice residue was decreased by 0.65 percent for each 1
percent increase in animal strength (ANIMAL). Because the effect of animal strength on
the use of rice residue is positive, therefore, farmers have adopted less burning practice.
Availability of farm machinery for incorporation (MACH) of rice residue in the
soil was significantly associated with the decrease in probability of rice residue burning
by 20.89 percent. This suggests that ensuring the availability of farm machinery for
incorporation can help in reducing the practice of burning.
Use of rice residue as feed (FEED) and fuel (FUEL) were both significantly
associated with decrease in probability of rice residue burning by 55.30 percent and 23.35
percent, respectively. Thus the farmers can reduce the adoption of burning practice by
utilising the residue for domestic purposes.
The probability of burning of rice residue was increased by 29.45 percent with the
intention of the producers to reduce turnaround time between harvesting of rice and sowing of
wheat (REDTUURN). Delay in sowing of wheat reduces its yield by 30 kg/day [Akhtar, et al.
(1992)] and in order to sow on time farmers are burning residue to clear the field. Intention of
the farmers to burn rice residue for the convenient use of farm machinery had positive and
significant impact on the probability of residue burning by 41.49 percent. Thus farmers used
burning practice for the convenient use of farm machinery for the preparation of fields for the
wheat crop. Thus the reduction of turnaround time between harvesting of rice and sowing of
wheat and convenient use of farm machinery demand the proper disposal of rice residue for
obtaining better wheat yield.
Not surprisingly, producers in the Gujranwala district exhibited higher probability
of rice residue burning than Sialkot district, the calculated change in probability was
16.53 percent. Larger farm size in Gujranwala district compared to Sialkot district
probably contributed to this difference.

3.2. Potential for Electricity Generation

If one looks at the overall area of rice allocated to different residue management
practices, then the full burn method ranks as first and removal ranks as second (Table 4).
58 percent of area under rice is fully burned, while 25 percent of rice area has full
removal of residue. The remaining area is either partially burnt or a small portion is
incorporated into the field. We observed a similar pattern of adoption of different residue
management practices for different varieties of rice (see Table 4).

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 286 Ahmed and Ahmad

Table 4

Proportion of Rice Area with Various Varieties under Different

Residue Management Practices
Pattern
Pattern
of Residue Management
of (Percent
Residue
of Total Rice Area) Manag
Complete Removal
Complete Removal of pural
of pural Burning
Burning of of Removal
Removal of puralofpural Complete
Complete
Removal
Removal of of and
andBurning
Burningof ofPural
Pural
and and and
andIncorporation
Incorporation Incorporation
Incorporation
Area Residue
Area ResidueLower Parts
Lower of of
Parts Lower Parts
Lower of Lower
Parts of Lower
Parts
Partsof
of
Variety (Acres)
Variety (Acres) Rice Plant
Rice Plant Rice PlantRice Rice
of RiceofPlant Plant
Plant
Super
Super Basmati Basmati
2677 25 2677
12 59
25 3
12 59 3 11
Basmati
Basmati 386 810 386
26 810
12 2653 12 53
9 9 00
Other
Other Varieties Varieties
303 23 12 303 23
62 12 3
62 3 00
All
All Varieties Varieties
3790 25 3790
12 25
58 12 58
4 4 I1

The results of logit model indicate that total cost associated with the handling of
residue and preparation of field for wheat crop after rice was significantly related with the
increase in probability of rice residue burning. The survey results show that the total cost
associated with the handling of rice residue and preparation of the wheat field after
various rice residue management practices was the highest at Rs 4585.72 for the REMV
practice and the lowest at Rs 3423.94 for the BPLP practice. The total cost was higher
for RPBL, RPfNC and INC by 25.56 percent, 26.51 percent and 19.68 percent,
respectively, in comparison with BPLP. Thus, the burning of residue is the most
economical method for handling rice residue and preparing the wheat field. Under the
prevailing cost conditions, farmers wil not stop rice residue burning unless they are
compensated appropriately by other measures.
The proportion of the straw burnt for various varieties; ranged from 53.75 to 58.12
percent for the practice of removal of pural and the burning of the lower parts of rice
plant; from 63.48 to 69.26 percent for the practice of burning the pural and the lower
parts of the rice plant. In terms of quantity 931 kg and 1034 kg of rice straw per acre was
burnt under these practices, respectively. On overall basis, 712 kg of rice straw per acre
was burnt in the study area. Of the total surveyed respondents, 61 percent were of the
view that the trend in rice residue burning was increasing although 31 percent thought it
was decreasing. About eight percent thought there is no change. As reported by 46
percent and 65 percent of the respondents, respectively, the short turn-around time
between the harvesting of the rice crop and the sowing of the wheat crop and
inconvenience in the use of farm machinery were the major reasons for the burning of
rice residue. Major reasons for not burning the residue included its use as feed for
animals and for home cooking as reported by 95 percent and 24 percent of respondents,
respectively.
On the basis of results of survey conducted in rice-wheat cropping system, total
quantity of rice residue burnt is estimated at 1704.91 thousand tonnes. Using same basis
as used for rice-wheat cropping system, total quantity of rice residue burnt is estimated at
3106.68 thousand tonnes for Punjab and 4159.05 thousand tonnes for Pakistan, which
could be used for electric power generation.
On the basis of the quantity of rice residue burnt, the potential for electric power
generation is estimated as 162.51 MW, 296.13 MW and 396.44 MW for the rice-wheat
cropping system, areas of Punjab and Pakistan, respectably. The power scenario in the

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Burning of Crop Residue and ils Potential for Electricity Generation 287

rice-wheat cropping area and in other areas in Punjab and Pakistan is characterised by
fluctuating voltage, load shedding and unreliable supply. However, demand for electricity
is increasing over time and is expected to increase many folds in coming years in
Pakistan. Electricity is required for improving health facilities, education system, living
standard and for other economic activities including running of tubewells for meeting the
water requirements of rice and other crops. Major part of the demand is met through
fossil fuels. Diminishing fuel reserves, mounting oil prices and Green House Gases
emission from burning of fossil fuels resulting in global environment problems demand
to look for renewable energy for meeting future energy requirement. Thus significant part
of future energy must be met from renewable energy sources to meet the rising demand
and to reduce Green House Gases emission. According to World Bioenergy Association
(2010), reasonable and sustainable use of world biomass energy can meet energy demand
globally. The European Commission has set an overall target of 20 percent share of
renewable energy and a 10 percent share of renewable energy in transport for the year
2020 [Dam and Junginger (2011)]. U.S. Department of energy has set a target that
biomass will supply energy equivalent to 30 percent of current petroleum consumption
[Fengxiang, et al. (2011)]. Similarly, targets have been fixed by Romania [Scarlat, et al.
(2011)] and Australia [Herr and Dunlop (2011)]. Demirbas (2011) has reported that
biomass energy can meet half of the present global energy consumption by the year 2050.
In view of the haulage cost associated with rice crop residue, installation of crop residue
biomass power plants at the village level would be an attractive option for improving
electricity supply. Such decentralised units can benefit the rural population in many ways.
First, these can generate income for farmers from rice residue, which is presently being
burnt by them. Second, these can generate employment through involvement of rural
population in collection, transport, loading and other activities. Third, decentralised
power units at the village level can stimulate economic activities through assured power
supply [Hiloidhari and Baruah (2011)].

4. CONCLUSIONS

This paper addresses two very important issues i.e. why farmers bur
and what is the potential of electricity generation from the residue being
of rice crop residue has significant effect on the yield of crops, physical p
and environment. The results obtained by using logit model provide poli
additional insight into the relations between the adoption of rice residue b
and the various factors which influence its adoption. There will not be sig
in rice residue burning under prevailing government policies as the othe
costly in terms of handling of rice residue and preparation of wheat fie
Application of choice logit model has identified farming experience, far
caste, soil type, tenure type, animal strength, use of residue as feed and
preparation of wheat field after rice, reduction in turnaround time betwe
rice and sowing of wheat, convenience in use of farm machinery,
machinery for incorporation and geographic location of farm as key expla
of rice crop residue burning decision.
The present study also attempted to estimate the quantity of burnt
which could be used for the generation of electricity. The results i

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 288 Ahmed and Ahmad

percent of area under rice is fully burn

and lower parts of rice plant are burnt. Th
53.75 to 58.12 percent of the total straw p
the farmer removed the pural and bur
proportion varied from 63.48 to 69.26 per
lower parts of rice plant. On overall basis
the study area. The overall quantity of
thousand tonnes for the rice-wheat cro
for Punjab and 4159.05 thousand tonne
potential to generate 162.51 MW, 296.1
rice-wheat cropping system area, Punj
minimise the cost of haulage of rice straw
at village level would be a good option. Fu
source can help in reducing foreign excha
can substitute one litter of furnace oi
Moreover, power generation from crop re
farmers from the rice residue along w
opportunities and economic activities on

REFERENCES

Amemiya, T. (1981) Qualitative Response Models: A Survey. Journal

Literature 20, 1483-1536.
Ahmed, T. and B. Ahmad (2013) Why do Farmers Burn Rice Residue
Farmers' Choices in Punjab, Pakistan. South Asian Network for Dev
Environmental Economics, Kathmandu, Nepal. (Working Paper No. 76-1
Akhtar, M., M. A. Zahid, D. Byerlee, and K. Tetlay (1992) Developin
Cropping Patterns for the Cotton-Wheat System of the Northern
Breeding and Policy Perspectives. In D. Byerlee and T. Husain (eds
Systems of Pakistan. Vanguard Books Pvt Ltd. Printed at Intekhab-e-Ja
Lahore.
Badarinath, K. V. S, T. R. K. Chand, and V. K. Prasad (2006) Agriculture Crop Residue
Burning in the Indo-Gangetic Plains—A Study Using IRS-P6 AWiFS Satellite Data.
Current Science 91, 1085-1089.
Barz, M. (2008) Biomass Technology for Electricity Generation in Community,
International Journal of Renewable Energy 3:1.
Barz, M. and M. K. Delivand (2011) Agricultural Residues as Promising Biofuels for
Biomass Power Generation in Thailand. Journal of Sustainable Energy and
Environment Special Issue, 21-27.
Bhatnagar, V. K., T. N. Choudhary, and B. R. Sharma (1983) Effect of Tillage Ad
Residue Management on Properties of Two Coarse Textured Soils and Yield of
Irrigated Wheat and Groundnut. Soil Tillage Research 3, 27-37.
Biederbeck, V. O., C. A. Campbell, K. E. Bowren, M. Schnitzer, and R. V. Mclver (1980)
Effect of Burning Cereal Straw on Soil Properties and Grain Yields in Saskatchewan.
Soil Science Society of American Journal 44, 103-11.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Burning of Crop Residue and ils Potential for Electricity Generation 289

Bond, T. C., S. J., Doherty, D. W. Fahey, P. M. Forster, T. Berntsen, B. J. DeAngelo, M.

G. Flanner, S. Ghan, B. Kärcher, D. Koch, S. Kinne, Y. Kondo, P. K. Quinn, M. C.
Sarofim, M. G. Schultz, M. Schulz, C. Venkataraman, H. Zhang, S. Zhang, N.
Bellouin, S. K. Guttikunda, P. K. Hopke, M. Z. Jacobson, J. W. Kaiser, Z. Klimont, U.
Lohmann, J. P. Schwarz, D. Shindell, T. Storelvmo, S.G. Warren, and C. S. Zender
(2013) Bounding the Role of Black Carbon in the Climate System: A Scientific
Assessment. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmosphere 118:11, 5380-552.
Capps jr., O. and R. A. Kramer (1985) Analysis of Food Stamp Participation Using
Qualitative Choice Models. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61 A, 49-59.
Chung, C. E., V. Ramanathan, D. Kim, and 1. A. Podgorny (2005) Global Anthropogenic
Aerosol Direct Forcing Derived from Satellite and Ground-based Observations.
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres 110.
Dam, V. J. and M. Junginger (2011) Striving to Further Harmonization of Sustainability
Criteria for Bioenergy in Europe: Recommendations from a Stakeholder
Questionnaire. Energy Policy 39, 4051-66.
Demirbas, A. (2001) Biomass Resource Facilities and Biomass Conversion Processing
for Fuels and Chemicals. Energy Conversation and Management 42, 1357-78.
Dubey, A. K, P. Chandra, D. Padhee, and S. Gangil (2013) Energy from Cotton Stalks
and other Crop Residues, CIAE, Bhopal, India, Available at https://www.icac.
org/projects/CommonFund/20_ucbvp/papers/15_chandra.pdf. (accessed on September 05,
2013)
Elmore, A. J., X. Shi, J. Nathaniel, X. Li, H. Jin, F. Wang, and X. Zhang (2008) Spatial
Distribution of Agricultural Residue from Rice for Potential Biofuel Production in
China. Biomass and Bioenergy 32:1, 22-7.
Erenstein, O. (2002) Crop Residue Mulching in Tropical and Semi-Tropical Countries:
An Evaluation of Residue Availability and Other Technological Implications. Soil and
Tillage Research 67, 115-133.
Ergudenler, A. and A. Isigigur (1994) Agricultural Residues as a Potential Resource for
Environmentally Sustainable Electric Power Generation in Turkey. Renewable Energy
5: Part-II, 786-90.
Freedman, S. M. (1983) The Use of Rice Crop Residues as a Non-commercial Energy
Source in Developing World: The Energy and Environmental Implications,
Agriculture. Ecosystems and Environment 10, 63-74.
Gadde, B., S. Bonnet, C. Menke, and S. Garivait (2009) Air Pollutant Emissions from
Rice Straw Open Field Burning in India, Thailand and the Philippines. Environmental
Pollution 157, 1554-1558.
Ganwar, K. S., K. K. Singh, S. K. Sharma, and O. K. Tomar (2006) Alternative Tillage
and Crop Residue Management in Wheat After Rice in Sandy Loam Soils of lndo
Gangetic Plains. Soil and Tillage Research 88, 242-257.
Garg, S. C. (2008) Trace Gases Emission from Field Burning of Crop Residues. Indian
Journal of Air Pollution Viii, 76-86.
Pakistan, Government of (2013) Economic Survey 2012-13. Ministry of Finance,
Government of Pakistan.

Punjab, Government of the (2009) Punjab Development Statistics 2009. Bureau of

Statistics, Lahore.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
290 Ahmed and A h mad

Graham, J. P., F. B. Ellis, D. G. Christian

Residues on the Establishment and Yie
Agricultural Engineering Research 33, 39-
Guadagni, P. M. and J. D. C. Little (1983) A
Scanner Data. Marketing Science 2:3, 203-
Gupta. P. K., S. Sahai, N. Singh, C. K. Dixit,
Gupta and, S. C. Garg (2004) Residue B
Causes and Implications. Current Scienc
Han, F. X., R. L., King, J. S. Lindner, T
Monts, Y. Su, J. C. Luthe, and M. J. Plodi
for Sustainable Biomass Supply to M
Bioenergy 35, 253-62.
Hanushek, E. A. and J. E. Jackson (1977) St
York: Academic Press.

Hartley, C. and C. V. Kessel (2005) Residue Management, Soil Organic Matter and
Fertility in Califormia Rice Systems. Conference Proceedings California Plant and
Soil Conference. California Chapter of the American Society of Agronomy. Modesto,
California.
Heard. J., C. Cavers, and G. Adrian (2006) Up in Smoke Nutrient Loss with Straw
Burning. Better Crops 90, 10-11.
Herr, A. and M. Dunlop (2011) Bioenergy in Australia: An Improved Approach fo
Estimating Spatial Availability of Biomass Resources in the Agricultural Production
Zones. Biomass and Bioenergy 35, 2298-305.
Hiloidhari, M. and D.C. Baruah (2011) Crop Residue Biomass for Decentralise
Electrical Powr Generation in Rural Areas (Part 1): Investigation of Spatial
Availability. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15, 1885-1892.
Hooker, M. L., G. M. Herron, and P. Penas (1982) Effect of Residue Burning, Removal
and Incorporation on Irrigated Cereal Yields and Soil Chemicals Properties. So
Science Society of America Journal 46, 122-126.
Idania, V-V, J. A. Acevedo-Benitezand, and C. Hernandez-Santiago (2010) Distributio
and Potential of Bioenergy Resources from Agricultural Activities in Mexico.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14, 2147-53.
IRR1-CIMMYT Alliance Cereal Knowledge Bank (2007) Crop Residue Management,
Fact Sheet. Developed with Input from M. Chandiramani, J. Jones, and P. Kosin
(knowledgebank.cimmyt.org).
Jiang, D., D. Zhuang, F. J. Yaohuan, Y. Huang, and K. Wen (2012) Bioenergy Potenti
from Crop Residues in China: Availability and Distribution. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 16, 1377-1382.
Jingura, R. M. and R. Matengaifa, (2008) The Potential for Energy Production from Crop
Residues in Zimbabwe. Biomass and Bioenergy 32, 1287-92.
Judge, G. G., W. E. Griffiths, R. C. Hill, and T. C. Lee (1980) The Theory and Practice
of Econometrics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Karaj, S., T. Rehl, H. Leis, and J. Muller (2010) Analysis of Biomass Residues Potential
for Electrical Generation in Albania. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14,
493-99.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Burning of Crop Residue and ils Potential for Electricity Generalion 291

Kante, B. (2009) Benefits of Black Carbon Mitigation for Developing Countries. Black
Carbon-e Bulletin 1, 2.
Kumar, K. and K. M. Goh (2000) Crop Residues and Management Practices: Effects on
Soil Quality, Soil Nitrogen Dynamics, Crop Yield and Nitrogen Recovery. Advances
in Agronomy 68, 197-319.
Kessel, C. V. and W. R. Horwath (1999) Long Term Rice Straw Incorporation: Does it
Impact Maximum Yield. University of California, Davis.
Malhi, S. S. and H. R. Kutcher (2007) Small Grains Stubble Burning on Tillage Effects
on Soil Organic C and N and Aggregation in North-Eastern Saskatchewan. Soil and
Tillage Research 94, 353-361.
Mckendry, P. (2002) Energy Production from Biomass (Part 2): Conversion
Technologies. Bioresource Technology 83:1, 47-54.
Nakajima, T. (2009) New Demands on Black Carbon Sciences. Black Carbon-e Bulletin
1:2.

Nori, S. J. (2005) Study of Particulate Matter (PM) in Air in Taiyun. M. Sc. Thesis
Department of Chemistry. Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences. University
of Oslo, Shanxi, China.
Nussbaumer, T. (2003) Combustion and Co-combustion of Biomass: Fundamentals
Technologies, and Primary Measures for Emission Reduction. Energy Fuels 17,
1510-21.

Nguyen, T. L. T., J. E. Hermansen, and L. Mogensen (2013) Environmental Performance

of Crop Residues as an Energy Source for Electricity Production: The Case of Wheat
Straw in Denmark. Applied Energy 104, 633-41.
Pindyck, R. S. and D. L. Rubinfeld (2000) Econometric Models and Economic Forecasts.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Prasad, R., B. Gangaiah, and K. C. Aipe (1999) Effect of Crop Residue Management in a
Rice Wheat Cropping System on Growth and Yield of Crops and on Soil Fertility.
Experimental Agriculture 35, 427—435.
Prasad, R. and J. F. Power (1991) Crop Residue Management. Advances in Soil Science
15, 205-251.
Raison, R. J. (1979) Modification of Soil Environment by Vegetation Fires, with
Particular Reference to Nitrogen Transformation a Review. Plant and Soil 51, 73-108.
Ramanathan, N., I. H. Rehman, A. Kar, N. Bhatt, and V. Ramanathan (2009) Project
Surya: Mitigation of Global and Regional Climate Change, Buying the Planet Time
for Reducing Black Carbon, Methane and Ozone. Black Carbon-e Bulletin 1:2.
Ramanathan, V. and G. Carmichael (2008) Global and Regional Climate Changes Due to
Black Carbon. Nature Geoscience 1: 221-227.
Rasmussen, P. E., R. R. Allmaras, C. R. Rohde, and N. C. Roager (1980) Crop Residue
Influence on Soil Carbon and Nitrogen in a Wheat Fallow System. Soil Science
Society of America Journal 44, 596-600.
Scarlat, N., V. Blujdea, and J-F. Dallemand (2011) Assessment of the Availability of
Agricultural and Forest Residues for Bioenergy Production in Romania. Biomass and
Bioenergy 35, 1995-2005.
Scarlat, N., M. Martinov, and J-F. Dallemand (2010) Assessment of the Availability of
Agricultural Crop Residues in the European Union: Potential and Limitation for
Bioenergy Use. Waste Management 30, 1889-97.

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 292 Ahmed and Ahmad

Sharma, H. L., S. C. Modgal, and M. P. Sing

Crop Residues and Nitrogen in Rice W
Himalayas. Himachal Journal of Agricult
Shyam, M. (2002) Agro-residue-based R
Development. Energy for Sustainable D
Sidhu, B. S. and V. Beri (1989) Effect of
Different Crops and on Soil Properties. B
Singh, J., B. S. Panesar, and S. K. Sharma
Biomass Using Geographical Information
and Bioenergy 32, 301-307.
Streets, D. G., K. F. Yarber, J. H. Woo, an
Asia: Annual and Seasonal Estimate
Biogeochemical Cycles 17, 1099-1118.
Surekha, K., P. C. Reddy, A. P. P. Kumari,
Yield Components of Rice (Oryza Sati
Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science
The Lung Association (2009) Heating Methods and Open Burning. Available at
http://www.lung.ca/protect-protegez/pollution-pollution/outdoor-exterior/heating
chauffage_e.php. (accessed on July 25, 2009)
Tripathi, R., P. Sharma, and S. Singh (2007) Influence of Tillage and Crop Residue on
Soil Physical Properties and Yield of Rice and Wheat Under Shallow Water Table
Condones. Soil and Tillage Research 92,221-226.
UNEP (2009) A Major Study on Black Carbon Intercomparison. Black Carbon-e Bulletin
1:2.

UNEP.RRC.AP (2012) Atmospheric Brown Clouds. Available at http://www.

rrcap.unep.org/abc/ (accessed on October 2, 2012)
World Bioenergy Association (2010) Certification Criteria for Sustainable Biomass for
Energy. WBA Position Paper, Available at http://www.worldbioenergy.org/
sites/default/files/Certification%20Criteria%20for%20Sustainable%20Biomass%20fo
r%20Energy_Position%20Paper.pdf. (accessed on September 5, 2013).

This content downloaded from 103.37.201.142 on Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:01:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms