First published: 22.08.2023 Last modified: 06.06.2024 Life Cycle Analysis No-burn rice farming practice Alternative to open-field burning Facilitating Solution  Overview Every year, more than 300,000 Myanmar rice farmers burn 2.3 million acres of farmland to prepare for the next growing season. Proximity Design's no-burn rice farming aims to mitigate more than 7 million tons of CO2 emissions, restore soil health, and improve incomes for farmers. Farmers traditionally burn crop rice straw residues in open fields to quickly clear the land for the next growing season. For the smallholder, this burning method is the most common, convenient, and often the only option for farmers to prepare the land within three to four weeks. This timeline is motivated by the opportunity for the farmer to have two crop cycles per year. However, this practice leads to 7 million tonnes of CO2 emitted to the atmosphere each year. This also releases dangerous levels of PM 2.5 particles into the atmosphere which enter our respiratory system. This alternative no-burn rice farming practice introduces the use of biological soil amendment – Effective Microorganism (EM) – to effectively decompose rice crop residues within 2 weeks. The practice helps restore essential soil properties and improve soil-related quality, productivity, and micro-biodiversity. As a result, farmers can improve yields by 15%, resulting in estimated income gains from monsoon paddy by 13%. Analysis Parameters Meeting international standards These analysis parameters are grounded in Lifecycle Assessment methods used in academic research and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14,000 series. They ensure a defined and structured approach to the analysis and outline the potential for comparability between two different solutions along with transparency for the reader. The functional unit is a quantification of the product or service that is being analyzed. It forms the center piece of the analysis, and it is used to analyze the proposed climate solution along with the comparative elements of the incumbent technology. The system boundary specifies what is included and what is omitted in the analysis. The product lifetime is essential to estimate potential use-phase as well as end-of-life emissions. Functional Unit Acre of no-burn rice farming practice The functional unit is represented by one acre of rice field managed according to Proximity Design's prescribed no-burn rice farming practice. Each acre is modeled with respect to the impacts associated with two growing seasons per year. Monsoon season is identified as the time that spans the months May to October while the summer season starts in November and lasts through April. There are different applications of inputs materials prescribed by the no-burn rice farming practice depending on the season which include effective micro-organism (EM), urea, and rice bran:
This functional unit has been chosen to best reflect the impacts of the no-burn rice farming practice with respect to the total acreage of farm land that employs this rice farming practice. Typical rice yield in monsoon season is 1,043 kg / acre, and in post-monsoon summer season, the yield average is 1,877 kg / acre. Goal and scope The goal of this study is to analyse the potential of effective microorganisms to reduce carbon emissions compared to the conventional rice farming practice with burning rice straw residues. The results of this study are useful for strategic planning and decision making of Proximity Designs. The study confirms the positive effects of EM on carbon emissions of rice farmers through the avoidance of rice straw residue burning. The audience is primarily the staff of Proximity Designs, but also third parties that are interested in the product, such as investors or government officials. System Boundary The system boundary includes the farm management inputs inclusive of EM's, urea, rice bran, and fertilizer. Transportation of these materials to the farm as well as rice delivery to market are modeled as direct, Scope 1 emissions. There are associated benchmarks with many of these processes that model the incumbent system boundary within the same context and constraints. The primary avoided impact factor is the absence of burning, or a direct Scope 1 emission that would otherwise result in a significant portion of CO2eq per acre in addition to local air pollution. The effective microorganisms are a best available technology that leverage the synergistic effects of beneficial microorganisms to enhance crop productivity and resilience. The geographical area of this study are rice fields in myanmar. This report excludes the effects of applying effective microorganisms in other geographical locations. The time of this study is 2023. Lifetime The following profile represents a farming practice that spans the timeline of one year. Each year, the practice is intended to be repeated and reflect a similar, of not the same, profile. Due to this farming practice, there may be longer ongoing effects that relate to the general soil health and other compounding factors. The positive biodiversity and soil sequestration implications of this practice could extend for several years, or decades, however, this research is still in process and there are no definitive results that can be quantified at this time. Executive Summary Key revelations The use of commercial NPK fertilizer represents a significant emission factor with respect to the entire rice farming process. Through the use of EM during the no-burn rice farming practice, one out of four applications of NPK fertilizer can be skipped compared to the open-field burning method. Insights to Impact Strategy The emissions that would have occurred as a result of the open-field burning practice are clearly very significant and the dedicated transitioning of farmers from this common practice to that of the no-burn rice farming practice represents a very strong alignment to a climate impact strategy. The results of research related to ongoing benefits of using EM's and not burning the rice straw could have compounding effects that maximize the perceived 'one-time' effects over time with year-over-year benefits. Continue to investigate and prove this impact perspective so that these implications can be modeled accordingly within this report. Offering Projections Proximity Designs projects the following scaled adoption rate of the 'no-burn' rice farming practice where each farmer is estimated to employ this method on an average 7.7 acres of land:
'Production' represents the total number of acres that are impacted each year with 'one-time' effects. Meanwhile, 'market activity' is intended to model recurring effects of the practice, for example 'improved soil biodiversity' over time. (No 'market activity' processes have been quantified at this time.) Potential Challenges Herbicide and pesticide use have only been identified qualitatively and not quantitatively at this time. These unknowns have the potential to significantly impact the overall no-burn rice farming practice profile. Therefore, continuing to find opportunities to reduce the use of these products with respect to the incumbent open-field burning will reduce the significance of these unknowns. Finding impact data for these commercial products can often be difficult and confined to proprietary information, thus a conservative, high estimated impact should be assumed with further analyses. Possible Rebounds The EM's contains a series of input compounds that reflect high embodied emissions. These are often the implications of products that are highly diluted due to the high concentration of input products. At this time, it represents a very significant emission factor, and the highest of the respective generated emissions. Climate Value Proposition Proximity Design's key climate value lies in the application of EM's as an alternative to the common open-field burning of the rice fields in Myanmar. This no-burn rice farming practice results in a reduction of direct, Scope 1 emissions which are indicated by the respective green bar (downstream). The generated emissions (orange) in Scope 1, down represent impacts of transport. Meanwhile, the Scope 3, upstream impacts reflect the embodied emissions of EM's in addition to those embodied emissions of the other required farm production; urea, rice bran, NPK fertilizer. Annual Cumulative Reaching the ClimatePoint Return on Impact Annual Emissions This bar chart represents the impact per year. The red bars represent the generated emissions, while the green bars represent the avoided emissions reflected on an annual basis. In the below table, the benchmark (yellow) conveys the incumbent scenario of what 'would have been', if the solution had not been in place. Thus, the 'Avoided' = the 'Benchmark' - the 'Generated.' This bar chart represents the annual impacts of the no-burn rice farming practice with respect to the projections forecasted by Proximity Designs. The red bars reveal the generated as a result of the no-burn rice farming practice, while the green bars indicate the difference, or avoided emissions, that can be estimated by replacing the incumbent open-field burning. The bars are stacked to reflect the total benchmark emissions of the open-field burning and the improvements associated with Proximity Design's no-burn solution. Annual Emissions This bar chart represents the impact per year. The red bars represent the generated emissions, while the green bars represent the avoided emissions reflected on an annual basis. In the below table, the benchmark (yellow) conveys the incumbent scenario of what 'would have been', if the solution had not been in place. Thus, the 'Avoided' = the 'Benchmark' - the 'Generated.' This bar chart represents the annual impacts of the no-burn rice farming practice with respect to the projections forecasted by Proximity Designs. The red bars reveal the generated as a result of the no-burn rice farming practice, while the green bars indicate the difference, or avoided emissions, that can be estimated by replacing the incumbent open-field burning. The bars are stacked to reflect the total benchmark emissions of the open-field burning and the improvements associated with Proximity Design's no-burn solution. Cumulative Emissions This area chart represents the impact over the lifetime of the solution. The orange area reflects the total anticipated generated emissions, while the green area reflects the total cumulative avoided emissions. In the below table, the benchmark (yellow) conveys the incumbent scenario of what 'would have been' if the solution had not been in place. Thus, the 'Avoided' = the 'Benchmark' - the 'Generated.' This stacked chart represents the cumulative impacts of the no-burn rice farming practice with respect to the projections forecasted by Proximity Designs. The red area represents the emissions that are generated as a result of the management practice, while the green area indicates the difference, or avoided emissions, that can be described by replacing the incumbent open-field burning. The chart areas are stacked to reflect the total benchmark emissions of the open-field burning and the improvements associated with Proximity Design's solution. Reaching the ClimatePoint This line chart represents the time at which the offering has reached 'The ClimatePoint.' This temporal alignment indicates that the technology or practices implemented by the solution have successfully reduced emissions by 50% compared to the incumbent technology. This is a pivotal indicator of the company's commitment to advancing sustainable solutions and meeting or even exceeding global climate change mitigation goals. When this intersection occurs before 2030, the technology is aligned to the Paris Accord. With the current emission profile, Proximity Designs is expected to reach the 'ClimatePoint' within the first year of implementation. This is indicated by the green line being above the orange line. As long as the green line remains above the orange line before the year 2030 and beyond, the solution represents a 1.5 degree Celsius technology that is aligned with ambitions of the Paris Accord. Return on Carbon This line chart represents the ratio of avoided tons CO2eq to generated tons CO2eq amortized over the lifetime of the company. An offering with a horizontal line indicates a company that projects a consistent quantified impact over time. Only per annum effects are considered for this analysis, thus the return on impact is reflected as a consistent linear relationship. However, once recurring compounded benefits can be proved, for example with increased sequestration in the soil due to implementing this no-burn practice, the resulting ratio will presumably improve over time. Process Overview Understanding your emission profile This process summary depicts an overview of the most significant emission factors that take place throughout your lifecycle activity. By viewing these intensities alongside each other, you can gauge their relative importance with respect to positive and negative extremes. Each process item listed on the horizontal axis will be described further in the Scope Allocation Analysis where readers can dive into the details behind each of the data points. While this model represents the complete overview, we make sure that each factor is supported by a sound methodology. Building your impact foundation Some process items may remain blank because the ClimatePoint team has considered them to be out of project scope, insignificant, or without enough information to analyse. These gaps should eventually be completed as you aim for your emission profile to approach higher levels of accuracy. Because of this presentation, you can understand which additional data is necessary to complete your entire impact profile and accommodate the dynamic growth and scalability of your company. ClimatePoint is here to help you navigate this pathway and optimize your impact strategy. Scope Allocation Analysis  Connecting academia with business The scope allocation analysis is our strategy to bridge the LCA emission assessment to the world of corporate GHG reporting. When our team approaches a new technology, we start with the most significant aspects that outline both your generated emissions and your avoided emission impact. The following process items represent these key factors backed by a defined methodology approach. This format permits the technology to be strategically aligned with our global climate targets, challenged for verification, and refined with evolution and growth. As the climate solution matures, we can easily update or add process items making this a truly dynamic report. This ClimatePoint approach integrates impact foundations outlined by the international community. Your most significant climate impact To help you interpret the key climate aspects of your technology, we assign each process item two labels to serve as high level indicators. A 'Score' that is 'Aligned' indicates that there is a quantifiable reduction in emissions relative to the incumbent process. If a process is assigned 'Potential,' there is an opportunity for additional alignment, but more verification is required to prove this benefit. 'Negative' means that the process results in additional emissions over the equivalent process while a 'Rebound' identifies additional emissions that would have otherwise been generated by the incumbent technology. The 'Priority' label rates these with relative significance to qualitatively distinguish importance and attention hierarchy. # Process item Scope Score Priority 1 Avoided rice straw burning Scope 1 Downstream Aligned High Company Claim Proximity Designs replaces the burning of rice crop residues that otherwise commonly occur as part of local land preparation practices. Burning intends to remove the rice straw from the land that remains from the previous harvest. It is a practice that is otherwise implemented once per year so that rice farmers can grow a second crop within an effective timeframe. In other countries, this process is mechanized, but in Myanmar, smallholder farmers have no access/finance to machinery, or their farms may be too small or uneven for respective machines. Thus, the traditional practice of burning the residue to clear the fields is employed by thousands of farmers each year. In addition to direct CO2 emissions, this management practice also results in dangerous levels of PM 2.4 particles in the atmosphere which can enter the respiratory system and impact human health throughout the surrounding communities. Benchmarks (Enabled (E)) Rice straw burning of one acre, once per year: Open field burning has already been banned in neighboring countries such as India and Thailand due to hazardous air quality, resulting in lockdowns and rise in respiratory-linked hospital visits. Despite these bans, each year satellite data shows a continued increase in hotspots during the burning seasons. This is because farmers have yet to be presented with practical alternatives to open-field burning. Qualitative Overview Score: Aligned This process represents significant avoided emissions, and is therefore aligned with a positive impact strategy. Priority: High Verifying that the no-burn rice farming practice is actively replacing the common open-field burning of existing farmers is essential to validating the Proximity Design impact story. Recommendation Continue to aggregate and share resources that support the estimated emission claims that would otherwise occur as a result of open-field burning. Additional reference points can be collected and inserted into the following quantification section to convey potential accuracy and differences across different studies and sources. Methodology Investigate respective scientific literature on open-field burning to estimate the avoided emissions per acre of land. It is preferable to find associated reference that specifically address rice farmers in the region of Southeast Asia. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 2 Effective micro-organisms (EM) Scope 3 Upstream Rebound Medium Company Claim
Qualitative Overview Score: Rebound Compared to the incumbent way of business, this process produces additional emissions, which is why it is marked with a rebound impact score. The production of EM mainly requires electricity that leads to emissions. Reducing the required energy and sourcing it from renewable sources reduces the emissions from this process. Priority: Medium The expected emissions from this process are considerable, which is why it is marked with a medium impact score. Recommendation To reduce emissions from the sourcing of raw materials for EM's, prioritize local and sustainable sourcing input ingredients, utilize renewable energy in production processes, and optimize supply chain logistics for efficiency. Methodology
User account login required to view quantification analysis. 3 Rice bran (soil nutrient) Scope 3 Upstream Rebound Low Company Claim Rice bran is the outer layer of rice grains that is removed during the milling process to produce polished white rice. It is rich in nutrients, particularly fats and proteins, and is typically applied to the soil to improve its organic matter content, enhance soil structure, moisture retention, and nutrient availability. The no-burn rice farming practice requires an application of rice bran once per year during the post-monsoon season at a rate of 13kg per acre. Benchmarks (Directly induced (DI)) Rice bran is typically applied in the incumbent scenario, thus the same amount has been assigned for the associated benchmark. Qualitative Overview Score: Rebound Since rice bran application is common practice for the incumbent method, it is identified as an inherently negative process that is required for both forms of management. Priority: Low The priority is low because the impact is relatively insignificant compared to the other identified processes. Recommendation The origins of the rice bran are unclear and could have a range of embodied emissions depending on the processes that take place to mill the rice and transport the bran to farmers. Results presented by this process have the potential to be double counted due to the listed transport factor. The process of rice milling to extract the bran is also unknown and thus can be investigated further to provide a more accurate representation of the actual data point. Methodology The required amount of rice bran is multiplied by an emission intensity estimated by academic sources. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 4 Urea (25% reduction) Scope 3 Upstream Aligned Medium Company Claim Secondary significant benefits are the reduction in fertilizer application as the enriched soil will require less amount of additional fertilizer. Usually, farmers apply 1 bag of urea + 0.5 bag compound per acre four times during the growing season (at 15, 30, 45, and 60 days after planting). With this practice, they can skip the one application on Day 15. This means a 25% overall reduction in urea fertilizer. Benchmarks (Enabled (E)) Urea application amounts required by the incumbent open-field burning. Qualitative Overview Score: Aligned As urea use is reduced by 25% by the no-burn rice strategy it is marked aligned. Priority: Medium As urea is an important part of the application process, it is marked with a medium impact score. Recommendation The choice of raw material used for the production of Urea can have a considerable impact on the emission values of this process. Therefore, by tracking and monitoring the source of Urea can help in reducing the associated emissions. Methodology For this process it is currently assumed that EM application reduces urea fertiliser application by around 25%. However, it is expected that in the near future, EM is able to half urea fertiliser need (50% reduction). This needs to be nonetheless verified by Proximity Designs through monitoring EM's performance. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 5 NPK 15-15-15 fertilizer Scope 3 Upstream Negative Medium Company Claim It was mentioned by the company that as additional fertilizer the compound fertilizer NPK 15-15-15 is used. A balanced NPK fertilizer with a ratio such as 15-15-15 is commonly used for rice cultivation in Myanmar. However, farmers and agricultural advisors will consider local conditions, soil nutrient levels, and the rice variety being grown to decide which NPK fertilizer will result in optimal crop yield and quality. Benchmarks (Directly induced (DI)) Both management methods use the same amount of NPK fertilizer because, at this time, Proximity Designs does not have any specific recommendations that will differentiate from the common application practice. Qualitative Overview Score: Negative Since commercial fertilizer application is common practice for the incumbent burn method, it is identified as an inherently negative process that is required for both forms of management. Priority: Medium The impact is moderately significant compared to the other identified processes and may offer an opportunity to improve the overall emission profile of the no-burn rice farming practice if it facilitates less use of the commercial product. Recommendation Supplementing the amount of fertilizer through the no-burn rice farming practice that is typically used can lead to significant decreases in the lifecycle emissions of the entire value chain. Methodology For calculating the emissions of the NPK 15-15-15 fertilizer, the amount of fertilizer in kg necessary for fertilizing the acre of rice field is taken into consideration and multiplied with the respective emission factor. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 6 Methane emissions GWP 100 Scope 1 Downstream Potential High Company Claim Rice farming contributes to methane emissions due to the flooded conditions in rice paddies, which create an anaerobic environment where methane-producing microorganisms thrive. These microorganisms produce methane as a byproduct of organic matter decomposition. Methane is released into the atmosphere as bubbles from the waterlogged soil, particularly during the growing season and after rice harvesting. Sustainable rice farming practices, such as intermittent flooding and improved water management, can help reduce methane emissions from this source. Benchmarks (Directly induced (DI)) Methane emissions with the incumbent practice of open-field burning. Qualitative Overview Score: Potential As EM indirectly could contribute to reducing methane emissions, this process is marked with a potential impact score. Priority: High Priority to track and monitor the methane emissions (reductions) is highly important. Recommendation Tracking and monitoring the methane emissions from the two practices is very important to see how EM effects the emissions in reality. This is important to verify that EM leads to the reduction of methane emissions. Methodology Some studies have suggested that EM-treated rice paddies may indirectly reduce methane emissions by improving overall soil health and promoting more efficient nutrient cycling. Healthy soils can potentially reduce the need for excessive fertilization, which can contribute to methane emissions when excess nutrients are available for methanogens. Additionally, EM-treated fields may support more robust plant growth, which can help reduce the duration of flooded conditions in the paddies, potentially lowering methane emissions. A specific study found that the methane efflux in planted plots varied with the rice variety and growth stage, ranging from 4 to 26 mg per hour per square meter. However, it’s important to note that these values can differ significantly based on the aforementioned factors. This process is left qualitatively in the report due to the variations in intensity of methane as a near term climate forcer (NTCF) over time. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 7 Nitrous oxide emissions (N2O) Scope 1 Downstream Potential High Company Claim Nitrogen in soils can be converted into various forms through biological and abiological pathways. The use of synthetic and organic fertilizers adds nitrogen to soils, thereby increasing natural emissions of nitrous oxide (N2O), a potent greenhouse gas. Agricultural lands and grasslands are significant emission sources within this category. The quantity of nitrogen oxides (NOx) emitted from agricultural land is dependent on fertilizer application and the subsequent microbial denitrification of the soil Benchmarks (Directly induced (DI)) N2O emissions with conventional open-field burn method. Qualitative Overview Score: Potential As literature mentions that EM can have positive effects on nitrogen soil contents, it has the potential to avoid emissions. Priority: High As nitrogen is a very potent greenhouse gas, it is very relevant to investigate the effect of EM on nitrogen soil contents further. Recommendation Tracking and monitoring the methane emissions from the two practices is very important to see how EM effects the emissions in reality. Methodology The carbon flux from nitrogen to atmosphere from rice fields has been calculated by researching on the nitrogen content in the rice fields per year and mltiplying the value by the actual flux to atomosphere. As through research it could not have been identified what kind of impact EM has on nitrogen contents of soils, an arbitrary estimate of 10% less nitrogen released to atmosphere through EM application has been assumed. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 8 Transport of input materials Scope 3 Downstream Rebound Medium Company Claim EM dry sleeping culture is sourced from South Korea (every 6 months, order of 500 kg). The sugar feed is sourced from a nearby sugar factory, it is a byproduct of sugar production. The water is filtered. The oxygen is produced by a 72W machine. It is manufactured by an external supplier in Hmawbi (45 km from Yangon), shipped to branch offices across the country (200-500 km) by an express bus where it may be stored at a room temperature and delivered to customers within 45 km radius from the branch office. Benchmarks (Enabled (E)) Airplane transport as an alternative mode of transport to ship and truck. Qualitative Overview Score: Rebound Compared to the incumbent way, this process leads to additional emissions in the company's overall emissions profile. Therefore it is assigned a rebound impact score. Priority: Medium As the transport emissions are considerable, the process has a medium priority. Recommendation To reduce emissions from transportation, reduce the frequency of transport by using larger transport vehicles and use greener transport vehicles. Methodology The transportation for the raw materials is based on the source of "EM dry sleeping culture" from South Korea. The distance is assumed to be road/ship (10/90) from South Korea to Myanmar. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 9 Diesel usage at farm Scope 1 Downstream Aligned Low Company Claim Planting for both monsoon and post monsoon season, planting is the same, the only difference is the tilling process - Harvesting during the post-monsoon season typically requires machinery. However, some of the farmers will do this by hand. During monsoon season, farmers use a manual tiller. With the no-burn rice farming practice, inclusive of EM, the tilling requirement is reduced by 50%. (For each acre of land, the incumbent method requires approximately one-liter of diesel.) Diesel-Powered Pumps: In some cases, diesel-powered pumps are used to lift water from a source (e.g., river or reservoir) into the rice field for flood irrigation. The diesel consumption in these situations will depend on the pump's horsepower, the distance to the water source, and the field size. Management Practices: The frequency and duration of flooding can impact diesel use. Some farmers may choose to flood their fields intermittently rather than continuously to conserve water and reduce energy consumption. Efficiency: The efficiency of the irrigation system, including the pump and water distribution methods, can affect diesel consumption. Well-maintained pumps and properly designed irrigation channels can reduce energy needs. Benchmarks (Enabled (E)) The benchmark is the diesel usage of tillage without EM application. Qualitative Overview Score: Aligned The no-burn rice strategy reduces the amount of diesel needed. Priority: Low As Diesel usage is expected to not be too large, priority is low. Recommendation Greater specifications on factors such as the type of pumps, related flood management practices, and overall efficiencies can add more granularity to the impact quantification of this process. Methodology For this process the diesel usage for tilling and irrigation of one acre of rice field was considered. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 10 Herbicides and pesticides Scope 3 Upstream Potential Medium Company Claim The choice of herbicides and pesticides for rice cultivation in Myanmar, as in many countries, depends on various factors, including the specific pests and weeds present, the rice varieties being grown, and local agricultural practices. Proximity Designs is currently investigating the impact of the no-burn rice farming practice respective of avoided herbicide, pesticide, and fungicide use. There are no results to share at this time. Qualitative Overview Score: Potential There might be a potential for avoided emissions through supplemented herbicides, pesticides or fungicides. Priority: Medium Further investigating this potential should have a medium priority. Recommendation Supplementing the otherwise perceived required use of these commercial products will result in additional quantified impacts that can be forecasted respective to the management policy. These commercial chemical products can have very high associated environmental impacts, thus while this process is not currently quantified, it could represent a significant emission factor to investigate further. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 11 Drying of harvested rice Scope 3 Downstream Negative Medium Company Claim Farmers don't use a dryer as a post treatment because in Myanmar it is common practice to dry the rice in the sun. This practice is employed for both seasons because the drying occurs post-monsoon season. Qualitative Overview Score: Negative While sun drying itself doesn't directly emit pollutants, there can be environmental concerns with respect to dust and particulate matter from the drying process which can affect local air quality, especially in areas with prevailing winds. Priority: Medium Depending on the region of application, this aspect of air quality degradation may or may not be relevant. Recommendation Emissions from rice drying can be mitigated through the adoption of clean and efficient drying technologies, such as mechanical dryers and solar dryers. Proper maintenance, clean energy sources, and adherence to good agricultural practices help reduce emissions during the drying process. Dust control measures, monitoring and compliance with regulations, and community engagement are additional strategies to minimize environmental impacts. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 12 Transport of rice to market Scope 1 Downstream Rebound Medium Company Claim Typical rice yield in monsoon season is 1043 kg / acre, and in post-monsoon summer season, the yield average is 1,877 kg / acre. Most of the rice produced is consumed domestically (Representative of 50-80 baskets, with 21 kg capacity per basket). Road transport is one of the primary modes of moving rice from rural areas to markets in Myanmar. Farmers use trucks, tractors, carts, and other vehicles to transport rice to local markets or collection centers. In some cases, rice may be bagged or loaded into sacks or containers for transport. Other options may be water transport in regions with navigable rivers and waterways. In some cases, areas are served by railways and can be transported by train. Myanmar has a railway network that connects major cities and regions, allowing for bulk transportation of rice in railcars. Benchmarks (Enabled (E)) As the rice is assumed to be transported by truck, two benchmarks/ reference points have been selected:
Qualitative Overview Score: Rebound The more rice is produced the more needs to be transported leading to higher emissions. However, this is a result of the Functional Unit being an acre of land. Measuring in kilograms of rice, there is no rebound effect as the manner of transport is not changed. Priority: Medium Quantities are expected to be considerable so that priority is medium. Recommendation This impact factor can be refined as more certainty is gained about the location of end markets and methods of transporting the harvested rice throughout the country. A metric that estimates the percentage of harvested rice that is consumed at local markets versus transported throughout the country, or even exported, could help refine this impact generalization and provide better context with respect to impacts associated with the other impact factors. Methodology As most rice is transported within Myanmar the largest travel distance from north to south of around 2 563,68499 km has been selected. This value is halved to have a mean travel distance. It is assumed by Proximity Designs that EM application increases rice yields by around 15% annually. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 13 Soil improvement/ health Scope 3 Downstream Potential Low Company Claim Proximity Designs is currently conducting research related to perceived beneficial changes to the soil that occur as a result of the no-burn rice farming practice. While there is no quantification at this time, the organization anticipates that the results will prove to be beneficial and demonstrate increased carbon uptake (CO2 sequestration). 800 soil samples to be collected over 12 months from adopters and non-adopters, before and after the season (10% completed as of July 2023). Their lab technicians follow Walkley and Black method to test for organic matters. Benchmarks (Enabled (E)) Carbon-uptake (sequestration) of farm fields that results or does not result from the incumbent rice-burning management method. Qualitative Overview Score: Potential There is a potential here for alignment, which needs to be further investigated. Priority: Low Opportunities with respect to alignment will become more apparent over time and will likely become of higher priority. Recommendation Continue to conduct research related to increased soil micro biology and carbon uptake that occur as a result of the no-burn rice farming practice. These positive impacts have potential to result in effects that compound year-over-year and further maximize the benefits associated with this practice. Employ sound research methodologies which continue to have a diverse and expansive sample size inclusive of regions that have not implemented the no-burn rice farming practice. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 14 Avoided air pollution Scope 1 Downstream Potential High Company Claim By applying EM to the fields, burning the rice fields is avoided and with it the air pollution. As the rice straw residues are often burned on open fields, the resulting smoke is going unfiltered into the air, leading to a large air pollution. This is not only a problem for the environment and climate, but also for the local population and its health. Benchmarks (Directly induced (DI)) Air pollution through open-field burning method. Qualitative Overview Score: Potential As the avoidance of air pollution shows great potential for further alignment of the process with the international climate goals, it is marked with a potential impact score. Priority: High As the avoided emissions are expected to be large this process should be tracked and monitored with high priority. Recommendation Mitigating air pollution from rice field burning can be achieved through strategies such as incorporating rice straw back into the soil to enhance fertility, utilizing straw as a raw material for bioenergy production or industrial uses, and adopting no-till farming practices to reduce the need for burning. Offering farmers financial incentives, technological support, and education on the impacts of burning and the benefits of alternative practices can encourage adoption of environmentally friendly straw management methods. Enforcing regulations against straw burning, coupled with community engagement and support for alternative uses, can further reduce air pollution. These efforts require collaboration across governments, agricultural sectors, and communities to ensure sustainable and effective implementation. Methodology This process considers the emissions and avoided emissions to air respectively of the no-burn rice farming practice and the open-field burning practice. It is assumed that the larger the carbon emissions, the worse the practice is for public health, as more carbon particles are in the air. User account login required to view quantification analysis. 15 Emissions to water Scope 3 Downstream Negative Medium Company Claim Effective Microorganisms (EM), a mixture of beneficial microorganisms for soil and plant health, typically do not emit pollutants into water when applied to rice fields. Benchmarks (Enabled (E)) Emissions to water that are implied by the no-burn rice farming practice that could be linked to applied substances, ie. EM and urea. Qualitative Overview Score: Negative Despite not leading to carbon emissions, this process potentially leads to emissions to water which is why it is marked with a negative impact score. Priority: Medium The priority is medium as despite its negligible effect, this process should be monitored thoroughly to avoid any surprising negative side-effects of EM application. Recommendation Application of EM is generally considered an environmentally safe practice. Since it is a natural product, pollutants and harming substances are not expected, however application practices should be mindful as embodied nutrients may leach into ground water. Meanwhile, urea, when not managed properly, can be a source of nitrogen emissions to water bodies, which can contribute to water pollution. These risks can be mitigated in rice cultivation through the adoption of several best management practices (BMPs) that pertain to application rates, timing, areas vulnerable to leaching, and defined buffer zones. Regular monitoring of field and water quality is essential to address any concerns promptly. User account login required to view quantification analysis. Impact Aggregation Functional unit profile This graph represents the aggregation of all the aforementioned emission factors with respect to the defined functional unit. By selecting a benchmark, the corresponding avoided emissions will also be displayed on the graph. If there are several benchmarks, the graph will display the benchmark specific avoided emissions. This enables you to see the difference in the emission profile that this climate solution has to the incumbent technology. There is also an effect filter to identify which impact factors only occur once and which recur multiple times, usually throughout the lifetime use of the product or service. You can click the process labels in the legend to hide and show different elements to reveal further insights. Projections Forecasting your impact As we seek to mitigate emissions across entire industry sectors, identifying our most strategic opportunities requires an examination of future scenarios and corresponding scalability. This section represents the aggregated impacts applied to the modeled growth forecast. Use the filters to navigate respective scopes and perspectives to visualize the nuances of these aggregations. You can even select different 'Scenarios' and 'Benchmarks' to understand the implications of different pathways and audience outlooks. Different lifecycle stages Some lifecycle activities, such as 'production,' reveal all of the embodied emissions that result from bringing the product or service to market. Meanwhile, 'Market' represents emission factors that occur after the technology is deployed. Think of this for products and services that continue to have an impact even after they are sold to the end consumer. 'End-of-life' activities may also be applicable to modeling if, for example, additional emissions are generated with waste processing. This Life Cycle Analysis represents aggregations of all stages. ClimatePoint Funding the Future ClimatePoint AS Universitetsgata 12, 0157 Oslo |