Potential Influence of Climate

Change on Water Footprint of Milk

Production: Case study in Irrigated
Rice-Wheat Cropping System

S. Sirohi, D. Pandey, S. Bansod, J. Sharma and R.C. Upadhyay

National Initiative on Climate Resilient Agriculture (NICRA)
National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal (Haryana)
Alarming Groundwater Depletion !
Punjab
>53% block overexploited, >7% dark
Haryana
>42% block overexploited, >6% dark
Groundwater Scarcity Index (Kampman, 2007)
Haryana 0.95
Punjab 0.45
 Water Footprints
Consumptive water use (CWU) in the process
of production of a commodity (Hoekstra, 2003)

Blue water footprint: CWU from irrigation, both,

groundwater and surface water
Green water footprint: CWU from rainfall
Grey water footprint: Non-consumptive use due
to deterioration in water quality
Sources of Water use in Milk
production
CWU

Direct Indirect

Drinking
Feed and
Bathing and
Fodder
servicing

Blue &
Blue Blue
Green
Component Component
Component
 The Present Study

Consumptive water use in milk production

Climate change and milk production

Options to reduce water footprints

 Direct Water Requirement
Drinking (liters/day)
Breed Winter Hot-humid
Crossbred 22 100
Murrah 30 85
Sahiwal & Tharparkar 18 45

Bathing and Servicing

Annual average 40 liters/day
Water footprints of milk production
CWU (m3/tonn)
Av. Milk Yield
Breed Blue Green Total
(lt./day)
Organized Farm
Karan Fries 9.0 995 216 1211
Murrah 7.4 1032 238 1270
Sahiwal & 7.2 1280 304 1584
Tharparkar
Unorganized Farms
Cross bred 8.3 1166 812 1977
Buffalo 5.2 1201 746 1947
Local Cow 4.5 981 563 1544

Moga, Punjab : 940 m3/tonn (Amarsinghe et al. 2010)

All-India average: 1789 m3/tonn (Amarsinghe et al. 2011)
All-India average: 1369 m3/tonn (Chapagain and Hoekstra, 2004)
Rice-Wheat-Milk: Ground Water Use
78% NIA by GW resources
86% of total irrigated area is under Rice in Kharif and Wheat in Rabi
12% under green fodder crops
CWU (m3/tonn) Production Total GW
(000 tonnes) use (MCM)
Total From Irrigation From GW
(Blue water) (internal)

Wheat 657 644 577 773 446

Rice 2170 1505 1347 521 702

Milk 1941 1187 287 439 126

Dry Fodder: 21.5%, Green Fodder: 10%, Concentrate: 64%, Direct water use: 4.5%
 Climate change and milk production

Aggravated Heat Stress: Rise in Temperature-

Humidity Index (THI) Decline in productivity
Milk yield reduction per unit increase in THI 0.20 to
0.32 kg (Ravagnolo et al., 2000; Ingraham et al., 1979)

India - negative correlation between productivity and

THI
Crossbred cows
Haryana and Sahiwal cows
Buffaloes
THI hourly distribution at Karnal
800

700

600

500
HOURS

400

300

200

100

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
>85 0 0 0 0 114 92 349 342 219 42 0 0
81-85 0 0 1 65 274 293 276 270 180 119 8 0
76-80 0 67 84 169 213 222 119 111 228 186 88 0
71-75 18 116 158 227 91 110 0 0 75 169 93 12
65-70 54 114 143 173 28 3 0 0 18 140 162 97
<65 672 375 358 86 0 0 0 0 0 87 366 587
Change in milk production and THI

KS=
KS=10.16
10.16
KF=11.52
KF=11.52
40
SW=9.61
SW=9.61 20
TH=8.44
TH=8.44
30 MU=9.73
MU=9.73 15

20 10

% Change of Ave. Prod

% Change of Ave. Prod

10 5

0 0
Feb
Jan

July

Oct

Nov

Dec
May

June

Sept
April
March

August
-10 -5

-20 -10

-30 -15
Months

KS KF Sahiwal Tharparkar Murrah

Impact of Heat and Cold Waves on Milk Production in Buffalo and
Cattle

Jun-07 Heat wave Jan-08 Cold wave

(10 days) (7 days)
Lactating Lactating Lactating Lactating
Buffaloes Cows Buffaloes Cows

No. of Animals 111 320 66 157

Monthly Production (liters) 22377.5 94221 17035 67148.7

Daily Production (liters) 745.9 3140.7 549.5 2166

Decline in MP (liters) 650 2414 337.5 1442.8

Avg. loss % 2.9 2.5 1.9 2.1

Climate Change Impact on Milk Production

Buffalo-Crossbred Production system:

1unit increase in mean THI 12.8%
decline in annual milk yield (without
adaptation measures)
Precis A1B Scenario for 2030
Milk production
Base year (2005) : 11.58 MT
Without climate change (2030): 26.92
MT
With climate change (2030): 19.52 MT
Likely effect on Water Footprint of Milk
Production
Milk surplus region, Commercialization of dairy farming

More concentrate based feeding higher CWU

Decline in crop productivity? higher CWU of crops

Increased drinking water requirement
Bos indicus, water intake increases from about 3 kg per kg DM
intake at 10 C ambient temperature, to 5 kg at 30C, and to
about 10 kg at 35C (NRC, 1981).

Decline in milk productivity due to heat stress higher

CWU
 Reducing water footprints:
Options
Re-orienting animal breeding policy
Focus of the cattle breeding policy - improve
productivity traits while maintaining adaptive traits
Feeding management
Diet with higher nutrient density
Fat supplementation and feed additives
Compound animal feed
Shelter Management
Extension Services
THANK YOU
 Compound Animal Feed: Lower CWU
CWU
Constituents in (m3) per
Farm % Composition DCP TDN
Concentrate tonn of
Conc.
Maize grain 33 1.17 16.90
Mustard cake 12 27.83 74.20
Organized Groundnut cake 21 41.75 71.00 463.26
Wheat bran 20 10.62 67.50
Rice bran 11 6.08 58.90
Mustard cake 39 27.83 74.20
Unorganized Cotton seed cake 31 17.48 71.60 1425.76
Wheat flour/ bran 30 10.62 67.50
 Estimation of Water
Footprints
Green Water Footprint = Min (ETp, Peff)

Where,
ki = crop Coefficient of ith growth period
dij = Number of days of the jth month in the
ith crop growth period
ET0ij = Reference evapotranspiration of the jth
month in the ith crop growth period
Where,
P75ij = daily 75% exceedence probability of rainfall
nij = total number of days in the jth month of the ith crop growth period
 The blue crop water use is the volume of
irrigation water that is actually supplied to
the crop field.

Blue Water Footprint= ETp-Peff

Total Water Footprint= Green Water

Footprint + Blue Water Footprint