Carbon sequestration through carbon farming to earn

carbon credit
Shaon Kumar Das1, Aniruddha Roy2 and N. U. Singh2
1
ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Sikkim Centre, Tadong, Gangtok, Sikkim-737102
ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya-793103
*e-mail for correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract
Carbon farming involves a single change in land management, such as zero tillage, agroforestry,
methane-reducing feed supplements or stubble retention which maximizes capture of carbon and
reduction of emissions. In carbon farming, the amounts of CO 2, CH4 , and N2O will be reduced
with increasing C sinks in soil because of increased soil aeration from organic carbon addition
which reduces denitrification and increases sink capacity for CH 4. Soil organic carbon adds
electron acceptors and increases redox-potential of soils to decrease N 2O source capacity of soil.
Carbon farming induces microbial immobilization of available N 2 in soil, which also decreases
the N2O source capacity of soil. Carbon farming is successful when the gain of carbon resulting
from enhanced land management and/or conservation practices exceeds the carbon losses. The
benefits include green house gas reduction, carbon sequestration, increased biodiversity,
buffering against drought and greater water use efficiency. Development of different programs
will facilitate the buying and selling of carbon credits between landholders and Government
agencies. Landholders receive carbon credits for storing carbon in the soil which are assembled
and sold when planned to reduce emissions. These credits are often bought independently of an
exchange, and can boost the financial status of the client, and help to demonstrate that the
practices are helpful in mitigating the effects of the industrial society.

Introduction
Carbon farming describes a collection of eco-friendly techniques that have the ability to increase
carbon sink into the soil i.e., carbon sequestration. Increasing the C sink in soil will help to
reduce the amounts of CO 2, CH4, and N2O emission in environment. Carbon farming leads to
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions is referred to as abatement activities. It holds carbon in
vegetation and soils, and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. A carbon offset credit is a payment
made by an emitter of carbon (a power plant, mine, oil refinery etc.) to the developer or owner of
a carbon sequestration process (owner of a forest reserve, biochar project developer etc.). In
carbon farming, there are some promising options that reduce greenhouse gas emissions; storage
of carbon in soils and degraded rangelands through forests tree plantings and regrowth, carbon
storage through incorporation of biochar which is carbon negative, substitution of biofuels for
fossil fuels. Carbon farming provides land managers an opportunity to earn carbon credits
through carbon storing or reducing greenhouse gas emissions on their own land. The emissions
can be offset by selling the carbon credits to the Government nominated authority. Actually
carbon farming is a voluntary carbon offsets scheme that provides economic rewards to
landholders willing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon farming reduces emissions by
sequestration, where carbon is stored on the land, and emissions avoidance, which prevents the
greenhouse gas emissions from entering the atmosphere. It involves implementing practices that
improve the rate at which CO 2 is removed from the atmosphere and converted to plant material
and/or soil organic matter.

Carbon farming
The phrase „carbon farming‟ means using farming methods that reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, and/or capture and hold carbon in vegetation and soils. Carbon farming can cover
small changes in land management – like introducing no-till cropping, stubble retention,
agroforestry, or methane-reducing feed supplements. At the other end of the scale, it can mean
developing an integrated whole farm plan to reduce emissions and maximize carbon capture. It
includes those activities that can earn Indian carbon credit units through the emissions reduction
fund. Land management is the second largest contributor to carbon dioxide emissions on planet
earth. Agriculture is the one sector that has the ability to transform from a net emitter of CO 2 to a
net sequesterer of CO2-there is no other human managed realm with this potential. Common
agricultural practices, including driving a tractor, tilling the soil, over-grazing, using fossil fuel
based fertilizers and pesticides result in significant carbon dioxide release. Alternatively, carbon
can be stored long term (decades to centuries or more) beneficially in soils in a process called
soil carbon sequestration. Carbon Farming involves implementing practices that are known to
improve the rate at which CO 2 is removed from the atmosphere and converted to plant material
and/or soil organic matter. Carbon farming is successful when carbon gains resulting from
enhanced land management and/or conservation practices exceed carbon losses.

Carbon credit
International treaties have set quotas on the amount of GHG countries can produce, which in turn
set quotas for businesses. Instruments like carbon credits and carbon offset were introduced in
order to improve the scenario by encouraging firms to be more environment friendly in
conducting their business. One carbon credit allows one tonne of carbon dioxide or a
corresponding amount of other greenhouse gases to be discharged in the air. Businesses that are
over their quotas must buy carbon credits for excess emissions, while those below can sell their
remaining credits. This exchange of credits between businesses has encouraged carbon trading
globally. These credits can be exchanged between businesses or bought and sold in international
markets at prevailing market price at two exchanges, namely the Chicago Climate Exchange and
the European Climate Exchange. The Multi-Commodity Exchange of India (MCX) may soon
become the third exchange in the world to trade in carbon credits. The amount of global
emissions can be controlled through the buying and selling of carbon credits in the carbon
trading method. It is quite simple and convenient to purchase carbon credits from a number of
firms, just like any other monetary instrument, as they are traded in an open market. Carbon
trading is used when the company's emissions exceed its quota of carbon credits, forc ing it to
purchase credits from other companies which have spare carbon credits. As a result, the
worldwide carbon emissions stay within permissible levels, and the companies come up with
ecologically sustaina ble ways of conducting business. The system also motivates the
organizations to be more eco friendly so that they can increase their earnings by selling carbon
credits. As carbon credits are freely traded in the market, they make it very easy for businesses to
follow the system. In the present scenario, the market of carbon credits has a direct impact on the
firm's financial analysis. This has caused firms to actively seek ways to decrease their emissions
and adopt cleaner ways of doing business. Thus, the whole system motivates companies and
governments to promote environment friendly processes that reduce greenhouse gas emission.
Carbon trading, also referred as emissions transacting, it is a joint effort designed to limit the
amount of carbon that businesses, organizations and other entities produce over a specific period
of time. The ones who are selling are companies that use clean technology and those buying are
the world‟s polluters. In future, the menace of global warming can be effectively handled by this
system.

Win-win carbon farming practices

The following practices, which relate to soils, livestock, trees, fertilizer and energy use, can be
integrated into existing farming systems to increase soil organic carbon and enhance
productivity.

Soils
Applying the practices below can help increase soil health by improving soil structure, reducing
losses of carbon and nitrogen from the soil, and building soil organic matter. Improving nitrogen
use efficiency and growing better pastures and crops can have direct financial benefits to farm
businesses.
Use conservation tillage and controlled traffic techniques in cropping operations.
Avoid burning crop residues and retain prunings and stubble where practical.
If cultivation is absolutely necessary, do not till excessively wet or dry soils.
Avoid periods of bare fallow and ensure continuous plant cover where possible.
Manage irrigation and soil drainage to reduce water logging.
Rotate crops and include rotations of perennial pastures and legumes.
Add composted material where practical.
Manage soil structure to maximize plant uptake and minimize nitrogen loss (e.g. use
gypsum on sodic soils).
Manage livestock waste (dung and urine) to minimize nitrous oxide emissions.
Manage soil nutrient levels by choosing nutrient targets, completing a nutrient budget to
determine fertilizer requirements, match nutrients to the nitrogen input and hence
maintain those targets.
Don‟t overgraze pastures. Keep sufficient groundcover throughout the year.
Manage livestock movement/ paddock rotations to reduce compaction/ soil
structure decline in overgrazed paddocks.
Livestock
Methane is a major inefficiency in animal production systems. 6% – 10% of livestock gross
energy intake is lost as methane: the equivalent of up to 55– 60 days grazing intake for ewes and
steers, and 40 days for dairy cows. Nitrogen is another area of loss: between 70% and 95% of
nitrogen consumed by ruminants is excreted. If used effectively, it can improve pasture or crop
growth instead of being lost to the atmosphere. The following practices can reduce these losses:
Optimize feed quality (digestibility).
Use and minimize nutrient excretion.
Manage flock or herd performance through increased reproductive efficiencies, selective
culling and genetic optimization to enable faster finishing and other practices such as
early joining and early weaning.
Use a genetic improvement program to increase reproductive rates and shorten finishing
times.
Manage livestock waste (dung and urine) to minimize nitrous oxide emissions.

Trees
Trees store carbon in their wood and litter, where it remains until the trees rot or are destroyed
(e.g. by fire). When carefully integrated into farms, trees can increase farm productivity through
soil and water conservation and as shelter to animals. Local landcare network may be able to
help with understanding what grants and resources are available in an area.
Identify areas for shelterbelts, woodlots or wildlife areas - they could be less productive
or degraded areas, such as erosion gullies.
Establish new tree plantations, with species selection and site preparation geared towards
the best survival and growth.
Consider woodlots with tree species that can be used on-farm (e.g. for fodder, fence
posts, poles or firewood), making sure you don‟t use any weed species.
Encourage regeneration of native trees and shrubs, for example by fencing out
established native vegetation.
Protect existing native trees and shrubs from loss or damage.
Research options for creating and trading carbon credits through the Carbon Farming
Initiative.
Fertilizer
Applying nitrogen fertilizers more efficiently reduces nitrous oxide emissions and nitrate runoff
into waterways and has direct financia l benefits. You can save money, boost production and
reduce emissions of nitrous oxide by using best management practices for the rates, sources,
timings and placement of fertilizers.
Match nitrogen supply to crop or pasture demand by soil and plant testing to assess
nitrogen supply and using decision support tools and seasonal forecasts.
Avoid high application rates of nitrogen in any single application.
Avoid applying nitrogen fertilizers (especially nitrate) to waterlogged soils.
Avoid tillage under wet conditions.
Incorporate fertilizer at the top of raised beds or ridges to avoid wet areas.
Choose the best source of nitrogen. In the wet season urea and DAP will lose less nitrate
and nitrous oxide than nitrate based fertilizers.
Place fertilizer below the soil surface where possible.
Use an inhibitor coated fertilizer where possible – in summer to reduce ammonia loss and
in winter to reduce nitrous oxide and nitrate leaching losses.
Energy
No matter what happens with carbon trading policy and legislation, farmers will be affected by
rising energy costs. Farmers who increase their energy efficiency and find alternative, low cost
sources of fuel, heat and electricity may ultimately become more profitable. Relatively easy and
low cost changes can have big influence on reducing energy consumption.
Improve irrigation efficiency to reduce energy demand from operating pumps through
monitoring soil moisture.
Insulate buildings, storage and refrigeration devices, and heating and cooling pipes.
Use light coloured, heat reflective paint on roofs and walls.
Maximize the use of natural light and ventilation in farm buildings.
Explore options for alternative sources of energy and fuel, such as bio-energy, renewable
sources, green power.
Low carbon farming (LCF) s trategy
It supports sustainable farming by encouraging farmers to adopt practices that reduce/ minimize/
remove the use of synthetic fertilizers while, at the same time, improving soil carbon content.
This is done through reduced tillage, anaerobic composting, using organic fertilizers, mulching,
intercropping, multi-cropping, and a horde of techniques specially designed for particular
regions, populations and climatic zones.
Planting fuel, fodder and fruit trees, and protecting those that are already there on the
farms.
Planting multiple crops on the same field support biodiversity.
Proper crop mixes, based on science and demonstrated results, promotes resilience by
bringing about a balance in the farm ecology and reducing the risk of crop failures due to
pest attack. Multiple cropping also reduces the risk exposure for farmers against erratic
and spatial rainfall.

Opportunities in carbon farming

Carbon farming initiative is a voluntary carbon offsets scheme that provides economic rewards
to farmers and landholders who take steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Farmers and
landholders can choose whether or not to be involved. Carbon farming activities that reduce
greenhouse gas emissions are referred to as abatement activities. They reduce emissions by
storing carbon in soil or plants (sequestration projects) or reducing emissions of carbon and other
harmful greenhouse gases (emission reduction or avoidance projects). Under carbon farming
initiatives scheme, they may be able to earn carbon credits from activities such as:
reducing livestock emissions
increasing efficiency of fertilizer use
enhancing carbon in agricultural soil
Storing carbon through re-vegetation and re-forestation

Carbon credit implication

Its goal is to stop the increase of carbon dioxide emissions. The Kyoto Protocol presents nations
with the challenge of reducing greenhouse gases and storing more carbon. A nation that finds it
hard to meet its target of reducing GHG could pay another nation to reduce emissions by an
appropriate quantity. The carbon credit system was ratified in conjunction with the Kyoto
Protocol. For example, if an environmentalist group plants enough trees to reduce emissions by
one ton, the group will be awarded a credit. If a steel producer has an emissions quota of 10 tons,
but is expecting to produce 11 tons, it could purchase this carbon credit from the environmental
group. The carbon credit system looks to reduce emissions by having countries honor their
emission quotas and offer incentives for being below them. Simply put, one carbon credit is
equivalent to one tonne of carbon dioxide or its equivalent greenhouse gas (GHG).

Indian initiatives for environmental management

Comparing the globally placed carbon trade, India seems nowhere near. However, policy
statement for abatement of pollution, 1992 by the Govt. favours the use of MBIs for pollution
control, wherever feasible. In the recent years, compulsion to comply with Euro II emission
norms is a very confident step towards controlling air pollution. It has now become essential for
companies to make environmental considerations as a part of their business decision making.
The enactment of the Information Technology Act, 2000 has enabled the industry to kick-start
the use of electronic mode as a valid legal medium for carrying out its business operations which
were until now done compulsorily on paper. This includes initiatives like MCA e-filing, Income
Tax e-filing, SEBI Reporting and other electronic communications via, emails and video
conferencing. According to industry estimates, Indian companies are expected to generate at
least $8.5 billion at the going rate of $10 per tonne of CER (certified emission reduction). Tata
Sponge Iron Ltd got a CDM (clean development mechanism) certificate from the UN for its
waste heat recovery project in Orissa. Reliance Energy already has energy efficiency and process
development CDM projects. It‟s the need of the hour to think very seriously on reducing
environment loss by religiously following & implementing and innovating techniques & ways to
contain the same. This is a high time to call a revolution for reducing carbon footprint in order to
preserve what‟s left of the ozone layer, which is a protective layer between sun‟s harsh ultra
violet rays and the living beings. Otherwise, the day is not far when the world will be full of
hunger; sun burnt, blind people, scary sounds and many more incurable diseases.
What we professionals can do?
India is still not a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, which in a way, is a road-block for effectively
carrying out environmental management by the industries. Currently companies like Jindal
Stainless, Essar Steel, Hyderabad Chemicals, Paschim Hydro Energy P. Ltd, The Andhra
Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd, have been making use of market based instruments like Carbon Credits
in their businesses.
The various industry Chambers like FICCI, ASSOCHAM, CII should take-up the issue of
introducing market based instruments like Carbon Credits through a legal framework
with the Government. These trade organizations can also come up with some award
program to the companies which religiously follow the norms. Such award program will
work as a motivating factor in the industry to adopt the norms suo-moto.
Introduction of corporate-run carbon funds
Introduction of Government-run carbon programmes.
We should stress upon and make the company management aware of the benefits of such
market based instruments
Awards like „Best Green Idea‟ for employees coming up with suggestions; ideas, ways,
etc. should be introduced.
Ask the management of our respective organizations to take help of the MBIs wherever
feasible.
Computer-based entrance tests for educational courses.
Organizations can also come up with policies for reducing wastes like for encouragement
of use of metal water bottle in the organization in place of plastic water bottles which is
sanitary, easy to clean and is capable of being used over and over.
Organizations can also encourage use of reusable lunch bags / cups etc. in their cafeteria /
lunch rooms which helps in avoiding use of plastic / paper, use of hand towels in toilets
and lunch rooms instead of paper towels and electric dryers.

Mitigation of green house gasses

Agricultural lands occupy 37% of the earth's land surface. Agriculture accounts for 52 and 84%
of global anthropogenic methane and nitrous oxide emissions. Agricultural soils may also act as
a sink or source for CO 2, but the net flux is small. Many agricultural practices can potentially
mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the most prominent of which are improved cropland
and grazing land management and restoration of degraded lands and cultivated organic soils.
Lower, but still significant mitigation potential is provided by water and rice management, set-
aside, land use change and agroforestry, livestock management and manure management. The
global technical mitigation potential from agriculture (excluding fossil fuel offsets from biomass)
by 2030, considering all gases, is estimated to be approximately 5500–6000 Mt CO2-eq. yr−1 , with
economic potentials of approximately 1500–1600, 2500–2700 and 4000–4300 Mt CO2-eq. yr−1 at
carbon prices of up to 20, up to 50 and up to 100 US$ t CO 2-eq.−1, respectively. In addition,
GHG emissions could be reduced by substitution of fossil fuels for energy production by
agricultural feedstocks (e.g. crop residues, dung and dedicated energy crops). The economic
mitigation potential of biomass energy from agriculture is estimated to be 640, 2240 and 16
000 Mt CO2-eq. yr−1 at 0–20, 0–50 and 0–100 US$ t CO2-eq.−1 , respectively. Agricultural
activities have a broad and multi-faceted impact on all three of the main GHGs-carbon dioxide,
methane, and nitrous oxide and policies designed to mitigate GHGs must consider impacts on all
three GHGs. Globally, land use (including agriculture) accounts for about one-third of all GHG
emissions due to human activities.

Can ‘carbon farming’ sustainably reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

From the perspective of global climate change, soils are a major compartment within the
planetary carbon cycle, the second-largest pool after the oceans, holding more carbon than the
atmosphere and all vegetation combined. Soils aren‟t necessarily climate neutral, depending on
how they‟re managed: they can release additional carbon into the atmosphere through practices
like overgrazing and excessive plowing, or soak up atmospheric carbon through practices like
agroforestry and conservation agriculture. But when run properly, farms can be powerful tools in
the fight against climate change. Estimates of the “technical potential” of agricultural soils to
absorb carbon range from 3 to 8 gigatons (billion metric tons) of CO2 equivalent a year for 20 to
30 years, enough to close the gap between what is achievable with emissions reductions and
what is necessary to stabilize the climate. If boosting soil organic matter used to just look like a
good way to farm, in other words, building soil carbon now looks like a key to planetary
survival. Advocates of carbon farming agree that carbon markets are only one of several
necessary routes to building carbon storage in soils, however-just as carbon sequestration in soils
is just one of an array of essential strategies for addressing global climate change.

Conclusion
Indian Government initiatives may allow the land managers to earn carbon credits by reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and storing carbon in vegetation and soil through carbon farming.
Besides this, it may also allow landholders to generate offset credits from activities that reduce
emissions or sequester carbon. The huge emitters will be able to utilize credits generated through
the carbon farming to meet their emission reduction targets. The production of biochar from farm
wastes and their application in soils may offer financial and environmental benefits. Once
environmental cost of carbon based greenhouse gas emission have been suitably internalized, we
can expect effective market forces and price mechanism. Considering the urgent need to take
action on climate change , it is recommended to include carbon farming in the portfolio of
mitigation strategies. Thus, carbon farming may serve as a promising mitigation strategy
deserving higher attention as many other geoengineering options.

My References
1. Das, S.K., 2014. Chemicals responsible for systemic acquired resistance in plant a critical
review. Journal of atoms and molecules 4 (3), 45-51.
2. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Gopi, R., 2014. Vermiwash: Use in organic agriculture for
improved crop production. Popular kheti 2 (4), 45-46.
3. Roy, A., Das, S.K., Tripathi, A.K., Singh, N.U., 2015. Biodiversity in North East India and
their Conservation. Progressive Agriculture 15 (2), 182-189.
4. Barman, H., Roy, A., Das, S.K., 2015. Evaluation of plant products and antagonistic
microbes against grey blight (Pestalotiopsis theae), a devastating pathogen of tea. African
journal of microbiology research 9 (18), 1263-1267.
5. Das, S.K., 2014. Scope and relevance of using pesticide mixtures in crop protection: A
critical review. International journal of environmental science and toxicology 2(5), 119-123.
6. Das, S.K., Mukherjee, I., Kumar, A., 2015. Effect of soil type and organic manure on
adsorption-desorption of flubendiamide. Environmental monitoring and assessment 187 (7),
403.
7. Das, S.K., 2013. Mode of action of pesticides and the novel trends. A critical review.
International research journal of agricultural science and soil science 3(11) 393-403.
8. Das, S.K., 2014. Recent development and future of botanical pesticides in India. Popular
kheti 2 (2), 93-99.
9. Mate, C.J., Mukherjee, I., Das, S.K., 2014. Mobility of spiromesifen in packed soil columns
under laboratory conditions. Environmental monitoring and assessment 186 (11), 7195-7202.
10. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Singh, M., Sharma, K., 2015. Biobeds: on-farm biopurification for
environmental protection. Current science 109 (9), 1521-1521.
11. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2015. Carbon farming and credit for mitigating greenhouse gases.
Current science 109 (7), 1223.
12. Mukherjee, I., Das, S.K., Kumar, A., 2012. A Fast Method for Determination of
Flubendiamide in Vegetables by Liquid Chromatography. Pesticide research journal 24 (2),
159-162.
13. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Singh, R., Babu, S., 2014. Biochar as carbon negative in carbon
credit under changing climate. Current science 107 (7), 1090-1091.
14. Das, S.K., Mukherjee, I., 2011. Effect of light and pH on persistence of flubendiamide.
Bulletin of environmental contamination toxicology 87, 292-296.
15. Das, S.K., Mukherjee, I., 2012. Effect of moisture and organic manure on persistence of
flubendiamide in soil. Bulletin of environmental contamination toxicology 88, 515-520.
16. Das, S.K., Mukherjee, I., 2012. Dissipation of flubendiamide in/on Okra [Abelmoschus
esculenta (L.) Moench] Fruits. Bulletin of environmental contamination toxicology 88, 381-
384.
17. Das, S.K., Mukherjee, I., 2012. Flubendiamide transport through packed soil columns.
Bulletin of environmental contamination toxicology 88: 229-233.
18. Das, S.K., Mukherjee, I., 2014. Influence of microbial community on degradation of
flubendiamide in two Indian soils. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 186, 3213-
3219.
19. Das, S.K., 2014. Role of micronutrient in rice cultivation and management strategy in
organic agriculture-A reappraisal. Agricultural sciences 5 (09), 765.
20. Das, S.K., 2014. Recent developments in clean up techniques of pesticide residue analysis for
toxicology study: a critical review. Universal journal of agricultural research 2 (6), 198-202.
21. Das, S.K., Mukherjee, I., 2017. Metsulfuron-methyl herbicide on dehydrogenase and acid
phosphatase enzyme activity on three different soils. International journal of bio-resource and
stress management 8 (2), 236-241.
22. Das, S.K., Roy, A., Barman, H., 2016. Fungi toxic efficiency of some plant volatile essential
oils against plant pathogenic fungi. African journal of microbiology research 10 (37), 1581-
1585.
23. Mukherjee, I., Das, S.K., Kumar, A., 2016. Degradation of flubendiamide as affected by
elevated CO2, temperature, and carbon mineralization rate in soil. Environmental science and
pollution research 23 (19), 19931-19939.
24. Das, S.K., Mukherjee, I., Roy, A., 2016. Alachlor and Metribuzin Herbicide on N 2-fixing
Bacteria in a Sandy Loam soil. International journal of bio-resource and stress management 7
(2), 334-338.
25. Barman, H., Roy, A., Das, S.K., Singh, N.U., Dangi, D.K., Tripathi, A.K., 2016. Antifungal
properties of some selected plant extracts against leaf blight (Alternaria alternata) in tomato.
Research on Crops 17 (1), 151-156.
26. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Singh, M., 2015. Buckwheat: the natural enhancer in rhizosphere
phosphorus. Current science 109 (10), 1763.
27. Mate, C.J., Mukherjee, I., Das, S.K., 2015. Persistence of spiromesifen in soil: influence of
moisture, light, pH and organic amendment. Environmental monitoring and assessment 187
(2), 7.
28. Das, S.K., Mondal, T., 2014. Mode of action of herbicides and recent trends in development:
a reappraisal. International journal of agricultural and soil science 2, 27-32.
29. Mukherjee, I., Das, S.K., Kumar, A., 2018. Atmospheric CO 2 level and temperature affect
degradation of pretilachlor and butachlor in Indian soil. Bulletin of environmental
contamination and toxicology 100 (6), 856-861.
30. Das, S.K., 2017. Rice cultivation under changing climate with mitigation practices: A mini
review. Universal journal of agricultural research 5 (6), 333-337
31. Das, S.K., 2015. Acid sulphate soil: management strategy for soil health and productivity.
Popular kheti 3 (2), 2-7.
32. Barman, H., Das, S.K., Roy, A., 2018. Zinc in soil environment for plant health and
management strategy. Universal journal of agricultural research 6, 149-54.
33. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Yadav, A., 2017. Secondary and micronutrients: deficiency
symptoms and management in organic farming. Innovative farming 2 (4), 209-211.
34. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G.K., 2017. Soil hydro-physical Environment as Influenced by Different
Biochar Amendments. International journal of bio-resource and stress management 8 (5),
668-673.
35. Das, S.K., Mukherjee, I., Roy, A., 2017. Flubendiamide as new generation insecticide in
plant toxicology: A policy paper. Advance in clinical toxicology 2, 100-122.
36. Das, S.K., 2015. Integrated nematode management in chickpea Against Meloidogyne
incognita-a view point. Universal journal of agricultural research 5 (5), 145-149.
37. Das, S.K., 2019. Soil carbon sequestration strategies under organic production system: A
policy decision. Agrica 8 (1), 1-6.
38. Das, S.K., 2019. Qualitative evaluation of fodder trees and grasses in hill region. Journal of
krishi vigyan 7 (2), 276-279.
39. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Ghosh, G.K., 2019. Solanum betaceum: An Underutilized but
potential tree species with anticancer activity. Bio-science research bulletin 35 (1), 36-37.
40. Roy, A., Das, A., Das, S.K., Datta, M., Datta, J., Tripathi, A.K., Singh, N.U., 2018. Impact
analysis of National Agricultural Innovation Project (NAIP): A paradigm shift in income and
consumption in Tripura. Green farming 9 (3), 559-564.
41. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Singh, M., Roy, A., 2018. Managing soil fertility under organic
production system through integrated approach. Green farming 9 (3), 449-454.
42. Das, S.K., Mukherjee, I., 2018. Propesticides and their implications. Insecticides: agriculture
and toxicology, 107.
43. Das, S.K., 2018. Microbial toxins as lead molecules: an overview. Popular agriculture 2(3),
1-3.
44. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2018. Plant nutrition management strategy: A policy for optimum
yield. Acta scientific agriculture 2 (5) 65-70.
45. Singh, N.S., Mukherjee, I., Das, S.K., Varghese, E., 2018. Leaching of clothianidin in two
different Indian soils: Effect of organic amendment. Bulletin of environmental contamination
and toxicology 100 (4), 553-559.
46. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Singh, M., Yadav, A., 2018. Soil health improvement using
biochar application in Sikkim: A success story. Innovative farming 3 (1), 48-50.
47. Barman, H., Das, S.K., Roy, A., 2018. Future of nano science in technology for prosperity: A
policy paper. Nanoscience and technology 5 (1), 1-5.
48. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Singh, M., Dutta, S.K., Roy, A., 2018. Zinc in plant-soil system
and management strategy. Agrica 7 (1), 1-6.
49. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2018. Development of innovative low cost biochar production
technology. Journal of krishi vigyan 7 (1) 223-225.
50. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Sharma, P., Sharma, K., 2017. Rainfall characteristics pattern and
distribution analysis at Tadong East Sikkim. Indian journal of hill farming 30 (2), 326-330.
51. Roy, A., Singh, N.U., Tripathi, A.K., Yumnam, A., Sinha, P.K., Kumar, B., Das, S.K., 2017.
Dynamics of pulse production in north-east region of India- A state-wise analysis. Economic
affairs 62 (4), 655-662.
52. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2017. Livelihood improvement of rural tribal farmers through soil
health management, input support system and training-A success story. Innovative farming 2
(3), 171-173.
53. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Sharma, K., Singh, M., Sharma, P., 2017. Soil fertility assessment
in different villages of east sikkim district. Indian journal of hill farming 30 (1), 14-16.
54. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G.K., Mukherjee, I., Avasthe, R.K., 2017. Nano-science for agrochemicals
in plant protection. Popular kheti 5 (4), 173-175.
55. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2017. Biochar amendments on physico-chemical and
biological properties of soils. Agrica 6 (2), 79-87.
56. Sharma, M., Rana, M., Sharma, P., Das, S.K., 2016. Effect of different organic substrates and
plant botanicals on growth and flowering of chincherinchee (Ornithogalum thyrosides Jacq).
Indian journal of hill farming 29 (2), 72-74.
57. Gopi, R., Avasthe, R.K., Kalita, H., Kapoor, C., Yadav, A., Babu, S., Das, S.K., 2016.
Traditional pest and disease management practices in Sikkim himala yan region. International
journal of bio-resource and stress management 7 (3), 471-476.
58. Sharma, P., Sharma, K., Das, S.K., 2016. Ethno medicinal plants uses in health care by the
himalayan tribal people in India. Popular kheti. 4 (3) 41-45.
59. Gopi, R., Kapoor, C., Kalita, H., Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2015. A new report of downy
mildew on buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum) caused by Perenospora sp. in Sikkim.
Journal of mycopathological research 53 (2), 95-297.
60. Roy, A., Dkhar, D.S., Tripathi, A.K., Singh, N.U., Kumar, D., Das, S.K., Debnath, A., 2014.
Growth performance of agriculture and allied sectors in the north east India. Economic
affairs 59 (Special), 783-795.
61. Das, S.K., 2017. Nanoparticles advanced characterization techniques: A view point. Journal
atoms and molecules 7 (4): 1091-1098.
62. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Ghosh, G.K., Dutta, S.K., 2019. Pseudocereal buckwheat with
potential anticancer activity. Bulletin of pure and applied sciences section B-botany 38 (2),
94-95.
63. Singh, M., Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2018. Effect of multipurpose trees on production and
soil fertility on large cardamom based agro forestry system in Sikkim Himalaya. Indian
journal of agroforestry 20 (2), 25-29.
64. Mukherjee, I., Das, S.K., Kumar, A., Shukla, L., 2020. Sludge amendment affects the
persistence, carbon mineralization and enzyme activity of atrazine and bifenthrin. Bulletin of
environmental contamination and toxicology 105 (2), 291-298.
65. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2020. Ecotoxicological responses of weed biochar on
seed germination and seedling growth in acidic soil. Environmental technology and
innovation, 101074.
66. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2020. Evaluating biomass-derived biochar on seed
germination and early seedling growth of maize and black gram. Biomass conversion and
biorefinery 1-14.
67. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2020. Valorizing biomass to engineered biochar and
its impact on soil, plant, water, and microbial dynamics: a review. Biomass conversion and
biorefinery 1-17.
68. Das, S.K., 2020. Influence of phosphorus and organic matter on microbial transformation of
arsenic. Environmental technology and innovation, 100930.
69. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2020. Packages of Organic Nutrient Management as Soil Policy for
Upgrading Cropping System to Restore Soil Productivity, Organic Agriculture, Shaon Kumar
Das, IntechOpen, DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.91928. Available from:
https://www.intechopen.com/books/organic-agriculture/packages-of-organic-nutrient-
management-as-soil-policy-for-upgrading-cropping-system-to-restore-soil
70. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G.K., 2020. Soil health management through low cost biochar technology.
Biochar applications in agriculture and environment management, 193-206.
71. Gopi, R., Avasthe, R.K., Kalita, H., Yadav, A., Das, S.K., Rai, D., 2020. Eco-friendly
management of tomato late blight using botanicals, bio-control agents, compost tea and
copper fungicides. Indian journal of agricultural sciences 90 (1), 35-39.
72. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., 2018. Soil organic nutrients management through integrated
approach: A policy for environment & ecology. Environmental analysis and ecology studies
4 (1), 1-8.
73. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G,K., Avasthe, R.K., 2020. Applications of biomass derived biochar in
modern science and technology. Environmental Technology and Innovat ion. 21: 101306.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2020.101306
74. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G,K., Avasthe, R.K., Sinha, K., 2021. Compositional heterogeneity of
different biochar: Effect of pyrolysis temperature and feedstocks. Journal of Environmental
Management. 278 (2): 111501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111501
75. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G,K., Avasthe, R.K., Sinha, K., 2020. Morpho-mineralogical exploration
of crop, weed and tree derived biochar. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 124370.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124370
76. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G,K., Avasthe, R.K., 2020. Biochar application for environmental
management and toxic pollutant remediation. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-01078-1
77. Das, S.K., Ghosh, G,K., Avasthe, R.K., 2020. Application of biochar in agriculture and
environment, and its safety issues. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-01013-4
78. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Kalita, H., Yadav, A. and Gopi, R. 2020. Organic Soil Nutrient
Practices in Sikkim and Impact at Field Level for Tribal Farmers‟: A Success Story. Biotica
Research Today. 2, 2 (Feb. 2020), 24-26.
79. Singh, M., Gupta, B., Das, S.K., 2018. Soil organic carbon density under different
agroforestry systems along an elevation gradient in north-western Himalaya. Range
Management and Agroforestry. 39(1)” 8-13.
80. Singh, M., Gupta, B., Babu, S., Avasthe, R.K., Das, S.K., 2017. Fodder, fuelwood
consumption pattern and energy dynamics along elevation gradient in Giri Catchment,
 Himachal Pradesh, India. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 87 (2): 261–5, February
2017/Article
81. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Singh, M., 2016. Carbon-negative biochar from weed biomass for
agricultural research in India. Current Science. 110 (11), 2045-2046
82. Das, S.K., 2016. Screening of Bioactive Compounds for Development of New Pesticides: A
Mini Review. Universal Journal of Agricultural Research 4 (1), 15-20.
83. Singh, M., Gupta, B., Das, S.K. 2015. Assessment of Economic Viability of Different
Agroforestry Systems in Giri Catchment, Himachal Pradesh. Economic Affairs. 60(3): 557-
561.
84. Barman, H., Roy, A., Das, S.K., 2015. Evaluation of plant products and antagonistic
microbes against leaf blight (Alternaria alternata), A devastating pathogen of Tomato.
Trends in Biosciences. 8(13): 3374-3377.
85. Mukherjee, I., Das, S.K., Kumar, A. 2014. P-41. Adsorption of flubendiamide in two Indian
soils varying in physicochemical properties. 4th International Conference of Young
Scientists: Chemistry Today–2014: August 18-22, 2014.-Yerevan: YCA, 2014–234 pages.
86. Avasthe, R.K., Das, S.K., Reza, S.K., 2014. Integrated Nutrient Management through
Organic Sources. Handbook on organic crop production in Sikkim. (Eds. RK Avasthe,
Yashoda Pradhan and Khorlo Bhutia). Published by Sikkim Organic Mission, Govt. of
Sikkim and ICAR Research Complex, Sikkim Centre, Tadong, Gangtok, Sikkim. Pp 317-
328.
87. Das, S.K., 2013. Integrated nutrient management using only through organic sources.
Popular Kheti. 1(4): 126.
88. Das, S.K. Avasthe, R.K., Roy, A., Singh, N.U., Soil sample analysis methods: A ready
reckoner for soil testing.
http://www.kiran.nic.in/pdf/publications/2020/Soil% 20Sample%20Analysis%20Methods%2
0Shaon%20Kumar%20Das.pdf
89. Das, S.K., 2019. Carbon Sequestration and Climate Change.
https://foodandscientificreports.com/assets/uploads/issues/1583721457carbon_sequestration.
pdf
90. Avasthe, R.K., Babu, S., Singh, R., Das, S.K., Impact of organic food production on soil
quality.https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Shaon_Das4/publication/326827479_Impact_of
 _Organic_Food_Production_on_Soil_Quality/links/5b65855e0f7e9bd7ae93a50b/Impact-of-
Organic-Food-Production-on-Soil-Quality.pdf
91. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Roy, A., Yadav, A., Singh, M., Managing soil acidity through
liming and organic nutrients for optimizing crop production in Sikkim.
http://kiran.nic.in/pdf/publications/Sikkim/Managing_soil_acidity_through_liming-
and_organic_nutrients-Sikkim.pdf
92. Das, S.K., Roy, A., Ghosh, G.K., Boron Nutrition in Soil System and Management
Strategy.http://www.kiran.nic.in/pdf/publications/2017/Boron_Nutrition_in_Soil_System_an
d_Management_Strategy.pdf
93. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Roy, A., Farming for North East with technology options for
sustainable feeding the populace.
http://kiran.nic.in/pdf/publications/2017/Farming_for_NorthEastwith_technology_optionsfor
sustainable_feeding_populace.pdf
94. Das, S.K., Avasthe, R.K., Gopi, R., Roy, A., Singh, M., Nanotechnology in pesticide
formulation: A new era in plant protection.
http://www.kiran.nic.in/pdf/publications/Sikkim/Nanotechnology.pdf
95. Das, S.K., Persistence and mobility behavior of flubendiamide in soil. IARI, Division of
Agricultural Chemicals. https://krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/handle/1/81262