If you care about climate change, you might be feeling a bit bruised and battered by 2025.
From the inauguration of a U.S. president committed to undermining renewable energy to an underwhelming COP30, it’s been – well, a year. But may we offer some good news? Here at Project Drawdown, we have continued to move climate solutions forward despite the headwinds, as evidenced by the perspectives chronicled in the 21 Insights posts we published over the past year.
This year’s major United Nations climate talks, COP30, fell short of many expectations.
Despite being held in Belém, Brazil, known as the “gateway to the Amazon,” issues such as stopping deforestation and transforming global food systems received relatively little attention. While some bright spots emerged, overall progress was minimal.
Replacing fossil-fuel-powered irrigation pumps with electric pumps powered by the grid can reduce emissions in most regions of the world. Electric irrigation pumps, which can also be powered by on-site clean energy, are more efficient than fossil fuel pumps. They are already cost-competitive and widely used, and adoption is increasing. Their emissions benefits will continue to grow as irrigation expands and the emissions intensity of the electrical grid falls. However, based on current grid emissions intensity, the climate impact of using electric pumps for agricultural irrigation is not globally meaningful (<0.1 Gt CO₂‑eq/yr ). Despite its modest climate impact, our assessment finds that deploying electric irrigation pumps is "Worthwhile".
Based on our analysis, deploying electric irrigation pumps will reduce emissions but will not provide a globally significant climate impact (>0.1 Gt CO₂‑eq/yr ), even under high adoption scenarios, until electrical grid emissions decline further. Therefore, this potential climate solution is “Worthwhile.”
| Plausible | Could it work? | Yes |
|---|---|---|
| Ready | Is it ready? | Yes |
| Evidence | Are there data to evaluate it? | Yes |
| Effective | Does it consistently work? | Yes |
| Impact | Is it big enough to matter? | No |
| Risk | Is it risky or harmful? | No |
| Cost | Is it cheap? | Yes |
This solution reduces emissions from irrigation by replacing pumps powered by natural gas, diesel, propane, or gasoline with electric pumps. Irrigation is the practice of adding water to croplands or pastures to reduce crop water stress and increase productivity. Pumps are used on some irrigated croplands to extract groundwater, transport surface water, and pressurize water for application through sprinklers or drip irrigation systems. Electric pumps have much higher motor efficiencies (~88%) than fossil fuel pumps (~21–31%), so pump switching reduces the energy required to pump the same amount of water. The extent to which emissions are reduced depends on the emissions intensity of the electrical grid mix. Electric pumps reduce emissions when the emissions intensity of the grid is below ~0.75 kg CO₂‑eq /kWh, or when they are powered by on-site solar or wind energy. In some places, additional emissions reductions can be achieved through Improving Irrigation Water Use Efficiency.
The efficiency and emissions benefits of electric pumps over fossil fuel pumps are well established. On-farm pumping emissions, currently estimated at approximately 0.2 Gt CO₂‑eq/yr, could feasibly be eliminated if all fossil fuel pumps are replaced with electric pumps and electrical grid emissions reach net-zero, or if they are powered by on-farm solar or wind energy. However, the climate impact of electric pump adoption today would be much lower, as electricity generation still produces substantial emissions. Under current conditions, replacing a diesel pump with an electric pump will reduce emissions in most, but not all, places around the world.
Electric pumps can reliably reduce emissions, are already cost-competitive and widely used, and adoption is increasing. Irrigation is a major energy user, and its energy use is increasing as irrigated areas expand. These trends are expected to continue in the coming decades as climate change exacerbates heat and water stress and agricultural production intensifies in low- and middle-income countries. Coupled with ongoing reductions in electrical grid emissions intensity, the potential climate benefits of this solution are growing.
Electric pump adoption can also be geographically targeted, as just five countries (China, India, the United States, Pakistan, and Iran) account for almost 70% of irrigation energy use. Areas with high groundwater reliance can also be targeted, as groundwater pumping accounts for 89% of irrigation energy use.
Pump switching also provides additional benefits, such as lowering long-term energy costs for farmers and reducing air pollution from on-farm fossil fuel use. Access to the electrical grid is the primary technical barrier to electric pump adoption, but small-scale solar installations can be used where grid connectivity is limited. Powering pumps with on-site solar also eliminates operational emissions, reduces the load on the electrical grid, and insulates farmers from variability in energy costs.
The climate impacts of pump switching are highly dependent on the emissions factor of the electrical grid. A large share of the potential reduction in fossil fuel pumping is located in India and China, which currently have relatively high electrical grid emissions intensities. Under the current grid mix, we estimate that pump switching in these countries will result in only modest benefits or a small increase in emissions.
Anand, S. K., Rosa, L., Mohanty, B. P., Rajan, N., & Calabrese, S. (2025). Balancing productivity and climate impact: A framework to assess climate-smart irrigation. Earth’s Future, 13(11), Article e2025EF006116. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1029/2025EF006116
Driscoll, A. W., Conant, R. T., Marston, L. T., Choi, E., & Mueller, N. D. (2024). Greenhouse gas emissions from US irrigation pumping and implications for climate-smart irrigation policy. Nature Communications, 15(1), Article 1. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-44920-0
Hrozencik, R. A. & Aillery, Marcel. (2021). Trends in U.S. irrigated agriculture: Increasing resilience under water supply scarcity. United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, Report No. EIB-229. Link to source: https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3996325
Kebede, E. A., Oluoch, K. O., Siebert, S., Mehta, P., Hartman, S., Jägermeyr, J., Ray, D., Ali, T., Brauman, K. A., Deng, Q., Xie, W., & Davis, K. F. (2025). A global open-source dataset of monthly irrigated and rainfed cropped areas (MIRCA-OS) for the 21st century. Scientific Data, 12(1), Article 208. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-024-04313-w
McCarthy, B., Anex, R., Wang, Y., Kendall, A. D., Anctil, A., Haacker, E. M. K., & Hyndman, D. W. (2020). Trends in water use, energy consumption, and carbon emissions from irrigation: Role of shifting technologies and energy sources. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(23), 15329–15337. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c02897
McDermid, S., Mahmood, R., Hayes, M. J., Bell, J. E., & Lieberman, Z. (2021). Minimizing trade-offs for sustainable irrigation. Nature Geoscience, 14(10), 706–709. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00830-0
McDermid, S., Nocco, M., Lawston-Parker, P., Keune, J., Pokhrel, Y., Jain, M., Jägermeyr, J., Brocca, L., Massari, C., Jones, A. D., Vahmani, P., Thiery, W., Yao, Y., Bell, A., Chen, L., Dorigo, W., Hanasaki, N., Jasechko, S., Lo, M.-H., … Yokohata, T. (2023). Irrigation in the Earth system. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 4, 435–453. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00438-5
McGill, B. M., Hamilton, S. K., Millar, N., & Robertson, G. P. (2018). The greenhouse gas cost of agricultural intensification with groundwater irrigation in a Midwest U.S. row cropping system. Global Change Biology, 24(12), 5948–5960. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14472
Qin, J., Duan, W., Zou, S., Chen, Y., Huang, W., & Rosa, L. (2024). Global energy use and carbon emissions from irrigated agriculture. Nature Communications, 15(1), Article 3084. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-47383-5
Ren, C., & Rosa, L. (2025). Global energy and emissions of irrigation and fertilizers management for closing crop yield gaps. Environmental Research Letters. 20(10), Article 104026. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/adfbfd
Rollason, E., Sinha, P., & Bracken, L. J. (2022). Interbasin water transfer in a changing world: A new conceptual model. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 46(3), 371–397. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1177/03091333211065004
Rosa, L., Chiarelli, D. D., Sangiorgio, M., Beltran-Peña, A. A., Rulli, M. C., D’Odorico, P., & Fung, I. (2020). Potential for sustainable irrigation expansion in a 3 °C warmer climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(47), 29526–29534. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2017796117
Rosa, L., Rulli, M. C., Ali, S., Chiarelli, D. D., Dell’Angelo, J., Mueller, N. D., Scheidel, A., Siciliano, G., & D’Odorico, P. (2021). Energy implications of the 21st century agrarian transition. Nature Communications, 12(1), Article 2319. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22581-7
Sanders, K. T., & Webber, M. E. (2012). Evaluating the energy consumed for water use in the United States. Environmental Research Letters, 7(3), Article 034034. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/3/034034
Schmitt, R. J. P., Rosa, L., & Daily, G. C. (2022). Global expansion of sustainable irrigation limited by water storage. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(47), Article e2214291119. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2214291119
Siddik, M. A. B., Dickson, K. E., Rising, J., Ruddell, B. L., & Marston, L. T. (2023). Interbasin water transfers in the United States and Canada. Scientific Data, 10(1), Article 1. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-01935-4
Sowby, R. B., & Dicataldo, E. (2022). The energy footprint of U.S. irrigation: A first estimate from open data. Energy Nexus, 6, Article 100066. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nexus.2022.100066
Yang, Y., Jin, Z., Mueller, N. D., Driscoll, A. W., Hernandez, R. R., Grodsky, S. M., Sloat, L. L., Chester, M. V., Zhu, Y.-G., & Lobell, D. B. (2023). Sustainable irrigation and climate feedbacks. Nature Food, 4(8), Article 8. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00821-x
Avery Driscoll, Ph.D.
Christina Swanson, Ph.D.
Heather McDiarmid, Ph.D.
James Gerber, Ph.D.
Every potential climate solution on the Drawdown Explorer begins as a hypothesis.
This sounds geeky, but we’re scientists – we can’t help it. It’s the way we think. Our hypothesis looks something like this: “If we do [name of climate solution], it will [reduce emissions or remove carbon dioxide] by [how it works]”.
Join the 85,000+ subscribers discovering how to drive meaningful climate action around the world! Every other week, you'll get expert insights, cutting-edge research, and inspiring stories.
