Analysis of beneficial management practices to mitigate environmental impacts in dairy production systems around the Great Lakes

Kim, Daesoo; Stoddart, Nick; Rotz, C. Alan; Veltman, Karin; Chase, L.E.; Cooper, Joyce; Ingraham, Pete; Izaurralde, R. C.; Jones, Curtis D.; Gaillard, Richard; Aguirre-Villegas, Horacio A.; Larson, R. H.; Ruark, Matthew D.; Salas, William

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102660

Cited by 20 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Legumes are estimated to generate <20% of the emissions associated with synthetic fertilisers, however N 2 O emissions can still occur from leguminous crop residues (Senbayram et al, 2015;Stagnari et al, 2017). Increasing the ratio of corn to alfalfa silage on large and small dairy farms in northern US has been shown to raise farm gate GHG emissions per kg of FPCM (Kim et al, 2019). An increase in the use of forage legumes within dairy systems should therefore be considered to improve outcomes for livestock and the wider environment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Nutritional Variation and LCA Methodology on the Carbon Footprint of Milk Production From Holstein Friesian Dairy Cows

March

Hargreaves

Sykes

et al. 2021

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The UK livestock industry urgently needs to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to contribute to ambitious climate change policy commitments. Achieving this requires an improved understanding of emission sources across a range of production systems to lower the burden associated with livestock products. Life cycle assessment (LCA) methods are used in this study to model milk production from two genetic merits of Holstein Friesian cows managed in two novel and two conventional UK dairy systems. Select merit cows sired by bulls with high predicted transmission for fat plus protein yield are compared with Control merit animals sired from UK average merit bulls. Cows were managed in conventional housed and grazed dairy systems with novel Byproduct and Homegrown feeding regimes. A LCA was used to quantify the effect of allocation and management of feed components on the carbon footprint of milk production. Natural variation in nutritional quality of dairy system rations was investigated to quantify uncertainty in the carbon footprint results. Novel production system data are used to assess the effect of introducing home grown legumes and co-product feeds. Control merit footprints across each of the management regimes were significantly higher (p<0.001) in comparison with a high production Select merit, on average by 15%. Livestock emissions (enteric, manure management and deposition) and embedded emissions (purchased feeds, fertiliser, and pesticides) were also significantly higher from control merit cows (p<0.01). Mass and economic allocation methods, and land use functional units, resulted in differences in performance ranking of the dairy systems, with larger footprints resulting from mass allocation. Pairwise comparisons showed GHG's from the systems to be significantly different in total and source category emissions, with significant differences in mean embedded emissions found between most management systems (p<0.05). Monte Carlo simulated system footprints considering the effect of variation in feed digestibility and crude protein also differed significantly from system footprints using standard methods (p < 0.001). Dairy system carbon footprint results should be expressed using multiple units and where possible calculations should incorporate variation in diet digestibility and crude protein content.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Nutritional Variation and LCA Methodology on the Carbon Footprint of Milk Production From Holstein Friesian Dairy Cows

March

Hargreaves

Sykes

et al. 2021

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Different studies have highlighted that despite important GHG emission reductions from AD, the dairy farm is still a source of emissions [9,14,38]. This study quantifies the additional capacity of the AD system modeled at the dairy farm to achieve GHG neutrality.…”

Section: Variable Value Referencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Feed management strategies and genetics have been explored as potential practices to mitigate enteric CH 4 . However, the overall reduction is limited, and the implementation of these strategies at the farm level is challenging [9]. Manure management is the second source of emissions with CH 4 from storage being the major contributor.…”

Section: Ghg Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The NZI is usually envisioned as voluntary actions of the industry as a whole, accounting for variable farm sizes and geographies, and using current but also yetto-be-discovered technologies [1]. In the U.S., different studies have evaluated alternative feeding, field, manure, and barn management practices at the farm level to reduce GHG emissions [9][10][11]. In addition, different dairy cooperatives are targeting cover crops, crop rotations, rotational grazing to promote carbon capture [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of Anaerobic Digestion and Solar PV to Achieve GHG Neutrality in a Farm Setting

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dairy farms are challenged to increase productivity while achieving environmental sustainability, where greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are at the center of the discussion. The U.S. dairy industry leadership has committed to a Net Zero Initiative to achieve GHG neutrality, but the specifics on how to achieve this are still uncertain. Life cycle assessment methods were used to quantify GHGs and net energy intensity (NEI) of a large (1000 cows) and a small (150 cows) farm in Wisconsin. The GHGs are 1.0 and 1.3 kg CO2-eq/kg FPCM and the NEI is 2.4 and 3.2 MJ/kg FPCM for the large and small farm, respectively. The GHG benefits from anaerobic digestion (AD, sized to process all manure on both farms) and PV (sized to match AD electricity production) are not enough to achieve GHG neutrality. Increasing the capacity of these systems showed that AD is more cost-effective for the larger farm, but the challenges and costs related to securing and disposing the extra manure needed for energy production limit its feasibility. For the smaller farm, the total annualized costs to achieve GHG neutrality are lower for PV vs. AD, even before accounting for any transportation costs related to handling the extra manure.

show abstract

“…LCA may be linked to other tools, such as processbased simulation, to obtain more specific representation of inventory data (Kim et al, 2019). By simulating alternatives in production, predicted inventory data can vary with changes in management and technologies used to produce the livestock.…”

Section: Assessment Of Environmental Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Sustainability of Livestock Production

Rotz

Rotz²

2020

Meat and Muscle Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The environmental impact of livestock production has become an important and controversial global issue, pri- marily due to reported impacts on global warming. This concern applies to all meat animals, but especially beef cattle due to their emission of enteric methane. Livestock production contributes to global warming, but the importance of its contri- bution may be overstated. Its effect on climate is primarily through methane production, which does not have a long-term effect on the atmosphere. Global livestock numbers and emissions from their manure are increasing, so there is a short-term effect through increased rate of emission. Other effects of meat production may be of more concern for long-term sustain- ability. Through a full life cycle of meat, the dominant impact is loss and waste, which adversely effects all measures of sustainability. An important environmental concern is reactive nitrogen losses, among which ammonia emission from manure is of most concern. Global estimates suggest that 63% of all ammonia emissions come from agriculture, with 44% of the total from livestock manure. Ammonia emissions have adverse effects related to acidification of ecosystems, eutrophication of surface waters, and human toxicity through formation of small particulate matter in the air we breathe. Water consumption is another important concern. Global estimates suggest that agriculture uses about 70% of freshwater withdrawals, with 20% used for livestock feed production. Although livestock production is not a large energy consumer, fossil fuels are a limited resource, and conservation is important. Many technologies and strategies exist for mitigating environmental impacts of livestock production, but finding economical solutions is challenging. Mitigation must start with the reduction of consumer waste. Other livestock impacts are best reduced using intensive practices to produce animals in less time and with fewer resources. Diets that accurately meet animal nutrient needs are an important mitigation option for efficient and sustainable meat production.

show abstract

Analysis of beneficial management practices to mitigate environmental impacts in dairy production systems around the Great Lakes

Cited by 20 publications

References 40 publications

Effect of Nutritional Variation and LCA Methodology on the Carbon Footprint of Milk Production From Holstein Friesian Dairy Cows

Effect of Nutritional Variation and LCA Methodology on the Carbon Footprint of Milk Production From Holstein Friesian Dairy Cows

The Role of Anaerobic Digestion and Solar PV to Achieve GHG Neutrality in a Farm Setting

Environmental Sustainability of Livestock Production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About