Comparative analyses of pig farming management systems using the Life Cycle Assessment method

Ghimire

et al. 2021

Animals

Livestock manure is one of the main sources of agricultural nonpoint source pollution and poses a great threat to the environment and human health. Sustainable management of manure via recycling is an effective means to tackle the problem. Based on field interviews in China, multiple case studies were employed to investigate alternative manure management systems. Four conclusions arose. First, compost-based systems, product-based systems, substrate-based systems, and biogas-based systems were identified as four main types of manure management systems, with each possessing its success factors and risk factors. The adoption of a system was driven by various factors. Second, market-oriented operation was the dominant operation mechanism of all the manure management systems. Third, compared to direct application of manure to croplands, all the four manure management systems could reduce nitrogen loadings from livestock farms and lower their environmental effects. Among the systems, biogas-based systems could reduce nitrogen loadings to the greatest extent, followed by product-based systems and substrate-based systems, and then by compost-based systems. Lastly, integrated management of manure with mixed recycling systems is imperative for reducing its environmental effects, which can benefit from the increasing role of third-party entities in manure recycling. Policy implications were also discussed.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative Management Systems of Beef Cattle Manure for Reducing Nitrogen Loadings: A Case-Study Approach

Ghimire

et al. 2021

Animals

“…Life cycle inventories for the production of enzymes and fertilizer were derived from Ecoinvent databases [49]. Life cycle inventory for the electricity [28] supply in Ecuador was derived from [46,47]. Life cycle inventories for the production of rice husk and fertilizer (N, P 2 O 5 , and K 2 O) were derived from Ecoinvent databases [49].…”

Section: On-farm Wastewater Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Makara et al [28] presented several scenarios with results ranging between 6.82-7.1 kg CO 2 -eq since it includes the rearing of pigs with fertilization using pig manure; A pig farming with the AMAK method (filtered solids used for fertilization), and a combined scenario with fertilization and AMAK.…”

Section: Comparison With Other Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life Cycle Assessment as a Methodological Framework for the Evaluation of the Environmental Sustainability of Pig and Pork Production in Ecuador

Pazmiño

Ramírez

2021

Sustainability

Pork is one of the proteins of greatest demand worldwide. This study has evaluated the environmental sustainability of pig production by applying the life cycle assessment methodological framework. The system boundaries include feed production, pig production, slaughtering, and slaughterhouse by-product management. Within this context, three scenarios have been proposed: the first related to the management of slaughter by-products in an open dump, the second contemplates a model for using these by-products in a rendering plant, and a third where the environmental burden of slaughterhouse co-products is portioned according to economic allocation. The primary data collected correspond to the period of 2019 for the facilities of a producer in a coastal province of Ecuador. Three functional units were used—“1 kg of pig carcass at the slaughterhouse gate”, “1 kg pig live weigh at the farm gate”, and “1 kg of feed at the plant gate”. The impact categories included were global warming, fossil depletion, marine eutrophication, ozone layer depletion, particulate matter formation, photochemical oxidation formation, and terrestrial acidification. The results revealed that the production of ingredients for feed is the largest contributor to the environmental burden of pig and pork. The rendering of slaughter by-products that avoid the production of other fats and proteins results in a lower environmental impact than the other scenarios in almost all categories.

“…Multiple studies have investigated the environmental impact of pig production [8,[16][17][18], including studies that particularly focus on the environmental impact of feed production [14,15,19,20]. While some of these studies include a comparison of different systems, for example between countries [16] or between different production systems [8,18,20], they do not consider variability in system characteristics between individual pig production farms, which also differ within countries and production systems. Moreover, most of the studies take into account one single or average feed composition, while feed compositions vary in time, according to the price and availability of feed ingredients [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Farm Characteristics and Feed Compositions on the Environmental Impact of Pig Production in Flanders: Productivity, Energy Use and Protein Choices Are Key

et al. 2021

The growing pig production sector is a large contributor of negative impacts to the environment and feed production is responsible for a large part of these impacts. Pig production systems, including feed compositions, are variable, resulting in variable potential environmental impacts. This study investigated the influence of different farm characteristics and feed compositions on the environmental impact of pig production in Flanders. A Life Cycle Assessment approach was followed, including data from 39 farms and monthly feed compositions in the year 2018. Even though feed production contributes significantly to the overall environmental impact of pig production, the results show that environmental impacts are more affected by variabilities in farm characteristics than by fluctuating feed compositions. A higher productivity, in terms of feed conversion efficiency and the number of pigs produced per sow, is generally related to lower environmental impacts. Another influencing factor is the type and amount of energy used. For feed consumption, high variabilities are observed for water use, mainly caused by varying levels of sugar cane molasses. Climate change impacts and variabilities are mainly caused by soy ingredients and their origin. Finally, amino acids show large contributions to the environmental impact of pig feed consumption. Our research highlights that future developments for reducing the environmental impact of pig production should target animal productivity, the type and amount of energy used and selection of protein sources in pig feed.