Effectiveness of climate change mitigation options considering the amount of meat produced in dairy systems

Effectiveness of climate change mitigation options considering the amount of meat produced in... Many of the climate change mitigation options for dairy systems that aim at optimizing milk production imply a reduced output of meat from these systems. The objective of this study was to evaluate effectiveness of a number of mitigation strategies for dairy systems, taking into account compensation for changes in the amount of beef produced. Four commonly used mitigation strategies for dairy systems were evaluated using an LCA modelling approach: increasing the milk production per cow, extending the productive life span of cows, increasing the calving interval, and changing breed from Holstein Friesian to Jersey. The Dutch dairy system was taken as a case study. For each scenario, analyses were done in two steps. First, effects of the mitigation strategy on production of milk and carcass weight from the dairy system were calculated. Second, GHG emission intensities were calculated for three different functional units (FU): one kg of fat and protein corrected milk (FPCM), one kg of carcass weight (CW), and a fixed amount of milk and beef (i.e. 1 kg FPCM and 40 g CW). In the third FU, in case the amount of CW produced by the dairy system was lower than 40 g per kg FPCM, the remainder was compensated by CW produced in pure beef systems, assuming a GHG emission intensity of 30 kg CO2-eq. per kg CW for pure beef. Results showed a reduction in CW per kg FPCM from the dairy system in all four mitigation strategies. Considering GHG emissions per kg of FPCM only, the strategies reduced emissions by 0.2 to 18.1%. When considering emissions per kg of CW only, emissions were reduced by 12.5 to 48.9%. However, when we used a FU of 1 kg FPCM and 40 g CW, changes in emissions ranged from −0.2 to 3.8%. This was caused by the compensation of the lower CW production from dairy systems by CW from pure beef systems. Differences in emissions per kg FPCM and 40 g CW were smaller when the assumed emission intensity of pure beef was lower. We concluded that the mitigation strategies for dairy systems evaluated in this study were less effective for reduction of GHG emissions from production of milk and beef, when accounting for changes in the amount of beef produced. This study showed that the challenge of reducing GHG emissions of milk and beef production is interrelated. Hence, analyses of GHG emissions related to changes in production of milk and beef requires an integrated approach, beyond the system boundaries of the dairy farm. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Agricultural Systems Elsevier

Effectiveness of climate change mitigation options considering the amount of meat produced in dairy systems

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/effectiveness-of-climate-change-mitigation-options-considering-the-KNiAZ4Xa0a
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 The Authors
ISSN
0308-521x
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.026
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Many of the climate change mitigation options for dairy systems that aim at optimizing milk production imply a reduced output of meat from these systems. The objective of this study was to evaluate effectiveness of a number of mitigation strategies for dairy systems, taking into account compensation for changes in the amount of beef produced. Four commonly used mitigation strategies for dairy systems were evaluated using an LCA modelling approach: increasing the milk production per cow, extending the productive life span of cows, increasing the calving interval, and changing breed from Holstein Friesian to Jersey. The Dutch dairy system was taken as a case study. For each scenario, analyses were done in two steps. First, effects of the mitigation strategy on production of milk and carcass weight from the dairy system were calculated. Second, GHG emission intensities were calculated for three different functional units (FU): one kg of fat and protein corrected milk (FPCM), one kg of carcass weight (CW), and a fixed amount of milk and beef (i.e. 1 kg FPCM and 40 g CW). In the third FU, in case the amount of CW produced by the dairy system was lower than 40 g per kg FPCM, the remainder was compensated by CW produced in pure beef systems, assuming a GHG emission intensity of 30 kg CO2-eq. per kg CW for pure beef. Results showed a reduction in CW per kg FPCM from the dairy system in all four mitigation strategies. Considering GHG emissions per kg of FPCM only, the strategies reduced emissions by 0.2 to 18.1%. When considering emissions per kg of CW only, emissions were reduced by 12.5 to 48.9%. However, when we used a FU of 1 kg FPCM and 40 g CW, changes in emissions ranged from −0.2 to 3.8%. This was caused by the compensation of the lower CW production from dairy systems by CW from pure beef systems. Differences in emissions per kg FPCM and 40 g CW were smaller when the assumed emission intensity of pure beef was lower. We concluded that the mitigation strategies for dairy systems evaluated in this study were less effective for reduction of GHG emissions from production of milk and beef, when accounting for changes in the amount of beef produced. This study showed that the challenge of reducing GHG emissions of milk and beef production is interrelated. Hence, analyses of GHG emissions related to changes in production of milk and beef requires an integrated approach, beyond the system boundaries of the dairy farm.

Journal

Agricultural SystemsElsevier

Published: May 1, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve Freelancer

DeepDyve Pro

Price
FREE
$49/month

$360/year
Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed
Create lists to
organize your research
Export lists, citations
Read DeepDyve articles
Abstract access only
Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles
Print
20 pages/month
PDF Discount
20% off