Life-Cycle Assessment of the Beef Cattle Production System for the Northern Great Plains, USA

Lupo, Christopher D.; Clay, David E.; Benning, Jennifer L.; Stone, Jeff

doi:10.2134/jeq2013.03.0101

Cited by 72 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is contrary to many commonly reported LCA analyses indicating that cow-calf enterprises account for the highest GHG emission in the beef production [11], which is misleading as most of these analyses do not consider the GHG sequestration in the ecosystem being studied. In addition, these analyses do not consider the GHG emissions generated by cropping practices [45,49] and soil erosion [50] associated with grains fed during the non-grazing portions of the production cycle.…”

Section: Carbon Sequestrationcontrasting

confidence: 86%

“…Cattle transportation from the site of cow-calf production to the next phase of production is not considered. The functional unit, to which all the environmental loads in the LCA are related, is generally defined as 1 kg live or carcass weight if the entire beef production systems are studied, which includes cow-calf, backgrounding and finishing systems [11]. As the boundary of our LCA study is limited to the calf-cow production system, we define the functional unit as one marketed beef calf as in Ogino et al [16], so that our result can be easily compared with literature value from other regions.…”

Section: The Study Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous LCA studies on beef production have consistently reported that the cow-calf phase contributes the most emissions to the overall beef production system [11]. However, they generally omitted carbon sequestration, which has great potential to mitigate GHG emissions for cow-calf production as C sequestration exceeds emissions when animals feed solely by grazing perennial pastures [5,12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

GHG Mitigation Potential of Different Grazing Strategies in the United States Southern Great Plains

Wang

Teague²,

Park³

et al. 2015

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The possibility of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by ruminants using improved grazing is investigated by estimating GHG emissions for cow-calf farms under light continuous (LC), heavy continuous (HC) and rotational grazing, also known as multi-paddock (MP), management strategies in Southern Great Plain (SGP) using life cycle assessment (LCA). Our results indicated a GHG emission with these grazing treatments of 8034.90 kg·CO2e·calffor cow-calf farms in SGP region, which is high, compared to that for other regions, due to the high percentage (79.6%) of enteric CH4 emissions caused by relatively lower feed quality on the unfertilized rangeland. Sensitivity analyses on MP grazing strategy showed that an increase in grass quality and digestibility could potentially reduce GHG emission by 30%. Despite higher GHG emissions on a per calf basis, net GHG emissions in SGP region are potentially negative when carbon (C) sequestration is taken into account. With net C emission rates of −2002.8, −1731.6 and −89.5 kg C ha −1 ·year −1 after converting from HC to MP, HC to LC and from LC to MP, our analysis indicated cow-calf farms converting from continuous to MP grazing in SGP region are likely net carbon sinks for decades.

show abstract

Section: Carbon Sequestrationcontrasting

confidence: 86%

Section: The Study Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

GHG Mitigation Potential of Different Grazing Strategies in the United States Southern Great Plains

Wang

Teague²,

Park³

et al. 2015

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The backgrounding phase in the beef production system (cow (calf through to feedlot) may make a significant contribution to net whole-farm GHG emissions. Using life-cycle assessment for the US beef production systems, Pelletier et al (2010) and Lupo et al (2013) reported that the backgrounding systems contributed 8 to 20% of the total net whole-farm GHG emissions of the beef production system, i.e., cowÁcalf through to feedlot.…”

Section: Results and Discussion System Boundariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Whole-farm greenhouse gas emissions from a backgrounding beef production system using an observation-based and model-based approach

Stewart¹,

Alemu

Ominski

et al. 2014

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2014. Whole-farm greenhouse gas emissions from a backgrounding beef production system using an observation-based and model-based approach. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 94: 463Á477. Backgrounding, raising weaned beef cattle in preparation for finishing in a feedlot, is a common practice in western Canadian beef production systems. The objectives of this study were: (i) to assess the whole-farm greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from a pasture-based backgrounding system using an observation-based and model-based approach and (ii) to compare model-based estimated emissions with observation-based emissions from the key components of the farm, in order to identify the knowledge gaps that merit further study. For the observation-based approach, emissions were garnered from a multi-disciplinary field study that examined three fertility treatments applied to the pasture grazed by beef cattle: (i) no liquid hog manure application (control); (ii) split application of liquid hog manure, half applied in fall and half in spring (split) and (iii) single spring application of liquid hog manure (single). The model-based approach used a systems-based model, adapted from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change algorithms, to estimate annual net farm GHG emissions from the three fertility treatments and a hypothetical synthetic fertilizer treatment. Total farm emissions included methane (CH 4 ), nitrous oxide (N 2 O) emissions from farm components and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions from energy use. Net farm GHG emissions using the observation-based approach ranged from 0.4 to 2.2 Mg CO 2 eq ha (1 and from 4.2 to 6.5 kg CO 2 eq kg (1 liveweight gain exported; the model-based approach resulted in net farm emissions ranged from 0.6 to 3.7 Mg CO 2 eq ha (1 and from 7.0 to 12.9 kg CO 2 eq kg (1 liveweight gain exported. Except in the control treatment, both enteric CH 4 and soil N 2 O emissions were the major contributors to total farm emissions. Emissions intensity for the hypothetical synthetic fertilizer treatment (9.4 kg CO 2 eq kg (1 liveweight gain) was lower than for the split and single scenarios. Although individual GHG emission estimates varied appreciably, trends in emissions intensity were similar between the two approaches. Efforts to reduce GHG emissions should be directed towards components such as enteric CH 4 and soil N 2 O, which have larger impacts on overall system emissions.

show abstract

“…However, the greater estimates using CCM (77%) can be attributed to the greater emission factor used in COWPOLL (7-8% of gross energy intake) than the default IPCC value (6% of gross energy intake) used in the previous studies. In a cow-calf backgrounding production system, Pelletier et al (2010) and Lupo et al (2013) reported that beef cows and backgrounded animals contributed 68-81% and 11-24% of the total farm GHG emissions, respectively. Furthermore, Beauchemin et al (2010) indicated that beef cows and backgrounded animals contributed up to 79% and 7%, respectively, of farm CH 4 emissions from enteric fermentation.…”

Section: Baseline Scenariomentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of greenhouse gas emissions from hog manure application in a Canadian cow–calf production system using whole-farm models

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The development of beneficial management practices is a key strategy to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from animal agriculture. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the impact of time and amount of hog manure application on farm productivity and GHG emissions from a cow-calf production system using two whole-farm models. Detailed model inputs (climate, soil and manure properties, farm operation data) were collected from a 3-year field study that evaluated the following three treatments: no application of hog manure on grassland (baseline); a single application of hog manure on grassland in spring (single); and two applications of hog manure as fall and spring (split). All three treatments were simulated in a representative cow-calf production system at the farm-gate using the following whole-farm models: a Coupled Components Model (CCM) that used existing farm component models and the Integrated Farm System Model (IFSM). Annual GHG intensities for the baseline scenario were 17.7 kg CO 2 -eq/kg liveweight for CCM and 18.1 kg CO 2 -eq/kg liveweight for IFSM. Of the total farm GHG emissions, 73-77% were from enteric methane production. The application of hog manure on grassland showed a mean emission increase of 7.8 and 8.4 kg CO 2 -eq/kg liveweight above the baseline for the single and split scenarios, respectively. For the manured scenarios, farm GHG emissions were mainly from enteric methane (47-54%) and soil nitrous oxide (33-41%). Emission estimates from the different GHG sources in the farm varied between models for the single and split application scenarios. Although farm productivity was 3-4% higher in the split than in single application (0.14 t liveweight/ha), the environmental advantage of applying manure in a single or split application was not consistent between models for farm emission intensity. Further component and whole-farm assessments are required to fully understand the impact of timing and the amount of livestock manure application on GHG emissions from beef production systems.

show abstract

Life-Cycle Assessment of the Beef Cattle Production System for the Northern Great Plains, USA

Cited by 72 publications

References 33 publications

GHG Mitigation Potential of Different Grazing Strategies in the United States Southern Great Plains

GHG Mitigation Potential of Different Grazing Strategies in the United States Southern Great Plains

Whole-farm greenhouse gas emissions from a backgrounding beef production system using an observation-based and model-based approach

Evaluation of greenhouse gas emissions from hog manure application in a Canadian cow–calf production system using whole-farm models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About