Modeling the effects of steroid implant use on the environmental and economic sustainability of Brazilian beef production

Abstract

Brazilian beef systems contribute 14.9% of global beef production, therefore given climate change concerns, there is a clear need to reduce environmental impacts while maintaining economic viability. This study evaluated the hypothesis that steroid implant use in Brazilian beef cattle would reduce resource use, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and economic costs of production, thereby improving environmental and economic sustainability. A deterministic model based on beef cattle population demographics, nutrition and performance was used to quantify resource inputs and GHG emissions per 1.0 x 10 6 kg of hot carcass weight (HCW) beef. System boundaries extended from cropping input manufacture to cattle arriving at the slaughterhouse. Beef systems were modeled using herd population dynamics, feed and performance data sourced from producers in four Brazilian states, with additional data from global databases. Implants were used in calves, growing and finishing cattle at low (LI), medium (MI) and high (HI) levels of performance enhancement, compared to non-implanted (NI) controls. Feed use results were used in combination with producer-derived input costs to assess the economic impacts of implant use, including production costs and returns on investment. Improved FCE, ADG and carcass weights conferred by implant use reduced the number of cattle and the time taken to produce 1.0 x 10 6 kg HCW beef. Compared to NI controls, the quantities of feed, land, water and fossil fuels required to produce 1.0 x 10 6 kg HCW beef was reduced in implanted cattle, with reductions proportional to the performance-enhancing effect of the implant (HI > MI > LI). Implant use reduced GHG emissions per 1.0 x 10 6 kg HCW beef by 9.4% (LI), 12.6% (MI) or 15.8% (HI). Scaling up the MI effects to represent all eligible Brazilian cattle being implanted, revealed avoided GHG emissions equivalent to the annual exhaust emissions of 62.0 x 10 6 cars. Economic impacts of implant use reflected the environmental results, resulting in a greater margin for the producers within each system (cow-calf through to finishing). The 6.13% increase in kg of HCW beef produced generates a cost reduction of 3.76% and an increase in the return on invested capital of 4.14% on average. Implants offer the opportunity for Brazilian beef producers to demonstrate their dedication to improving environmental and economic sustainability through improved productivity, although care must be taken to avoid negative trade-offs.

Modelling environmental impacts associated with the removal of productivity-enhancing technologies from Canadian feedlots: a case study

“…Similarly, in Canada, improved land-use efficiency due to an increase in the CW of implanted cattle ranging from 4.0% to 9.0% has been observed (Basarab et al 2012;Aboagye et al 2022). Furthermore, a recent study in Brazil also showed that, compared with control cattle (no implants), the quantities of feed and land required to produce a unit of beef were reduced in implanted cattle over the entire production system, with reductions proportional to the level of animal performance by the implant (high > medium > low; Capper et al 2021). Consequently, due to the lower ADG of cattle raised without these additives, Capper and Hayes (2012) reported a 9.1% increase in the amount of land required to produce feed when PETs were eliminated in the US production system.…”

“…However, Basarab et al (2012) did not include other environmental metrics such as water use and NH 3 emissions. More recently, a more extensive review of the environmental footprint, including ammonia emissions, as well as land and water use was conducted in the United States (Crawford et al 2022) and Brazil (Capper et al 2021). Thus, the objective of the current study was to model and compare the environmental footprint (i.e., GHG and NH 3 emissions, land use, and water use) of feedlot steers and heifers from a multiyear study using current conventional western Canadian production practices with or without PETs.…”

Anabolic Steroids in Fattening Food-Producing Animals—A Review

“…The use of implants reduced GHG emissions for 1.0 × 10 6 kg HCW of beef by 15.8%. The 6.13% increase in kg of HCW beef produced generates a cost reduction of 3.76% and an increase in the return on invested capital of 4.14% on average [ 12 ]. Another study conducted on cattle shows that the use of anabolic implants reduces water consumption by 9.85%, the need for sown land by 9.58%, greenhouse gas emissions by 7.5%, fossil fuel consumption by 4.98%, and animal feed costs by 7.55% [ 13 ].…”

Implantes promotores de crecimiento en ganado bovino. Efectos y rol en un escenario de mayor demanda y preocupación ambiental

“…Por otro lado, Capper et al (2021) evaluaron, bajo un modelo determinístico, sistemas de producción de carne en Brasil, con y sin uso de IAPC, señalando que los IAPC de alta potencia lograron reducir la emisión de GEI en un 15,8%, para producir 1 x 10 6 kg de canal caliente. Crawford et al (2022), estimaron los efectos en los cambios en las dietas en los corrales de engorda y disponibilidad de tecnologías mejoradoras del crecimiento sobre el crecimiento animal y la huella de carbono de la alimentación del ganado en 1990 y 2020.…”