IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v103y2010i6p371-379.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from beef production in western Canada: A case study

Author

Listed:
  • Beauchemin, Karen A.
  • Henry Janzen, H.
  • Little, Shannan M.
  • McAllister, Tim A.
  • McGinn, Sean M.

Abstract

A life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted to estimate whole-farm greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from beef production in western Canada. The aim was to determine the relative contributions of the cow-calf and feedlot components to these emissions, and to examine the proportion of whole-farm emissions attributable to enteric methane (CH4). The simulated farm consisted of a beef production operation comprised of 120 cows, four bulls, and their progeny, with the progeny fattened in a feedlot. The farm also included cropland and native prairie pasture for grazing to supply the feed for the animals. The LCA was conducted over 8Â years to fully account for the lifetime GHG emissions from the cows, bulls and progeny, as well as the beef marketed from cull cows, cull bulls, and progeny raised for market. The emissions were estimated using Holos, a whole-farm model developed by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Holos is an empirical model, with a yearly time-step, based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change methodology, modified for Canadian conditions and farm scale. The model considers all significant CH4, N2O, and CO2 emissions and removals on the farm, as well as emissions from manufacture of inputs (fertilizer, herbicides) and off-farm emissions of N2O derived from nitrogen applied on the farm. The LCA estimated the GHG intensity of beef production in this system at 22Â kg CO2 equivalent (kg carcass)-1. Enteric CH4 was the largest contributing source of GHG accounting for 63% of total emissions. Nitrous oxide from soil and manure accounted for a further 27% of the total emissions, while CH4 emissions from manure and CO2 energy emissions were minor contributors. Within the beef production cycle, the cow-calf system accounted for about 80% of total GHG emissions and the feedlot system for only 20%. About 84% of enteric CH4 was from the cow-calf herd, mostly from mature cows. It follows that mitigation practices to reduce GHG emissions from beef production should focus on reducing enteric CH4 production from mature beef cows. However, mitigation approaches must also recognize that the cow-calf production system also has many ancillary environmental benefits, allowing use of grazing and forage lands that can preserve soil carbon reserves and provide other ecosystems services.

Suggested Citation

  • Beauchemin, Karen A. & Henry Janzen, H. & Little, Shannan M. & McAllister, Tim A. & McGinn, Sean M., 2010. "Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from beef production in western Canada: A case study," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 371-379, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:103:y:2010:i:6:p:371-379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308-521X(10)00038-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Casey, J.W. & Holden, N.M., 2005. "Analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from the average Irish milk production system," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 97-114, October.
    2. Casey, J.W. & Holden, N.M., 2006. "Quantification of GHG emissions from sucker-beef production in Ireland," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-3), pages 79-98, October.
    3. Vergé, X.P.C. & Dyer, J.A. & Desjardins, R.L. & Worth, D., 2008. "Greenhouse gas emissions from the Canadian beef industry," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 126-134, September.
    4. Lovett, D.K. & Shalloo, L. & Dillon, P. & O'Mara, F.P., 2006. "A systems approach to quantify greenhouse gas fluxes from pastoral dairy production as affected by management regime," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 88(2-3), pages 156-179, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Raymond L. Desjardins & Devon E. Worth & Xavier P. C. Vergé & Dominique Maxime & Jim Dyer & Darrel Cerkowniak, 2012. "Carbon Footprint of Beef Cattle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(12), pages 1-23, December.
    2. Thomassen, M.A. & Dolman, M.A. & van Calker, K.J. & de Boer, I.J.M., 2009. "Relating life cycle assessment indicators to gross value added for Dutch dairy farms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2278-2284, June.
    3. Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano & Lamonaca, Emilia & Tappi, Marco & Di Gioia, Leonardo, 2020. "On the Environmental Impacts of Voluntary Animal-based Policies in the EU: Technical and Political Considerations," MPRA Paper 99932, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Pelletier, N., 2008. "Environmental performance in the US broiler poultry sector: Life cycle energy use and greenhouse gas, ozone depleting, acidifying and eutrophying emissions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 67-73, September.
    5. Fabio Gaetano Santeramo & Emilia Lamonaca & Marco Tappi & Leonardo Di Gioia, 2019. "Considerations on the Environmental and Social Sustainability of Animal-Based Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-12, April.
    6. Dakpo, Hervé K & Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2014. "Inclusion of undesirable outputs in production technology modeling: The case of greenhouse gas emissions in French meat sheep farming," Working Papers 207806, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    7. Nijdam, Durk & Rood, Trudy & Westhoek, Henk, 2012. "The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 760-770.
    8. Nigel Key & Gregoire Tallard, 2012. "Mitigating methane emissions from livestock: a global analysis of sectoral policies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 387-414, May.
    9. Bradley G. Ridoutt & Peerasak Sanguansri & Gregory S. Harper, 2011. "Comparing Carbon and Water Footprints for Beef Cattle Production in Southern Australia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(12), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Vergé, X.P.C. & Dyer, J.A. & Desjardins, R.L. & Worth, D., 2008. "Greenhouse gas emissions from the Canadian beef industry," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 126-134, September.
    11. Hoffman, Eric & Cavigelli, Michel A. & Camargo, Gustavo & Ryan, Matthew & Ackroyd, Victoria J. & Richard, Tom L. & Mirsky, Steven, 2018. "Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in organic and conventional grain crop production: Accounting for nutrient inflows," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 89-96.
    12. Malý, M. & Hálová, P. & Havlíková, M. & Žáková-Kroupová, Z., 2017. "Valuation of Public Goods: The Case of Emissions from Livestock Holdings in the Czech Republic," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 9(1), March.
    13. Elisavet Giamouri & Foivos Zisis & Christina Mitsiopoulou & Christos Christodoulou & Athanasios C. Pappas & Panagiotis E. Simitzis & Charalampos Kamilaris & Fenia Galliou & Thrassyvoulos Manios & Alex, 2023. "Sustainable Strategies for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction in Small Ruminants Farming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, February.
    14. Innocent Bakam & Robin Matthews, 2009. "Emission trading in agriculture: a study of design options using an agent-based approach," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 14(8), pages 755-776, December.
    15. Mack, G. & Rossier, R., 2017. "Entspricht die Schweizer Milchproduktion bei erhöhtem Kraftfuttereinsatz noch den Erwartungen der Bevölkerung?," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 45, July.
    16. White, Robin R. & Brady, Michael & Capper, Judith L. & Johnson, Kristen A., 2014. "Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-12.
    17. González-Quintero, Ricardo & van Wijk, Mark T. & Ruden, Alejandro & Gómez, Manuel & Pantevez, Heiber & Castro-Llanos, Fabio & Notenbaert, An & Arango, Jacobo, 2022. "Yield gap analysis to identify attainable milk and meat productivities and the potential for greenhouse gas emissions mitigation in cattle systems of Colombia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    18. Agostinho, F. & Oliveira, M.W. & Pulselli, F.M. & Almeida, C.M.V.B. & Giannetti, B.F., 2019. "Emergy accounting as a support for a strategic planning towards a regional sustainable milk production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    19. María I. Nieto & Olivia Barrantes & Liliana Privitello & Ramón Reiné, 2018. "Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Beef Grazing Systems in Semi-Arid Rangelands of Central Argentina," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, November.
    20. Kearney, M. & O'Riordan, E.G. & Byrne, N. & Breen, J. & Crosson, P., 2023. "Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in pasture-based dairy-beef production systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:103:y:2010:i:6:p:371-379. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.