IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v106y2012i1p1-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The life cycle impacts of feed for modern grow-finish Northern Great Plains US swine production

Author

Listed:
  • Stone, James J.
  • Dollarhide, Christopher R.
  • Benning, Jennifer L.
  • Gregg Carlson, C.
  • Clay, David E.

Abstract

A life cycle assessment (LCA) model was developed to analyze the environmental impacts per head of swine for typical feed rations of Northern Great Plains (NGP) US grow-finish swine production. The all-inclusive ‘field to gate’ approach incorporated steps ranging from corn and soybean production to shipping the market weight pig to a slaughtering facility. Feed production scenarios included: (1) a standard feed diet of 72% corn and 28% soymeal using 100% synthetic fertilizer; (2) standard feed diet using 40% manure as fertilizer; (3) modified feed diet using dry distillers gains with solubles (DDGS), with 100% DDGS allocation towards ethanol production; and (4) modified feed diet with 50% DDGS allocation towards ethanol production. For the standard NGP feed diet, enteric emissions and feed production were the two largest contributors towards climate change impacts, while feed production further resulted in significant contributions towards human health damage (44.6%), ecosystem diversity (67.4%), and resource availability (75.0%). DDGS incorporation assuming 100% allocation reduced corn and soymeal inputs considerably, resulting in overall decrease in impacts associated with climate change (−2.7%), terrestrial acidification (−7.1%), and both marine (−14.6%) and freshwater eutrophication (−22.7%); however terrestrial ecotoxicity increased (+22.9%) due to natural gas drying. 50% DDGS allocation increased all impact categories, with the greatest change found for terrestrial ecotoxicity (48.4%). The study results highlight the significant LCA impact contributions associated with feed during grow-finish swine production, and the benefits associated with DDGS incorporation; however, LCA benefits were realized only if 100% DDGS allocation was applied towards ethanol production.

Suggested Citation

  • Stone, James J. & Dollarhide, Christopher R. & Benning, Jennifer L. & Gregg Carlson, C. & Clay, David E., 2012. "The life cycle impacts of feed for modern grow-finish Northern Great Plains US swine production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 1-10.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:106:y:2012:i:1:p:1-10
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2011.11.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X11001533
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2011.11.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Lammers, P.J. & Kenealy, J.B. & Kliebenstein, James & Harmon, Jay D. & Helmers, Matthew J. & Honeyman, Mark, 2010. "Nonsolar Energy Use and One-Hundred-Year Global Warming Potential of Iowa Swine Feedstuffs and Feeding Strategies," Staff General Research Papers Archive 31866, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Lammers, P.J. & Honeyman, M.S. & Harmon, J.D. & Helmers, M.J., 2010. "Energy and carbon inventory of Iowa swine production facilities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(8), pages 551-561, October.
    3. Pelletier, N. & Lammers, P. & Stender, D. & Pirog, R., 2010. "Life cycle assessment of high- and low-profitability commodity and deep-bedded niche swine production systems in the Upper Midwestern United States," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(9), pages 599-608, November.
    4. Shapouri, Hosein & Duffield, James A. & Wang, Michael Q., 2002. "The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update," Agricultural Economic Reports 34075, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    5. Y. Nunez & J. Fermoso & N. Garcia & R. Irusta, 2005. "Comparative life cycle assessment of beef, pork and ostrich meat: a critical point of view," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(2), pages 140-151.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tuomisto, H.L. & Hodge, I.D. & Riordan, P. & Macdonald, D.W., 2012. "Comparing energy balances, greenhouse gas balances and biodiversity impacts of contrasting farming systems with alternative land uses," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 42-49.

    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. Pelletier, N. & Lammers, P. & Stender, D. & Pirog, R., 2010. "Life cycle assessment of high- and low-profitability commodity and deep-bedded niche swine production systems in the Upper Midwestern United States," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(9), pages 599-608, November.
    2. Šantek, Božidar & Gwehenberger, Gernot & Šantek, Mirela Ivančić & Narodoslawsky, Michael & Horvat, Predrag, 2010. "Evaluation of energy demand and the sustainability of different bioethanol production processes from sugar beet," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(11), pages 872-877.
    3. Beghin, John C. & Jensen, Helen H., 2008. "Farm policies and added sugars in US diets," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 480-488, December.
    4. Burnes, Ellen & Wichelns, Dennis & Hagen, John W., 2005. "Economic and policy implications of public support for ethanol production in California's San Joaquin Valley," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1155-1167, June.
    5. Ryan, Lisa & Convery, Frank & Ferreira, Susana, 2006. "Stimulating the use of biofuels in the European Union: Implications for climate change policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3184-3194, November.
    6. Abbe Hamilton & Stephen B. Balogh & Adrienna Maxwell & Charles A. S. Hall, 2013. "Efficiency of Edible Agriculture in Canada and the U.S. Over the Past Three and Four Decades," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-30, March.
    7. Castoldi, Nicola & Bechini, Luca & Ferrante, Antonio, 2011. "Fossil energy usage for the production of baby leaves," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 86-93.
    8. Gwendolyn Rudolph & Stefan Hörtenhuber & Davide Bochicchio & Gillian Butler & Roland Brandhofer & Sabine Dippel & Jean Yves Dourmad & Sandra Edwards & Barbara Früh & Matthias Meier & Armelle Prunier &, 2018. "Effect of Three Husbandry Systems on Environmental Impact of Organic Pigs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, October.
    9. Milazzo, M.F. & Spina, F. & Primerano, P. & Bart, J.C.J., 2013. "Soy biodiesel pathways: Global prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 579-624.
    10. Hermann, Weston A., 2006. "Quantifying global exergy resources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(12), pages 1685-1702.
    11. Eaves, James & Eaves, Stephen, 2007. "Renewable corn-ethanol and energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5958-5963, November.
    12. Raush, Kent D. & Belyea, Ronald L. & Singh, Vijay & Tumbleson, M.E., 2007. "Corn Processing Coproducts from Ethanol Production," Biofuels, Food and Feed Tradeoffs Conference, April 12-13, 2007, St, Louis, Missouri 313708, Farm Foundation.
    13. Rausch, Kent D. & Belyea, Ronald L. & Singh, Vijay & Tumbleson, M.E., 2007. "Corn processing coproducts from ethanol production," Biofuels, Food and Feed Tradeoffs Conference, April 12-13, 2007, St, Louis, Missouri 48775, Farm Foundation.
    14. Ludvík Friebel & Jana Friebelová & Naděžda Kernerová, 2016. "Stochastic Analysis of Profitability of the Pig Breeding Process," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 64(1), pages 255-264.
    15. Meryemoğlu, Bahar & Hasanoğlu, Arif & Kaya, Burçak & Irmak, Sibel & Erbatur, Oktay, 2014. "Hydrogen production from aqueous-phase reforming of sorghum biomass: An application of the response surface methodology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 535-541.
    16. Sergio Madrid, 2005. "Discussion," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 401-415, September.
    17. Yang, Q. & Chen, G.Q., 2013. "Greenhouse gas emissions of corn–ethanol production in China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), pages 176-184.
    18. Liu, Huacai & Huang, Yanqin & Yuan, Hongyou & Yin, Xiuli & Wu, Chuangzhi, 2018. "Life cycle assessment of biofuels in China: Status and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 301-322.
    19. Collotta, M. & Champagne, P. & Tomasoni, G. & Alberti, M. & Busi, L. & Mabee, W., 2019. "Critical indicators of sustainability for biofuels: An analysis through a life cycle sustainabilty assessment perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    20. R. Lal, 2007. "Carbon Management in Agricultural Soils," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 303-322, February.

    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:106:y:2012:i:1:p:1-10. 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.