IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v11y2021i10p921-d643146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Assessment of Sustainable Broiler Production Systems: Effects of Low-Protein Diet and Litter Incineration

Author

Listed:
  • Akifumi Ogino

    (Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science, National Agriculture and Food Research Organization (NARO), Tsukuba 305-0901, Japan)

  • Kazato Oishi

    (Laboratory of Animal Husbandry Resources, Division of Applied Bioscience, Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan)

  • Akira Setoguchi

    (Laboratory of Animal Husbandry Resources, Division of Applied Bioscience, Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan)

  • Takashi Osada

    (Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science, National Agriculture and Food Research Organization (NARO), Tsukuba 305-0901, Japan)

Abstract

We conducted a life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare environmental impacts of conventional (CNV) broiler chicken production in Japan with those of three mitigation options: a low-protein diet supplemented with more crystalline amino acids (LP), incineration of broiler litter (IC), and their combination (LP + IC). Feed production, feed transport, broiler housing, and manure management were included in the LCA, with 1 kg of liveweight of broiler chicken as the functional unit. The CNV environmental impacts were: climate change, 1.86 kg CO 2 e; acidification, 52.6 g SO 2 e; eutrophication, 18.3 g PO 4 e; energy consumption, 18.8 MJ. Since broiler manure management has a lower N 2 O emission factor, the LP diet’s effects on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were limited. Because a large amount of ammonia is emitted from broiler-litter composting and the LP diet reduced nitrogen excretion and consequent NH 3 emission, the LP showed lower acidification and eutrophication potentials than CNV. The IC system reduced fuel consumption by utilizing the generated heat for broiler-house heating and thus had lower GHG emissions and energy consumption; it reduced ammonia emission from the manure-management process by incineration and thus had lower acidification and eutrophication potentials even when including NO X generation by litter incineration. The LP + IC system had lower environmental impacts than CNV: for climate change (by 16%), acidification (48%), eutrophication (24%), and energy consumption (15%). Mitigation opportunities for broiler chickens remain, and broiler production systems with mitigation options help produce chickens more sustainably.

Suggested Citation

  • Akifumi Ogino & Kazato Oishi & Akira Setoguchi & Takashi Osada, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of Sustainable Broiler Production Systems: Effects of Low-Protein Diet and Litter Incineration," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-14, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:10:p:921-:d:643146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/10/921/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/10/921/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Santos Dalólio, Felipe & da Silva, Jadir Nogueira & Carneiro de Oliveira, Angélica Cássia & Ferreira Tinôco, Ilda de Fátima & Christiam Barbosa, Rúben & Resende, Michael de Oliveira & Teixeira Albino,, 2017. "Poultry litter as biomass energy: A review and future perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 941-949.
    2. 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.
    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. Marius Giorgi Usturoi & Răzvan-Mihail Radu-Rusu & Alexandru Usturoi & Cristina Simeanu & Marius Gheorghe Doliș & Roxana Nicoleta Rațu & Daniel Simeanu, 2023. "Impact of Different Levels of Crude Protein on Production Performance and Meat Quality in Broiler Selected for Slow Growth," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, February.
    2. Foivos Zisis & Elisavet Giamouri & Christina Mitsiopoulou & Christos Christodoulou & Charalampos Kamilaris & Alexandros Mavrommatis & Athanasios C. Pappas & Eleni Tsiplakou, 2023. "An Overview of Poultry Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Mediterranean Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-19, January.

    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. 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.
    2. Sitka, Andrzej & Szulc, Piotr & Smykowski, Daniel & Jodkowski, Wiesław, 2021. "Application of poultry manure as an energy resource by its gasification in a prototype rotary counterflow gasifier," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 422-429.
    3. 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.
    4. Xiaodan Liu & Xuping Feng & Lingxia Huang & Yong He, 2020. "Rapid Determination of Wood and Rice Husk Pellets’ Proximate Analysis and Heating Value," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-13, July.
    5. repec:lib:0000of:v:1:y:2015:i:1:p:38-45 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Payandeh, Z. & Kheiralipour, K. & Karimi, M. & Khoshnevisan, B., 2017. "Joint data envelopment analysis and life cycle assessment for environmental impact reduction in broiler production systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 768-774.
    7. 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.
    8. Leinonen, Ilkka & Williams, Adrian G. & Waller, Anthony H. & Kyriazakis, Ilias, 2013. "Comparing the environmental impacts of alternative protein crops in poultry diets: The consequences of uncertainty," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 33-42.
    9. Tallentire, C.W. & Mackenzie, S.G. & Kyriazakis, I., 2017. "Environmental impact trade-offs in diet formulation for broiler production systems in the UK and USA," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 145-156.
    10. Tańczuk, M. & Junga, R. & Werle, S. & Chabiński, M. & Ziółkowski, Ł., 2019. "Experimental analysis of the fixed bed gasification process of the mixtures of the chicken manure with biomass," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1055-1063.
    11. Izabella Maj & Sylwester Kalisz & Szymon Ciukaj, 2022. "Properties of Animal-Origin Ash—A Valuable Material for Circular Economy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-15, February.
    12. Putman, Ben & Thoma, Greg & Burek, Jasmina & Matlock, Marty, 2017. "A retrospective analysis of the United States poultry industry: 1965 compared with 2010," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-117.
    13. Elżbieta Jadwiga Szymańska & Robert Mroczek, 2023. "Energy Intensity of Food Industry Production in Poland in the Process of Energy Transformation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-24, February.
    14. Zifei Liu & Yang Liu, 2018. "Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions from animal production," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 8(4), pages 627-638, August.
    15. Marco Remondino & Luigi Valdenassi, 2018. "Different Uses of Ozone: Environmental and Corporate Sustainability. Literature Review and Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    16. Daya Shankar Pandey & Giannis Katsaros & Christian Lindfors & James J. Leahy & Savvas A. Tassou, 2019. "Fast Pyrolysis of Poultry Litter in a Bubbling Fluidised Bed Reactor: Energy and Nutrient Recovery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, May.
    17. White, Robin R., 2016. "Increasing energy and protein use efficiency improves opportunities to decrease land use, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions from dairy production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 20-29.
    18. Yi Liang & Michael Janorschke & Chad E. Hayes, 2022. "Low-Cost Solar Collectors to Pre-Heat Ventilation Air in Broiler Houses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-9, February.
    19. Fuchs, Werner & Wang, Xuemei & Gabauer, Wolfgang & Ortner, Markus & Li, Zifu, 2018. "Tackling ammonia inhibition for efficient biogas production from chicken manure: Status and technical trends in Europe and China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 186-199.
    20. Bartłomiej Bajan & Joanna Łukasiewicz & Agnieszka Poczta-Wajda & Walenty Poczta, 2021. "Edible Energy Production and Energy Return on Investment—Long-Term Analysis of Global Changes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-16, February.
    21. Mariusz Tańczuk & Robert Junga & Alicja Kolasa-Więcek & Patrycja Niemiec, 2019. "Assessment of the Energy Potential of Chicken Manure in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, April.

    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:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:10:p:921-:d:643146. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.