Carbon footprint of five pig diets using three land use change accounting methods

Livestock Science

Volumn 149, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 215-223

  Meul, Marijke ^a   Ginneberge, Celine ^a   Van Middelaar, Corina E ^b   de Boer, Imke J M ^b   Fremaut, Dirk ^a   Haesaert, Geert ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE GHENT   (Belgium)

^b WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Carbon footprint; Direct land use change; Feed; Pig; Total LUC risk

Indexed keywords

GLYCINE MAX; SUIDAE;

EID: 84867332798     PISSN: 18711413     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.livsci.2012.07.012     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Audsley, E., Brander, M., Chatterton, J., Murphy-Bokern, D., Webster, C., Williams, A., 2009. How low can we go? An Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the UK Food System and the Scope to Reduce Them by 2050. WWF-UK.
2. Avelar E., Jha R., Beltranena E., Cervantes M., Morales A., Zijlstra R.T. The effect of feeding wheat distillers dried grain with solubles on growth performance and nutrient digestibility in weaned pigs. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2010, 160:73-77.
3. Bampidis V.A., Christodoulou V. Chickpeas (Cicer arietinum L.) in animal nutrition: a review. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2011, 168:1-20.
4. Barker, T., Bashmakov, I., Bernstein, L., Bogner, J.E., Bosch, P.R., Dave, R., Davidson, O.R., Fisher, B.S., Gupta, S., Halsnæs, K., Heij, G.J., Kahn Ribeiro, S., Kobayashi, S., Levine, M.D., Martino, D.L., Masera, O., Metz, B., Meyer, L.A., Nabuurs, G.-J., Najam, A., Nakicenovic, N., Rogner, H.-H., Roy, J., Sathaye, J., Schock, R., Shukla, P., Sims, R.E.H., Smith, P., Tirpak, D.A., Urge-Vorsatz, D., Zhou, D., 2007. Technical summary. In: Metz, B., Davidson, O.R., Bosch, P.R., Dave, R., Meyer, L.A. (Eds.), Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
5. Basset-Mens C., Van der Werf H.M.G. Scenario-based environmental assessment of farming systems: the case of pig production in France. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2005, 105:127-144.
6. Bohumila P., Zdenek Z. Nutritional value of lupine in the diets for pigs (a review). Acta Vet. BRNO 2009, 78:399-409.
7. Canola Council, 2011. Seed, oil and meal prices. Canola Council of Canada. Accessed on: http://www.canolacouncil.org.
8. Carlsson-Kanyama A. Climate change and dietary choices-how can emissions of greenhouse gases from food consumption be reduced?. Food Policy 1998, 23:277-293.
9. Cederberg C., Persson U.M., Neovius K., Molander S., Clift R. Including carbon emissions from deforestation in the carbon footprint of Brazilian beef. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45:1773-1779.
10. Cederberg C., Wivstad M., Bergkvist P., Mattsson B., Ivarsson K. Environmental assessment of plant protection strategies using scenarios for pig feed production. AMBIO 2005, 34:408-413.
11. Corré W.J., Langeveld J.W.A. Energie- en broeikasgasbalans voor enkele opties van energieproductie uit suikerbiet. Rapport 187 2008, Plant Research International B.V, Wageningen, The Netherlands, (12 pp.).
12. DEFRA, 2011. Commodity prices. Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Accessed on: http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/foodfarm/farmgate/commodity/.
13. Dumortier J., Hayes D.J., Carriquiry M., Dong F., Du X., Elobeid A., Fabiosa J.F., Tokgoz S. Sensitivity of Carbon Emission Estimates from Indirect Land-Use Change 2009, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University, USA, (17 pp.).
14. De Boer I.J.M., Cederberg C., Eady S., Gollnow S., Kristensen T., Macleod M., Meul M., Nemecek T., Phong L.T., Thoma G., van der Werf H.M.G., Williams A.G., Zonderland-Thomassen M.A. Greenhouse gas mitigation in animal production: towards an interdisciplinary research agenda. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustainability 2011, 3:423-431.
15. De Vries M., De Boer I.J.M. Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: a review of life cycle assessments. Livest. Sci. 2010, 128:1-11.
16. Ecoinvent, 2010. Ecoinvent Data v2.2. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dubendorf, Switzerland.
17. Elferink E.V., Nonhebel S., Moll H.C. Feeding livestock food residue and the consequences for the environmental impact of meat. J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16:1227-1233.
18. Eriksson I.S., Elmquist H., Stern S., Nybrant T. Environmental systems analysis of pig production. The impact of feed choice. Int. J. LCA 2005, 10:143-154.
19. FAO, 2009. State of the World's Forests 2009. FAO, Rome, 168 pp.
20. FAO, 2010. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Dairy Sector. A Life Cycle Assessment. FAO, Italy, 98 pp.
21. Flysjö A., Cederberg C., Henriksson M., Ledgard S. The interaction between milk and beef production and emissions from land use change-critical considerations in life cycle assessment and carbon footprint studies of milk. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 28:134-142.
22. ® Guide for Energy and Plant Managers 2003, University of California, U.S, (92 pp.).
23. Gatel F., Grosjean F. Effect of protein-content of the diet on nitrogen-excretion by pigs. Livest. Prod. Sci. 1992, 31:109-120.
24. Harvey M., Pilgrim S. The new competition for land: food, energy and climate change. Food Policy 2011, 36:S40-S51.
25. Hörtenhuber S.J., Lindenthal T., Zollitsch W. Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from feed supply chains by utilizing regionally produced protein sources: the case of Austrian dairy production. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2011, 91:1118-1127.
26. IDF A common carbon footprint approach for dairy. The IDF guide to standard lifecycle assessment methodology for the dairy sector. Bull. Int. Dairy Fed. 2010, (445).
27. IPCC, 2006. In: Eggleston, H.S., Buendia, L., Miwa, K., Ngara, T., Tanabe, K. (Eds.), 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme. IGES, Japan.
28. Jezierny D., Mosenthin R., Bauer E. The use of grain legumes as a protein source in pig nutrition: a review. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2010, 157:111-128.
29. Jungbluth, N., Chudacoff, M., Dauriat, A., Dinkerl, F., Doka, G., Faist Emmenegger, M., Gnansounou, E., Kljun, N., Schleiss, K., Spielmann, M., Stettler, C., Sutter, J., 2007. Life cycle inventories of bioenergy. Ecoinvent Report no. 17. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Invenotries, Dübendorf, CH.
30. Lange M. The GHG balance of biofuels taking into account land use change. Energy Policy 2011, 39:2373-2385.
31. Lehuger S., Gabrielle B., Gagnaire N. Environmental impact of the substitution of imported soybean meal with locally-produced rapeseed meal in dairy cow feed. J. Clean. Prod. 2009, 17:616-624.
32. Linneen S.K., DeRouchey J.M., Dritz S.S., Goodband R.D., Tokach M.D., Nelssen J.L. Effects of dried distillers grains with solubles on growing and finishing pig performance in a commercial environment. J. Anim. Sci. 2008, 86:1579-1587.
33. Macedo M.N., DeFries R.S., Morton D.C., Stickler C.M., Galford G.L., Shimabukuro Y.E. Decoupling of deforestation and soy production in the southern Amazon during the late 2000s. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012, 109:1341-1346.
34. Meul M., Nevens F., Reheul D., Hofman G. Energy use efficiency of specialised dairy, arable and pig farms in Flanders. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2007, 119:135-144.
35. Nemecek, T., Kägi, T., 2007. Life Cycle Inventories of Agricultural Production Systems. Ecoinvent Report no. 15. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories. Dubendorf, Switzerland, 360 pp.
36. Nemecek T., von Richthofen J.S., Dubois G., Casta P., Charles R., Pahl H. Environmental impacts of introducing grain legumes into European crop rotations. Eur. J. Agron. 2008, 28:380-393.
37. Osada T., Takada R., Shinzato I. Potential reduction of greenhouse gas emission from swine manure by using a low-protein diet supplemented with synthetic amino acids. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2011, 166-167:562-574.
38. Panichelli L., Gnansounou E. Estimating greenhouse gas emissions from indirect land-use change in biofuels production: concepts and exploratory analysis for soybean-based biodiesel. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 2008, 67:1017-1030.
39. Panichelli L., Dauriat A., Gnansounou E. Life cycle assessment of soybean-based biodiesel in Argentina for export. Int. J. LCA 2009, 14:144-159.
40. Partanen K., Siljander-Rasi H., Alaviuhkola T. Feeding weaned piglets and growing-finishing pigs with diets based on mainly home-grown organic feedstuffs. Agric. Food Sci. 2006, 15:89-105.
41. Plevin R.J., O'Hare M., Jones A.D., Torn M.S., Gibbs H.K. Greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels' indirect land use change are uncertain but may be much greater than previously estimated. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44:8015-8021.
42. Prudĉncio da Silva V., van der Werf H.M.G., Spies A., Soares S.R. Variability in environmental impacts of Brazilian soybean according to crop production and transport scenarios. J. Environ. Manage. 2010, 91:1831-1839.
43. Punter, G., Rickeard, D., Larivé, J.-F., Edwards, R., Mortimer, N., Horne, R., Bauen, A., Woods, J., 2004. Well-to-Wheel Evaluation for Production of Ethanol from Wheat. LowCVP Fuels Working Group. WTW Sub-Group, 40 pp.
44. Reinhard J., Zah R. Global environmental consequences of increased biodiesel consumption in Switzerland: consequential life cycle assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 2009, 17:S46-S56.
45. RTRS, 2011. Round Table on Responsible Soy Association. Accessed on: http://www.responsiblesoy.org.
46. Searchinger T., Heimlich R., Houghton R.A., Dong F., Elobeid A., Fabiosa J., Tokgoz S., Hayes D., Yu T.-H. Use of U.S. cropland for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science 2008, 319:1238-1240.
47. Smith P., Martino D., CaI Z., Gwary D., Janzen H., Kumar P., McCarl B., Ogle S., O'Mara F., Rice C., et al. Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. 2008, 363:789-813.
48. Stein H.H., Shurson G.C. Board-Invited Review: the use and application of distillers dried grains with solubles in swine diets. J. Anim. Sci. 2009, 87:1292-1303.
49. Tekchandani H.K., Dias F.F., Mehta D. Maize wet milling co-products as feed additives: perspectives and opportunities. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 1999, 58:83-88.
50. Tits, M., Misonne, J.F., 2002. Suikerbieten en leefmilieu. De Bietplanter, augustus 2002. Koninklijk Belgisch Instituut tot Verbetering van de Biet.
51. USDA, 2011. Market News. USDA Agricultural Marketing Service. Accessed on: http://www.ams.usda.gov.
52. Van der Werf H.G.M., Petit J., Sanders J. The environmental impacts of the production of concentrated feed: the case of pig feed in Bretagne. Agric. Syst. 2005, 83:153-177.
53. Van Middelaar, C.E., Cederberg, C., Vellinga, T.V., Van der Werf, H.M.G., de Boer, I.J.M. Exploring variability in methods and data sensitivity in carbon footprints of feed ingredients. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., submitted.
54. Van Nevel C., Seynaeve M., Van de Voorde G., De Smet S., Van Driessche E., De Wilde R. Effects of increasing amounts of Lupinus albus seeds without or with whole egg powder in the diet of growing pigs on performance. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2000, 83:89-101.
55. Wang M.Q., Han J., Haq Z., Tyner W.E., Wu M., Elgowainy A. Energy and greenhouse gas emission effects of corn and cellulosic ethanol with technology improvements and land use changes. Biomass Bioenergy 2011, 35:1885-1896.
56. Weidema, B., 2003. Market information in life cycle assessment. Environmental Project no. 863 2003. Miljøprojekt. The Danish Environmental Protection Agency (Danish EPA).
57. Weightman R.M., Cottrill B.R., Wiltshire J.J.J., Kindred D.R., Sylvester-Bradley R. Opportunities for avoidance of land-use change through substitution of soya bean meal and cereals in European livestock diets with bioethanol coproducts. GCB Bioenergy 2011, 3:158-170.