Life cycle assessment of Japanese pig farming using low-protein diet supplemented with amino acids

Soil Science and Plant Nutrition

Volumn 59, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 107-118

  Ogino, Akifumi ^a   Osada, Takashi ^a   Takada, Ryozo ^b   Takagi, Tomo ^c   Tsujimoto, Susumu ^c   Tonoue, Tsuyoshi ^d   Matsui, Daisuke ^d   Katsumata, Masaya ^a   Yamashita, Takahiro ^a   Tanaka, Yasuo ^a  

^a FOOD RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Japan)

^b NIIGATA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^c AJINOMOTO CO INC   (Japan)

^d SUMITOMO CHEMICAL CO LTD   (Japan)

Author keywords

amino acids; greenhouse gas; life cycle analysis; low protein diet; swine

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; SUIDAE; SUS SCROFA DOMESTICA;

EID: 84873987806     PISSN: 00380768     EISSN: 17470765     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00380768.2012.730476     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. AFFTIS. 2000. Investigation of Energy-Managing Agricultural Production System Development, Tokyo: Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Technology Information Society. (in Japanese)
2. Ajinomoto. 2007. CO2 Database for Food-Related Materials, Tokyo: Ajinomoto Co., Inc.
3. Basset-Mens, C and van der Werf, HMG. 2005. Scenario-based environmental assessment of farming systems: the case of pig production in France. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 105: 127-144.
4. Bernet, N and Béline, F. 2009. Challenges and innovations on biological treatment of livestock effluents. Bioresour. Technol., 100: 5431-5436.
5. Bortone, G. 2009. Integrated anaerobic/aerobic biological treatment for intensive swine production. Bioresour. Technol., 100: 5424-5430.
6. 3 volatilization loss from synthetic fertilizers and animal manure applied to arable lands and grasslands. Global Biogeochem. Cycl., 16 doi:10.1029/2000GB001389
7. Canh, TT, Aarnink, AJA, Schutte, JB, Sutton, A, Langhout, DJ and Verstegen, MWA. 1998. Dietary protein affects nitrogen excretion and ammonia emission from slurry of growing-finishing pigs. Livest. Prod. Sci., 56: 181-191.
8. Casey, JW and Holden, NM. 2006. Greenhouse gas emissions from conventional, agri-environmental scheme, and organic Irish suckler-beef units. J. Environ. Qual., 35: 231-239.
9. CMETEL (Exploratory Committee for Methods Evaluating Technologies against Environmental Problems in Livestock Industry). 2005. Development of computer program to support planning of animal manure namagement facilities from environmental and economical aspects. Mem. Natl. Inst. Livest. Grassl. Sci., 6: 1-51. (in Japanese)
10. Eriksson, IS, Elmquist, H, Stern, S and Nybrant, T. 2005. Environmental systems analysis of pig production: The impact of feed choice. Int. J. Life Cycl. Assess., 10: 143-154.
11. Han, IK and Lee, JH. 2000. The role of synthetic amino acids in monogastric animal production: Review. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci., 13: 543-560.
12. Harper, LA, Sharpe, RR and Simmons, JD. 2004. Ammonia emissions from swine houses in the southeastern United States. J. Environ. Qual., 33: 449-457.
13. Heijungs, R, Guinee, J, Huppes, G, Lankreijer, RM, Udo de Haes, HA, Wegener Sleeswijk, A, Ansems, AMM, Eggels, PG, Van Duin, R and De Goede, HP. 1992. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Products: Guide., Leiden, The Netherlands: Center of Environmental Science (CML), Leiden University.
14. Hishinuma, T, Ihara, T, Shimizu, A, Yang, C and Genchi, Y. 2007. Comparison of the environmental impact at the livestock manure treatment system with swine manure by life cycle assessment method. J. Soc. Agric. Struct. Jpn., 38: 43-56 (in Japanese with English abstract).
15. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2006. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories., Hayama: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES).
16. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis., Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
17. ISO. 2006. Environmental Management-Life cycle assessment: Principles and Framework., Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.
18. Itsubo, N and Inaba, A. 2010. LIME2: Life-Cycle Impact Assessment Method Based on Endpoint Modeling., Tokyo: Japan Environmental Management Association for Industry.
19. Itsubo, N, Sakagami, M, Washida, T, Kokubu, K and Inaba, A. 2004. Weighting across safeguard subjects for LCIA through the application of conjoint analysis. Int. J. Life Cycl. Assess., 9: 196-205.
20. JEMAI. 2005. JEMAI-LCA Pro., Tokyo: Japan Environmental Management Association for Industry.
21. JPPA. 2010. The Survey on Pig Production, Tokyo: Japan Pork Producers Association.
22. Kaji, Y, Katsumata, M, Tsuneishi, E and Takada, R. 1997. Reduction of urinary nitrogen excretion of swine by improving dietary amino acid balance. Res. Results Anim. Prod., 11: 109-110. (in Japanese)
23. Kerr, BJ, Yen, JT, Nienaber, JA and Easter, RA. 2003. Influences of dietary protein level, amino acid supplementation and environmental temperature on performance, body composition, organ weights and total heat production of growing pigs. J. Anim. Sci., 81: 1998-2007.
24. Lammers, PJ, Kenealy, MD, Kliebenstein, JB, Harmon, JD, Helmers, MJ and Honeyman, MS. 2010. Nonsolar energy use and one-hundred-year global warming potential of Iowa swine feedstuffs and feeding strategies. J. Anim. Sci., 88: 1204-1212.
25. Le Bellego, L, van Milgen, J and Noblet, J. 2002. Effect of high temperature and low-protein diets on the performance of growing-finishing pigs. J. Anim. Sci., 80: 691-701.
26. Liang, R, Taniguchi, K, Kawashima, H, Kikuchi, E and Soma, T. 2007. Estimation of global warming emissions associated with a pig production system by life cycle assessment. J. Life Cycl. Assess. Jpn., 3: 178-183.
27. MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries). 2010a. Production Cost of Livestock 2009., Tokyo: Association of Agriculture and Forestry Statistics.
28. MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries). 2010b. Statistics on Livestock Products Marketing 2009., Tokyo: Association of Agriculture and Forestry Statistics.
29. MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries) 2012: Generation and Management of Livestock Manure. Available from: http://www.maff.go.jp/j/chikusan/kankyo/taisaku/t_mondai/02_kanri/index.html (March, 2012)
30. Matsumoto, M, Murakami, H, Inoue, A and Kaji, Y. 2009. Amino acid digestibilities of feeds for fattening pigs decrease in a hot environment. Res. Results Livest. Grassl. Sci., 8 no. 54 (in Japanese). http://www.naro.affrc.go.jp/project/results/laboratory/karc/2008/konarc08-39.html (March, 2012)
31. METI (Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry), MLIT (Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism). 2007. Joint Guideline for Calculation Method of CO2 Emissions in Logistics. ver. 3.0., Tokyo: Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism.
32. MOE (Ministry of the Environment). 2010. National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report of Japan., Tsukuba: Greenhouse Gas Inventory Office of Japan, Center for Global Environmental Research, National Institute for Environmental Studies.
33. MOF (Ministry of Finance). 2008. Trade Statistics of Japan., Tokyo: Ministry of Finance.
34. Mosnier, E, van der Werf, HMG, Boissy, J and Dourmad, JY. 2011. Evaluation of the environmental implications of the incorporation of feed-use amino acids in the manufacturing of pig and broiler feeds using Life Cycle Assessment. Animal, 5: 1972-1983.
35. NARO (National Agriculture and Food Research Organization). 2005. Japanese Feeding Standard for Swine, 2005, Tokyo: Japan Livestock Industry Association.
36. NARO (National Agriculture and Food Research Organization). 2010. Standard Tables of Feed Composition in Japan, 2009., Tokyo: Japan Livestock Industry Association.
37. Nguyen, TLT, Hermansen, JE and Mogensen, L. 2010. Fossil energy and GHG saving potentials of pig farming in the EU. Energ. Policy, 38: 2561-2571.
38. NIES. 2002. Embodied Energy and Emission Intensity Data for Japan Using Input-Output Tables (3EID)., Tsukuba: National Institute for Environmental Studies.
39. Ogino, A, Hirooka, H, Ikeguchi, A, Tanaka, Y, Waki, M, Yokoyama, H and Kawashima, T. 2007. Environmental impact evaluation of feeds prepared from food residues using life cycle assessment. J. Environ. Qual., 36: 1061-1068.
40. Ogino, A, Ishida, M, Ishikawa, T, Ikeguchi, A, Waki, M, Yokoyama, H, Tanaka, Y and Hirooka, H. 2008. Environmental impacts of a Japanese dairy farming system using whole-crop rice silage as evaluated by life cycle assessment. Anim. Sci. J., 79: 727-736.
41. Ogino, A, Kaku, K, Osada, T and Shimada, K. 2004. Environmental impacts of the Japanese beef-fattening system with different feeding lengths as evaluated by a life-cycle assessment method. J. Anim. Sci., 82: 2115-2122.
42. Osada, T, Takada, R and Shinzato, I. 2011. Potential reduction of greenhouse gas emission from swine manure by using a low-protein diet supplemented with synthetic amino acids. Anim. Feed Sci. Tech., 166/167: 562-574.
43. Otto, ER, Yokoyama, M, Hengemuehle, S, von Bermuth, RD, van Kempen, T and Trottier, NL. 2003a. Ammonia, volatile fatty acids, phenolics, and odor offensiveness in manure from growing pigs fed diets reduced in protein concentration. J. Anim. Sci., 81: 1754-1763.
44. Otto, ER, Yokoyama, M, Ku, PK, Ames, NK and Trottier, NL. 2003b. Nitrogen balance and ileal amino acid digestibility in growing pigs fed diets reduced in protein concentration. J. Anim. Sci., 81: 1743-1753.
45. Pelletier, N, Lammers, P, Stender, D and 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. Agric. Syst., 103: 599-608.
46. Rotz, CA. 2004. Management to reduce nitrogen losses in animal production. J. Anim. Sci., 82: E119-E137.
47. 2 emissions from soy oil and soymeal production". In In: Life Cycle Assessment of Foods and Development of a Sustainability Indicator for Agro-Food Consumption and Production., Japan, Tokyo: Ed. Food Study Group, Institute of LCA, pp. 19-29. Institute of LCA.
48. Shin, JH, Lee, SM, Jung, JY, Chung, YC and Noh, SH. 2005. Enhanced COD and nitrogen removals for the treatment of swine wastewater by combining submerged membrane bioreactor (MBR) and anaerobic upflow bed filter (AUBF) reactor. Process Biochem., 40: 3769-3776.
49. Steinfeld, H, Gerber, P, Wassenaar, T, Castel, V and de Haan, C. 2006. Livestock's Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options., Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
50. Su, JJ, Kung, CM, Lin, J, Lian, WC and Wu, JF. 1997. Utilization of sequencing batch reactor for in situ piggery wastewater treatment. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A-Environ. Sci. Eng. Toxic Hazard. Subst. Control, 32: 391-405.
51. Thomassen, MA, van Calker, KJ, Smits, MCJ, Iepema, GL and de Boer, IJM. 2008. Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands. Agric. Syst., 96: 95-107.
52. USDA-ERS 2009: Farm Business and Household Survey Data: Customized Data Summaries From Agricultural Resources and Management Survey (ARMS). United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC, USA
53. Vanotti, MB, Szogi, AA, Millner, PD and Loughrin, JH. 2009. Development of a second-generation environmentally superior technology for treatment of swine manure in the USA. Bioresour. Technol., 100: 5406-5416.
54. Wang, M. 2008. GREET 1.8b., Argonne, IL: Argonne National Laboratory.
55. Yasuda, T, Kuroda, K, Fukumoto, Y, Hanajima, D and Suzuki, K. 2009. Evaluation of full-scale biofilter with rockwool mixture treating ammonia gas from livestock manure composting. Bioresour. Technol., 100: 1568-1572.