Environmental impact of replacing soybean meal with rapeseed meal in diets of finishing pigs

Animal

Volumn 9, Issue 11, 2015, Pages 1866-1874

  Van Zanten, H H E ^a   Bikker, P ^a   Mollenhorst, H ^a   Meerburg, B G ^a   De Boer, I J M ^a  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

environmental impact; land use; pigs; rapeseed; soybean

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID;

ANALYSIS; ANIMAL; ANIMAL FOOD; BRASSICA RAPA; DIET; ENERGY METABOLISM; ENVIRONMENT; FERMENTATION; METABOLISM; NUTRITIONAL VALUE; PHYSIOLOGY; PIG; SOYBEAN; VETERINARY;

AMINO ACIDS; ANIMAL FEED; ANIMALS; BRASSICA RAPA; DIET; ENERGY METABOLISM; ENVIRONMENT; FERMENTATION; NUTRITIVE VALUE; SOYBEANS; SWINE;

EID: 84945488313     PISSN: 17517311     EISSN: 1751732X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1751731115001469     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Aarnink AJA, Van Ouwerkerk ENJ and Verstegen MWA 1992. A mathematical model for estimating the amount and composition of slurry from fattening pigs. Livestock Production Science 31, 133-147
2. Agrovision 2012. Annual published avarage company data of Dutch pig farms (in Dutch: Kengetallenspiegel). Agrovision, Deventer, the Netherlands
3. Audsley E, Brander M, Chatterton J, Murphy-Bokern D, Webster C and Williams A 2009. How low can we go? An sassessment of green-house gas emissions from the UK food system and the scope to reduce them by 2050. WWF, UK.
4. Basset-Mens C and Van Der Werf HMG 2005. Scenario-based environmental assessment of farming systems: the case of pig production in France. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 105, 127-144
5. Bauman H and Tillman AM 2004. The hitchhiker's guide to LCA. Chalmers University of Technology, Götenborg, Sweden
6. Cederberg C and Flysjo A 2004. Environmental assesment of future pig farming systems (SIK report 728). Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology, Gothenburg, Sweden
7. Coenen PWHG, Van Der Maas CWM, Zijlema PJ, Arets EJMM, Baas K, Van den Berghe ACWM, Te Biesebeek JD, Brandt AT, Geilenkirchen G, Van Der Hoek KW, Te Molder R, Dröge R, Montfoort JA, Peek CJ and Vonk J 2013. Greenhouse gas emissions in the Netherlands 1990-2011. National Inventory Report 2013 National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
8. CVB 2010. Feed tables (in Dutch: Tabellenboek veevoeding. CVB-reeks nr. 49.). Productschap Diervoeder, Centraal Veevoederbureau, Den Haag, the Netherlands
9. Dalgaard R, Halberg N and Hermansen JE 2007. Danish pork production. An environmental assessment. University of Aarhus, Tjele, Denmark
10. De Vries M and De Boer IJM 2010. Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: a review of life cycle assessments. Livestock Science 128, 1-11
11. EcoinventCentre 2007. Ecoinvent data v2.0 Final reports econinvent 2007. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, Switzerland
12. Elferink EV, Nonhebel S and Moll HC 2008. Feeding livestock food residue and the consequences for the environmental impact of meat. Journal of Cleaner Production 16, 1227-1233
13. Eriksson IS, Elmquist H, Stern S and Nybrant T 2005. Environmental systems analysis of pig production - the impact of feed choice. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 10, 143-154
14. Foley JA, Asner GP, Costa MH, Coe MT, DeFries R, Gibbs HK, Howard EA, Olson S, Patz J, Ramankutty N and Snyder P 2007. Amazonia revealed: forest degradation and loss of ecosystem goods and services in the Amazon Basin Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 5, 25-32
15. Forster P, Ramaswamy V, Artaxo P, Berntsen T, Betts R, Fahey DW, Haywood J, Lean J, Lowe DC, Myhre G, Nganga J, Prinn R, Raga G, Schulz M and Van Dorland R 2007. Changes in atmospheric constituents and in radiative forcing. Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA
16. Garcia-Launay F, Van Der Werf HMG, Nguyen TTH, Le Tutour L and Dourmad JY 2014. Evaluation of the environmental implications of the incorporation of feeduse amino acids in pig production using Life Cycle Assessment (Livestock Science). Livestock Science 161, 158-175
17. Gerber P, Opio C, Vellinga T, Falcucci A, Tempio G, Gianni G, Henderson B, MacLeod M, Makkar H, Mottet A, Robinson T and Weiler V 2013. Greenhouse gas emissions from ruminant supply chains - A global life cycle assessment Food and Agriculture Organization Rome Italy
18. Gerber P, Steinfeld H, Henderson B, Mottet A, Opio C, Dijkman J, Falcucci A and Tempio G 2013. Tackling climate change through livestock - A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy
19. Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, De Koning A, Van Oers L, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S, Udo De Haes HA, De Bruijn H, Van Duin R, Huijbregts MAJ, Lindeijer E, Roorda AAH, Van Der Ven BL and Weidema BP 2002. Life cycle assessment: an operational guide to the ISO standards. Centrum voor Milieukunde, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands
20. IPCC 2006. 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Volume 4: Agriculture, forestry and other land use. In Emissions from livestock and manure management (ed. HS Eggleston, L Buendia, K Miwa, T Ngara and K Tanabe). IGES, Japan
21. Jungbluth N, Chudacoff M, Dauriat A, Dinkerl F, Doka G, Faist Emmenegger M, Gnansounou E, Kljun N, Schleiss K, Spielmann M, Stettler C and Sutter J 2007 Life cycle inventories of bioenergy (Ecoinvent Report No. 17). Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Invenotries, Dübendorf, Switzerland
22. Macedo MN, DeFries RS, Morton DC, Stickler CM, Galford GL and Shimabukuro YE 2012. Decoupling of deforestation and soy production in the southern Amazon during the late 2000s. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109, 1341-1346
23. Makkar HPS, Cooper G, Weber JA, Lywood W and Pinkney J 2012. Biofuel co-products as livestock feed.Opportunities and challenges. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy
24. Meul M, Ginneberge C, Van Middelaar CE, De Boer IJM, Fremaut D and Haesaert G 2012. Carbon footprint of five pig diets using three land use change accounting methods. Livestock Science 149, 215-223
25. Mosnier E, Van Der Werf HMG, Boissy J and Dourmad J-Y 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
26. Nemecek T, Schnetzer J and Reinhard J (in press). Updated and harmonised greenhouse gas emissions for crop inventories. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 1-18
27. Nuscience 2012. Quarterly published pricelist of feed ingredients. Nuscience, Utrecht, the Netherlands
28. Persson UM, Henders S and Cederberg C 2014. A method for calculating a land-use change carbon footprint (LUC-CFP) for agricultural commodities - Applications to Brazilian beef and soy, Indonesian palm oil. Global Change Biology 20, 3482-3491
29. Prudêncio da Silva V, Van Der Werf HMG, Spies A and Soares SR 2010 Variability in environmental impacts of Brazilian soybean according to crop production and transport scenarios. Journal of Environmental Management 91, 1831-1839
30. Quiniou N and Noblet J 2012. Effect of the dietary net energy concentration on feed intake and performance of growing-finishing pigs housed individually. Journal of Animal Science 90, 4362-4372
31. Reinhard J and Zah R 2011. Consequential life cycle assessment of the environmental impacts of an increased rapemethylester (RME) production in Switzerland. Biomass and Bioenergy 35, 2361-2373
32. Sasu-Boakye Y, Cederberg C and Wirsenius S 2014. Localising livestock protein feed production and the impact on land use and greenhouse gas emissions. Animal 8, 1339-1348
33. Staatsblad 2014. Regulation related to keeping livestock (Policy 210, 5 Juni 2014). Staatsblad van het Koninkrijk Der Nederlanden, Den Haag, the Netherlands
34. Steinfeld H, Gerber P, Wassenaar T, Castel V, Rosales M and De Haan C 2006 Livestock's long shadow: environmental issues and options. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy
35. Thamsiriroj T and Murphy JD 2010. Can rape seed biodiesel meet the european union sustainability criteria for biofuels? Energy & Fuels 24, 1720-1730
36. Van Der Peet-Schwering CMC, Straathof SB, Binnendijk GP and Van Diepen JTM 2012. Influence of diet composition and level of amino acids on performance of boars, barrows and gilts. Wageningen UR, Lelystad, the Netherlands
37. Van Der Werf HMG, Petit J and Sanders J 2005. The environmental impacts of the production of concentrated feed: the case of pig feed in Bretagne. Agricultural Systems 83, 153-177
38. Van Middelaar C, Cederberg C, Vellinga T, Van Der Werf HG and De Boer IM 2013. Exploring variability in methods and data sensitivity in carbon footprints of feed ingredients. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18, 768-782
39. Van Milgen J, Valancogne A, Dubois S, Dourmad J-Y, Sève B and Noblet J 2008 InraPorc: a model and decision support tool for the nutrition of growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 143, 387-405
40. Vellinga T, Van Laar H, Thomassen MA, De Boer IJM, Berkhout P and Aiking H 2009. Environmental impact of livestock feed (in Dutch: Milieu effecten van diervoeders.). Animal Sciences Group van Wageningen UR, Lelystad, the Netherlands
41. Vellinga TV, Blonk H, Marinussen M, Van Zeist WJ and De Boer IJM 2013. Methodology used in feedprint: a tool quantifying greenhouse gas emissions of feed production and utilization. Wageningen UR, Lelystad, the Netherlands