Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The impact of various parameters on the carbon footprint of milk production in New Zealand and Sweden

Contents:

Author Info

  • Flysjö, Anna
  • Henriksson, Maria
  • Cederberg, Christel
  • Ledgard, Stewart
  • Englund, Jan-Eric
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    The carbon footprint (CF) of milk production was analysed at the farm gate for two contrasting production systems; an outdoor pasture grazing system in New Zealand (NZ) and a mainly indoor housing system with pronounced use of concentrate feed in Sweden (SE). The method used is based on the conceptual framework of lifecycle assessment (LCA), but only for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. National average data were used to model the dairy system in each country. Collection of inventory data and calculations of emissions were harmonised to the greatest extent possible for the two systems. The calculated CF for 1Â kg of energy corrected milk (ECM), including related by-products (surplus calves and culled cows), was 1.00Â kg carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) for NZ and 1.16Â kg CO2e for SE. Methane from enteric fermentation and nitrous oxide emissions from application of nitrogen (as fertiliser and as excreta dropped directly on the field) were the main contributors to the CF in both countries. The most important parameters to consider when calculating the GHG emissions were dry matter intake (DMI), emission factor (EF) for methane from enteric fermentation, amount of nitrogen applied and EF for direct nitrous oxide emissions from soils. By changing one parameter at a time within 'reasonable' limits (i.e. no extreme values assumed), the impact on the total CF was assessed and showed changes of up to 15%. In addition, the uncertainty in CF estimates due to uncertainty in EF for methane from enteric fermentation and nitrous oxide emissions (from soil and due to ammonia volatilisation) were analysed through Monte Carlo simulation. This resulted in an uncertainty distribution corresponding to 0.60-1.52Â kg CO2e kg-1 ECM for NZ and 0.83-1.56Â kg CO2e kg-1 ECM for SE (in the prediction interval 2.5-97.5%). Hence, the variation within the systems based on the main EF is relatively large compared with the difference in CF between the countries.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X11000412
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Agricultural Systems.

    Volume (Year): 104 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 6 (July)
    Pages: 459-469

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:104:y:2011:i:6:p:459-469

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy

    Related research

    Keywords: CF Lifecycle assessment LCA Milk production Emission factor Uncertainties;

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Basset-Mens, Claudine & Ledgard, Stewart & Boyes, Mark, 2009. "Eco-efficiency of intensification scenarios for milk production in New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1615-1625, April.
    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 in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Nijdam, Durk & Rood, Trudy & Westhoek, Henk, 2012. "The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 760-770.
    2. Jones, A.K. & Jones, D.L. & Cross, P., 2014. "The carbon footprint of lamb: Sources of variation and opportunities for mitigation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 97-107.
    3. Van Middelaar, C.E. & Berentsen, P.B.M. & Dijkstra, J. & De Boer, I.J.M., 2013. "Evaluation of a feeding strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from dairy farming: The level of analysis matters," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 9-22.

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:104:y:2011:i:6:p:459-469. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.