Life cycle assessment of high- and low-profitability commodity and deep-bedded niche swine production systems in the Upper Midwestern United States
We used ISO-compliant life cycle assessment to evaluate the comparative environmental performance of high- and low-profitability commodity and deep-bedded niche swine production systems in the Upper Midwestern United States. Specifically, we evaluated the contributions of feed production, in-barn energy use, manure management, and piglet production to farm-gate life cycle energy use, ecological footprint, and greenhouse gas (GHG) and eutrophying emissions per animal produced and per live-weight kg. We found that commodity systems generally outperform deep-bedded niche systems for these criteria, but that significant overlap occurs in the range of impacts characteristic of high- and low-profitability production between systems. Given the non-optimized status of current deep-bedded niche relative to commodity production, we suggest that optimizing niche systems through improvements in feed and sow herd efficiency holds significant environmental performance improvement potential. Drivers of impacts differed between commodity and deep-bedded niche systems. Feed production was the key consideration in both, but proportionally more important in niche production due to lower feed use efficiencies. Liquid manure management in commodity production strongly influenced GHG emissions, whereas solid manure management increased eutrophication potential due to outdoor storage in deep-bedded niche production. We further observe an interesting but highly imperfect relationship between economic and environmental performance measures, where profitability tracks well with resource (in particular, feed) throughput, but only indirectly with emissions intensity.
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.
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.
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.:
- Pelletier, Nathan & Pirog, Rich & Rasmussen, Rebecca, 2010. "Comparative life cycle environmental impacts of three beef production strategies in the Upper Midwestern United States," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 380-389, July.
- 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.
- Lammers, P.J. & Honeyman, M.S. & Harmon, J.D. & Helmers, M.J., 2010. "Energy and carbon inventory of Iowa swine production facilities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(8), pages 551-561, October.
- Krausmann, Fridolin & Erb, Karl-Heinz & Gingrich, Simone & Lauk, Christian & Haberl, Helmut, 2008. "Global patterns of socioeconomic biomass flows in the year 2000: A comprehensive assessment of supply, consumption and constraints," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 471-487, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:103:y:2010:i:9:p:599-608. 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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.