IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The life cycle impacts of feed for modern grow-finish Northern Great Plains US swine production

Listed author(s):
  • Stone, James J.
  • Dollarhide, Christopher R.
  • Benning, Jennifer L.
  • Gregg Carlson, C.
  • Clay, David E.
Registered author(s):

    A life cycle assessment (LCA) model was developed to analyze the environmental impacts per head of swine for typical feed rations of Northern Great Plains (NGP) US grow-finish swine production. The all-inclusive ‘field to gate’ approach incorporated steps ranging from corn and soybean production to shipping the market weight pig to a slaughtering facility. Feed production scenarios included: (1) a standard feed diet of 72% corn and 28% soymeal using 100% synthetic fertilizer; (2) standard feed diet using 40% manure as fertilizer; (3) modified feed diet using dry distillers gains with solubles (DDGS), with 100% DDGS allocation towards ethanol production; and (4) modified feed diet with 50% DDGS allocation towards ethanol production. For the standard NGP feed diet, enteric emissions and feed production were the two largest contributors towards climate change impacts, while feed production further resulted in significant contributions towards human health damage (44.6%), ecosystem diversity (67.4%), and resource availability (75.0%). DDGS incorporation assuming 100% allocation reduced corn and soymeal inputs considerably, resulting in overall decrease in impacts associated with climate change (−2.7%), terrestrial acidification (−7.1%), and both marine (−14.6%) and freshwater eutrophication (−22.7%); however terrestrial ecotoxicity increased (+22.9%) due to natural gas drying. 50% DDGS allocation increased all impact categories, with the greatest change found for terrestrial ecotoxicity (48.4%). The study results highlight the significant LCA impact contributions associated with feed during grow-finish swine production, and the benefits associated with DDGS incorporation; however, LCA benefits were realized only if 100% DDGS allocation was applied towards ethanol production.

    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:
    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.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Agricultural Systems.

    Volume (Year): 106 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 1-10

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:106:y:2012:i:1:p:1-10
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2011.11.002
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    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.:

    in new window

    1. 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.
    2. Shapouri, Hosein & Duffield, James A. & Wang, Michael Q., 2002. "The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update," Agricultural Economics Reports 34075, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. Y. Nunez & J. Fermoso & N. Garcia & R. Irusta, 2005. "Comparative life cycle assessment of beef, pork and ostrich meat: a critical point of view," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(2), pages 140-151.
    4. Pelletier, N. & Lammers, P. & Stender, D. & 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," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(9), pages 599-608, November.
    5. Lammers, P.J. & Kenealy, J.B. & Kliebenstein, James & Harmon, Jay D. & Helmers, Matthew J. & Honeyman, Mark, 2010. "Nonsolar Energy Use and One-Hundred-Year Global Warming Potential of Iowa Swine Feedstuffs and Feeding Strategies," Staff General Research Papers Archive 31866, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:106:y:2012:i:1:p:1-10. 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: (Dana Niculescu)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.