IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v12y2022i6p804-d830450.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate-Smart Holistic Management System Criteria’s Effectiveness on Milk Production in Lithuania

Author

Listed:
  • Vilma Naujokienė

    (Department of Mechanics, Energy and Biotechnology Engineering, Vytautas Magnus University, Studentų Str. 11, Kaunas District, LT-52261 Akademija, Lithuania)

  • Rolandas Bleizgys

    (Department of Mechanics, Energy and Biotechnology Engineering, Vytautas Magnus University, Studentų Str. 11, Kaunas District, LT-52261 Akademija, Lithuania)

  • Kęstutis Venslauskas

    (Department of Mechanics, Energy and Biotechnology Engineering, Vytautas Magnus University, Studentų Str. 11, Kaunas District, LT-52261 Akademija, Lithuania)

  • Simona Paulikienė

    (Department of Mechanics, Energy and Biotechnology Engineering, Vytautas Magnus University, Studentų Str. 11, Kaunas District, LT-52261 Akademija, Lithuania)

Abstract

One of the problematic sectors according to GHG (greenhouse gas) and ammonia (NH 3 ) emission quantities is agriculture. Without endangering food production (and intensifying), GHG emissions come from all sources in animal husbandry. The aim of this study was to comprehensively reduce GHG emissions by applying a holistic process management model to one of the most popular cowsheds in Lithuania (260-seat boxing cowshed, cows are milked on site, computerized management of technological processes, productivity of 8600 kg of milk, barn system, and liquid manure). Considering the cow keeping technology applied on the farm, the equipment used, and the feed production and ration system, a model for the management of technological parameters of production processes was prepared for the farm. This model balanced trade-offs among animal welfare, cow productivity, production costs, and GHG and NH 3 emissions. The aim of the research was the adaptation of the integrated model to fully control, manage, and optimize milk production processes through bio- and engineering innovations to implement climate-friendly feed production and feeding and feed rationing systems, to improve animal housing and working conditions, and to reduce GHG and NH 3 emissions without increasing production costs. The environmental impact assessment was performed with SimaPro 9.1 process modeling software. Data from milk production, biomass cultivation, and feed preparation, transportation, and equipment were used from the Ecoinvent v3 database. Based on the LML-I calculation methodology, the effect of processes was determined. To quantify the potential emissions in the dairy farm, the emission factors were estimated using a life cycle assessment method per functional unit—1000 kg—of standardized milk. Grass silage, maize silage, and feed concentrate were found to account for the largest share of gas emissions—26.09% (107.39 kg CO 2 eq. FU −1 ), 22.70% (93.44 kg CO 2 eq. FU −1 ), and 21.85% (89.92 kg CO 2 eq. FU −1 ) of the total CO 2 emissions during the process, respectively. Considering the critical points of the classic SC scenario, the cultivation technology was adjusted, where 50% of N fertilizers were replaced by bioproducts (biological preparations). Both scenarios—classic SC (control variant) and Bio SC (variants using bioproducts)—were evaluated for comparison. The use of biopreparations in the categories reduced the environmental impact from 0.1% to 45.7% in dairy production technology grass silage, barley grain, hay production, and corn silage stocks. The carbon footprint of the sustainable bio-based milk production (0.393 kg CO 2 eq. kg −1 FPCM (fat- and protein-adjusted milk)) was lower by 4.6% compared to the average Lithuanian classic dairy farm (0.412 kg CO 2 eq. kg −1 FPCM). Based on this methodology, it is possible to assess many dairy farms and address critical points in an integrated way, which can help to improve the quality of dairy production and the environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Vilma Naujokienė & Rolandas Bleizgys & Kęstutis Venslauskas & Simona Paulikienė, 2022. "Climate-Smart Holistic Management System Criteria’s Effectiveness on Milk Production in Lithuania," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-18, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:6:p:804-:d:830450
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/6/804/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/6/804/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    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)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shyian, Natalia & Kolosha, Valerii, 2020. "Формування Ціни На Молоко В Україні В Контексті Світових Тенденцій," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 6(4), December.
    2. Graeme J. Doole, 2010. "Evaluating Input Standards for Non‐Point Pollution Control under Firm Heterogeneity," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 680-696, September.
    3. Ramilan, Thiagarajah & Scrimgeour, Frank & Marsh, Dan, 2011. "Analysis of environmental and economic efficiency using a farm population micro-simulation model," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 81(7), pages 1344-1352.
    4. José A. Gómez-Limón & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo & Ernest Reig-Martínez, 2011. "Eco-efficiency Assessment of Olive Farms in Andalusia," Working Papers 1105, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    5. Huysveld, Sophie & Van Meensel, Jef & Van linden, Veerle & De Meester, Steven & Peiren, Nico & Muylle, Hilde & Dewulf, Jo & Lauwers, Ludwig, 2017. "Communicative farm-specific diagnosis of potential simultaneous savings in costs and natural resource demand of feed on dairy farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 34-45.
    6. O'Brien, D. & Bohan, A. & McHugh, N. & Shalloo, L., 2016. "A life cycle assessment of the effect of intensification on the environmental impacts and resource use of grass-based sheep farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 95-104.
    7. Graeme J. Doole & Dan Marsh & Thiagaragah Ramilan, 2011. "Evaluation of Agri-Environmental Policies for Water Quality Improvement Accounting for Firm Heterogeneity," Working Papers in Economics 11/13, University of Waikato.
    8. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Alberto Pardossi, 2020. "Improving Policy Evidence Base for Agricultural Sustainability and Food Security: A Content Analysis of Life Cycle Assessment Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-29, February.
    9. Belflower, Jeff B. & Bernard, John K. & Gattie, David K. & Hancock, Dennis W. & Risse, Lawrence M. & Alan Rotz, C., 2012. "A case study of the potential environmental impacts of different dairy production systems in Georgia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 84-93.
    10. Kalaugher, Electra & Beukes, Pierre & Bornman, Janet F. & Clark, Anthony & Campbell, David I., 2017. "Modelling farm-level adaptation of temperate, pasture-based dairy farms to climate change," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 53-68.
    11. Flysjö, Anna & Henriksson, Maria & Cederberg, Christel & Ledgard, Stewart & Englund, Jan-Eric, 2011. "The impact of various parameters on the carbon footprint of milk production in New Zealand and Sweden," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(6), pages 459-469, July.
    12. Balaine, Lorraine & Dillon, Emma J. & Läpple, Doris & Lynch, John, 2020. "Can technology help achieve sustainable intensification? Evidence from milk recording on Irish dairy farms," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    13. Joanna Domagała, 2021. "Economic and Environmental Aspects of Agriculture in the EU Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    14. Tiago G. Morais & Ricardo F. M. Teixeira & Nuno R. Rodrigues & Tiago Domingos, 2018. "Carbon Footprint of Milk from Pasture-Based Dairy Farms in Azores, Portugal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-22, October.
    15. Mohamed Ghali & Laure Latruffe & Karine Daniel, 2016. "Efficient Use of Energy Resources on French Farms: An Analysis through Technical Efficiency," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, July.
    16. Piwońska, Kalina, 2021. "The Concept Of Eco-Efficiency In Fisheries. A Literature Review," Roczniki (Annals), Polish Association of Agricultural Economists and Agribusiness - Stowarzyszenie Ekonomistow Rolnictwa e Agrobiznesu (SERiA), vol. 2021(4).
    17. Liang, Long & Lal, Rattan & Ridoutt, Bradley G. & Zhao, Guishen & Du, Zhangliu & Li, Li & Feng, Dangyang & Wang, Liyuan & Peng, Peng & Hang, Sheng & Wu, Wenliang, 2018. "Multi-indicator assessment of a water-saving agricultural engineering project in North Beijing, China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 34-46.
    18. Philip Shine & John Upton & Paria Sefeedpari & Michael D. Murphy, 2020. "Energy Consumption on Dairy Farms: A Review of Monitoring, Prediction Modelling, and Analyses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-25, March.
    19. White, T.A. & Snow, V.O. & King, W.McG., 2010. "Intensification of New Zealand beef farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 21-35, January.
    20. Binder, C.R. & Schmid, A. & Steinberger, J.K., 2012. "Sustainability solution space of the Swiss milk value added chain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 210-220.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:6:p:804-:d:830450. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.