IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v13y2023i11p2109-d1275429.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Carbon Footprint of a 5000-Milking-Head Dairy Operation in Central Texas

Author

Listed:
  • Sadie Woolery

    (Division of Agribusiness and Agricultural Economics, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Sciences, Tarleton State University, P.O. Box T-0040, Stephenville, TX 76402, USA)

  • Edward Osei

    (Division of Agribusiness and Agricultural Economics, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Sciences, Tarleton State University, P.O. Box T-0040, Stephenville, TX 76402, USA)

  • Mark Yu

    (Division of Agribusiness and Agricultural Economics, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Sciences, Tarleton State University, P.O. Box T-0040, Stephenville, TX 76402, USA)

  • Selin Guney

    (Division of Agribusiness and Agricultural Economics, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Sciences, Tarleton State University, P.O. Box T-0040, Stephenville, TX 76402, USA)

  • Ashley Lovell

    (Division of Agribusiness and Agricultural Economics, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Sciences, Tarleton State University, P.O. Box T-0040, Stephenville, TX 76402, USA)

  • Hussain Jafri

    (Department of Accounting, Finance, and Economics, Tarleton State University, P.O. Box T-0920, Stephenville, TX 76402, USA)

Abstract

Texas is the third-largest milk-producing state in the U.S., with Central Texas being the second-largest milk-producing region in Texas. The average size of a dairy herd in Texas is 1829 cows. In Central Texas alone, there are 88,000 dairy cows. However, there is a lack of environmental impact research for this region. The overall objective of this case study is to evaluate the net carbon and carbon equivalent balances for a large dairy operation in Central Texas. The dairy selected for this study has a herd size of 5000 milking cows. The data assumptions were made regarding the selected dairy’s performance and production for the 2021 production year. These data include herd size and management, milk production, crop production, feed purchases, and on-farm energy usage. The USDA-Integrated Farm System Model (IFSM) was used to estimate the daily and annual greenhouse gas emissions and environmental footprint of the dairy by quantifying the operation’s carbon footprint based on its 2021 performance and management practices. Research outcomes identify and quantify sources of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions produced on the dairy farm. Additionally, the carbon footprint (CF) was determined by estimating the CO 2 equivalents (CO 2 -eq) emitted or sunk from animal and manure emissions, direct and indirect land emissions, net biogenic and anthropogenic CO 2 emissions, and the production of resource inputs. The results of this case study indicated that the carbon footprint (CF) of the 5000-milking-head dairy in Central Texas was 0.40 lb. of CO 2 per lb. of fat- and protein-corrected milk (FPCM) when considering biogenic CO 2 and 0.83 lb. of CO 2 per lb. of FPCM without biogenic CO 2 .

Suggested Citation

  • Sadie Woolery & Edward Osei & Mark Yu & Selin Guney & Ashley Lovell & Hussain Jafri, 2023. "The Carbon Footprint of a 5000-Milking-Head Dairy Operation in Central Texas," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:11:p:2109-:d:1275429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/11/2109/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/11/2109/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lauer, Markus & Hansen, Jason K. & Lamers, Patrick & Thrän, Daniela, 2018. "Making money from waste: The economic viability of producing biogas and biomethane in the Idaho dairy industry," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 621-636.
    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. Struhs, Ethan & Mirkouei, Amin & You, Yaqi & Mohajeri, Amir, 2020. "Techno-economic and environmental assessments for nutrient-rich biochar production from cattle manure: A case study in Idaho, USA," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    2. Barbera, Elena & Menegon, Silvia & Banzato, Donatella & D'Alpaos, Chiara & Bertucco, Alberto, 2019. "From biogas to biomethane: A process simulation-based techno-economic comparison of different upgrading technologies in the Italian context," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 663-673.
    3. Al-Fatesh, Ahmed Sadeq & Hanan atia, & Ibrahim, Ahmed Aidid & Fakeeha, Anis Hamza & Singh, Sunit Kumar & Labhsetwar, Nitin K. & Shaikh, Hamid & Qasim, Shamsudeen O., 2019. "CO2 reforming of CH4: Effect of Gd as promoter for Ni supported over MCM-41 as catalyst," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 658-667.
    4. Diego Teixeira Michalovicz & Patricia Bilotta, 2023. "Impact of a methane emission tax on circular economy scenarios in small wastewater treatment plants," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 6575-6589, July.
    5. Grzegorz Piechota & Bartłomiej Igliński, 2021. "Biomethane in Poland—Current Status, Potential, Perspective and Development," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-32, March.
    6. Felipe Solferini de Carvalho & Luiz Carlos Bevilaqua dos Santos Reis & Pedro Teixeira Lacava & Fernando Henrique Mayworm de Araújo & João Andrade de Carvalho Jr., 2023. "Substitution of Natural Gas by Biomethane: Operational Aspects in Industrial Equipment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-19, January.
    7. Cudjoe, Dan & Nketiah, Emmanuel & Obuobi, Bright & Adu-Gyamfi, Gibbson & Adjei, Mavis & Zhu, Bangzhu, 2021. "Forecasting the potential and economic feasibility of power generation using biogas from food waste in Ghana: Evidence from Accra and Kumasi," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    8. Zhang, Lihui & Wang, Jianing & Li, Songrui, 2022. "Regional suitability analysis of the rural biogas power generation industry:A case of China," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 293-306.
    9. Schiochet Pinto, Luane & Pinheiro Neto, Daywes & de Leles Ferreira Filho, Anésio & Domingues, Elder Geraldo, 2020. "An alternative methodology for analyzing the risk and sensitivity of the economic viability for generating electrical energy with biogas from the anaerobic bio-digestion of vinasse," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1401-1410.
    10. Keogh, Niamh & Corr, D. & O'Shea, R. & Monaghan, R.F.D., 2022. "The gas grid as a vector for regional decarbonisation - a techno economic case study for biomethane injection and natural gas heavy goods vehicles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 323(C).
    11. Şenol, Halil & Ali Dereli̇, Mehmet & Özbilgin, Ferdi, 2021. "Investigation of the distribution of bovine manure-based biomethane potential using an artificial neural network in Turkey to 2030," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    12. Ng, Rex T.L. & Fasahati, Peyman & Huang, Kefeng & Maravelias, Christos T., 2019. "Utilizing stillage in the biorefinery: Economic, technological and energetic analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C), pages 491-503.
    13. Lauer, Markus & Leprich, Uwe & Thrän, Daniela, 2020. "Economic assessment of flexible power generation from biogas plants in Germany's future electricity system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 1471-1485.
    14. Zhao, Ning & You, Fengqi, 2019. "Dairy waste-to-energy incentive policy design using Stackelberg-game-based modeling and optimization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(C).
    15. Patrycja Pochwatka & Alina Kowalczyk-Juśko & Piotr Sołowiej & Agnieszka Wawrzyniak & Jacek Dach, 2020. "Biogas Plant Exploitation in a Middle-Sized Dairy Farm in Poland: Energetic and Economic Aspects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.
    16. Li, Xue & Mupondwa, Edmund, 2018. "Commercial feasibility of an integrated closed-loop ethanol-feedlot-biodigester system based on triticale feedstock in Canadian Prairies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 401-413.
    17. Adam Wąs & Piotr Sulewski & Vitaliy Krupin & Nazariy Popadynets & Agata Malak-Rawlikowska & Magdalena Szymańska & Iryna Skorokhod & Marcin Wysokiński, 2020. "The Potential of Agricultural Biogas Production in Ukraine—Impact on GHG Emissions and Energy Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-20, November.
    18. D’Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Huisingh, Donald & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2021. "A circular economy model based on biomethane: What are the opportunities for the municipality of Rome and beyond?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1660-1672.

    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:13:y:2023:i:11:p:2109-:d:1275429. 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.