IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i20p11248-d654399.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Impacts Associated with Intensive Production in Pig Farms in Mexico through Life Cycle Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Mario Rafael Giraldi-Díaz

    (Facultad de Ciencias Químicas, Universidad Veracruzana, Circuito Gonzalo Aguirre Beltrán, Zona Universitaria, Xalapa 91040, Veracruz, Mexico)

  • Eduardo Castillo-González

    (Facultad de Ingeniería Civil, Universidad Veracruzana, Circuito Gonzalo Aguirre Beltrán, Zona Universitaria, Xalapa 91040, Veracruz, Mexico)

  • Lorena De Medina-Salas

    (Facultad de Ciencias Químicas, Universidad Veracruzana, Circuito Gonzalo Aguirre Beltrán, Zona Universitaria, Xalapa 91040, Veracruz, Mexico)

  • Raúl Velásquez-De la Cruz

    (Facultad de Ciencias Químicas, Universidad Veracruzana, Circuito Gonzalo Aguirre Beltrán, Zona Universitaria, Xalapa 91040, Veracruz, Mexico)

  • Héctor Daniel Huerta-Silva

    (Facultad de Ciencias Químicas, Universidad Veracruzana, Circuito Gonzalo Aguirre Beltrán, Zona Universitaria, Xalapa 91040, Veracruz, Mexico)

Abstract

In this research, environmental impacts associated with the intensive production of pigs on a farm in Mexico were determined through the application of life cycle assessment methodology. The research was focused on the following stages of the product system: (i) pig rearing and growth phases; (ii) production operations in the pig-house; (iii) the supply of feed. The life cycle inventory database was mainly made up of data collected in field visits to local farms. The functional unit was defined as one finished swine weighing 124 kg. The results for the selected impact categories of carbon, water, and energy footprints were 538.62 kg CO 2 eq, 21.34 m 3 , and 1773.79 MJ, respectively. The greatest impact was generated in the final stages of pig fattening, mainly due to the large quantity of feed supplied. The impacts caused by operation of the pig farm were less significant, their contribution in all cases was less than a third of the total quantified values. The energy conversion of pig slurry improves the environmental performance of the product system by reducing the carbon footprint.

Suggested Citation

  • Mario Rafael Giraldi-Díaz & Eduardo Castillo-González & Lorena De Medina-Salas & Raúl Velásquez-De la Cruz & Héctor Daniel Huerta-Silva, 2021. "Environmental Impacts Associated with Intensive Production in Pig Farms in Mexico through Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-20, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:20:p:11248-:d:654399
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/20/11248/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/20/11248/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lijó, Lucía & González-García, Sara & Bacenetti, Jacopo & Fiala, Marco & Feijoo, Gumersindo & Lema, Juan M. & Moreira, María Teresa, 2014. "Life Cycle Assessment of electricity production in Italy from anaerobic co-digestion of pig slurry and energy crops," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 625-635.
    2. Theofanous, Elisavet & Kythreotou, Nicoletta & Panayiotou, Gregoris & Florides, Georgios & Vyrides, Ioannis, 2014. "Energy production from piggery waste using anaerobic digestion: Current status and potential in Cyprus," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 263-270.
    3. Dieuwertje Schrijvers & Philippe Loubet & Guido Sonnemann, 2020. "Archetypes of Goal and Scope Definitions for Consistent Allocation in LCA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-15, July.
    4. Gwendolyn Rudolph & Stefan Hörtenhuber & Davide Bochicchio & Gillian Butler & Roland Brandhofer & Sabine Dippel & Jean Yves Dourmad & Sandra Edwards & Barbara Früh & Matthias Meier & Armelle Prunier &, 2018. "Effect of Three Husbandry Systems on Environmental Impact of Organic Pigs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, October.
    5. Javier García-Gudiño & Alessandra N. T. R. Monteiro & Sandrine Espagnol & Isabel Blanco-Penedo & Florence Garcia-Launay, 2020. "Life Cycle Assessment of Iberian Traditional Pig Production System in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, January.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Beike Sumfleth & Stefan Majer & Daniela Thrän, 2023. "A Review of Trade-Offs in Low ILUC-Risk Certification for Biofuels—Towards an Integrated Assessment Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-41, November.

    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. Antonia Katharina Ruckli & Sabine Dippel & Nora Durec & Monika Gebska & Jonathan Guy & Juliane Helmerichs & Christine Leeb & Herman Vermeer & Stefan Hörtenhuber, 2021. "Environmental Sustainability Assessment of Pig Farms in Selected European Countries: Combining LCA and Key Performance Indicators for Biodiversity Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    2. David Fernández-Gutiérrez & Alejandra Argüelles & Gemma Castejón Martínez & José M. Soriano Disla & Andrés J. Lara-Guillén, 2022. "Unlocking New Value from Urban Biowaste: LCA of the VALUEWASTE Biobased Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    3. Xavier Tanguay & Gatien Geraud Essoua Essoua & Ben Amor, 2021. "Attributional and consequential life cycle assessments in a circular economy with integration of a quality indicator: A case study of cascading wood products," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(6), pages 1462-1473, December.
    4. Bacenetti, Jacopo & Sala, Cesare & Fusi, Alessandra & Fiala, Marco, 2016. "Agricultural anaerobic digestion plants: What LCA studies pointed out and what can be done to make them more environmentally sustainable," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 669-686.
    5. Jun Hou & Weifeng Zhang & Pei Wang & Zhengxia Dou & Liwei Gao & David Styles, 2017. "Greenhouse Gas Mitigation of Rural Household Biogas Systems in China: A Life Cycle Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-14, February.
    6. Dolores Ayuso & Ana González & Francisco Peña & Francisco I. Hernández-García & Mercedes Izquierdo, 2020. "Effect of Fattening Period Length on Intramuscular and Subcutaneous Fatty Acid Profiles in Iberian Pigs Finished in the Montanera Sustainable System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-12, September.
    7. Ilkka Leinonen, 2019. "Achieving Environmentally Sustainable Livestock Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-5, January.
    8. Nur Izzah Hamna A. Aziz & Marlia M. Hanafiah & Shabbir H. Gheewala & Haikal Ismail, 2020. "Bioenergy for a Cleaner Future: A Case Study of Sustainable Biogas Supply Chain in the Malaysian Energy Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-24, April.
    9. Sara Rajabi Hamedani & Mauro Villarini & Andrea Colantoni & Michele Moretti & Enrico Bocci, 2018. "Life Cycle Performance of Hydrogen Production via Agro-Industrial Residue Gasification—A Small Scale Power Plant Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-19, March.
    10. Gojiya, Anil & Deb, Dipankar & Iyer, Kannan K.R., 2019. "Feasibility study of power generation from agricultural residue in comparison with soil incorporation of residue," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 416-425.
    11. Elena Tamburini & Mattias Gaglio & Giuseppe Castaldelli & Elisa Anna Fano, 2020. "Biogas from Agri-Food and Agricultural Waste Can Appreciate Agro-Ecosystem Services: The Case Study of Emilia Romagna Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-15, October.
    12. Auburger, Sebastian & Jacobs, Anna & Märländer, Bernward & Bahrs, Enno, 2016. "Economic optimization of feedstock mix for energy production with biogas technology in Germany with a special focus on sugar beets – Effects on greenhouse gas emissions and energy balances," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 1-11.
    13. Martinát, Stanislav & Navrátil, Josef & Dvořák, Petr & Van der Horst, Dan & Klusáček, Petr & Kunc, Josef & Frantál, Bohumil, 2016. "Where AD plants wildly grow: The spatio-temporal diffusion of agricultural biogas production in the Czech Republic," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 85-97.
    14. Sara Rajabi Hamedani & Mauro Villarini & Andrea Colantoni & Maurizio Carlini & Massimo Cecchini & Francesco Santoro & Antonio Pantaleo, 2020. "Environmental and Economic Analysis of an Anaerobic Co-Digestion Power Plant Integrated with a Compost Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, May.
    15. Hessam Golmohamadi, 2022. "Demand-Side Flexibility in Power Systems: A Survey of Residential, Industrial, Commercial, and Agricultural Sectors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-16, June.
    16. Michail Tsangas & Mejdi Jeguirim & Lionel Limousy & Antonis Zorpas, 2019. "The Application of Analytical Hierarchy Process in Combination with PESTEL-SWOT Analysis to Assess the Hydrocarbons Sector in Cyprus," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, February.
    17. Zhang, Yizhen & Jiang, Yan & Wang, Shun & Wang, Zhongzhong & Liu, Yanchen & Hu, Zhenhu & Zhan, Xinmin, 2021. "Environmental sustainability assessment of pig manure mono- and co-digestion and dynamic land application of the digestate," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    18. Shakira R. Hobbs & Tyler M. Harris & William J. Barr & Amy E. Landis, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of Bioplastics and Food Waste Disposal Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, June.
    19. Javier García-Gudiño & Elena Angón & Isabel Blanco-Penedo & Florence Garcia-Launay & José Perea, 2022. "Targeting Environmental and Technical Parameters through Eco-Efficiency Criteria for Iberian Pig Farms in the dehesa Ecosystem," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, December.
    20. Freitas, F.F. & Furtado, A.C. & Piñas, J.A.V. & Venturini, O.J. & Barros, R.M. & Lora, E.E.S., 2022. "Holistic Life Cycle Assessment of a biogas-based electricity generation plant in a pig farm considering co-digestion and an additive," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:20:p:11248-:d:654399. 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.