Greenhouse gas emission intensity based on lifetime milk production of dairy animals, as affected by ration-balancing program
M. R. Garg A C , P. L. Sherasia A , B. T. Phondba A and H. P. S. Makkar B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Animal Nutrition Group, National Dairy Development Board, Anand-388 001, Gujarat, India.
B Animal Production and Health Division, Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy.
C Corresponding author. Email: mrgarg@nddb.coop
Animal Production Science 58(6) 1027-1042 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN15586
Submitted: 14 September 2015 Accepted: 21 January 2016 Published: 3 May 2016
Abstract
Smallholder dairying in India and other developing countries relies on low- and medium-productive animals, and the feeding is mainly based on crop residues and other agro-industrial by-products. The diets are generally nutritionally imbalanced, resulting in productive and reproductive inefficiencies. This also negatively affects the emission intensity (Ei). For the past 3 years, the National Dairy Development Board of India has been implementing large-scale ration-balancing (RB) program in field animals. The effect of feeding balanced rations on Ei was explored. A cradle to farm-gate life-cycle assessment, taking into account the lifespan milk production, was conducted on 163 540 lactating cows and 163 550 buffaloes in northern, southern, eastern and western India. The life-cycle assessment boundary included feed production, enteric fermentation and manure management during various stages of life. On the basis of economic allocation, emissions of methane (CH4) from enteric fermentation, CH4 from manure management, nitrous oxide from manure management and greenhouse gas (GHG), i.e. carbon dioxide (CO2), CH4 and nitrous oxide from feed production, contributed 69.9%, 6.3%, 9.6% and 14.2% in cows, and 71.6%, 7.4%, 12.6% and 8.4% in buffaloes, respectively, to the baseline (before RB) lifetime total GHG emissions. Average Ei based on economic, mass and digestibility allocation for ‘baseline versus after RB’ were 1.6 versus 1.1, 1.8 versus 1.2 and 1.7 versus 1.2 kg CO2-equivalent/kg fat and protein-corrected milk in cows and 2.3 versus 1.5, 2.5 versus 1.6 and 2.4 versus 1.5 kg CO2-equivalent/kg fat and protein-corrected milk in buffaloes, respectively. Feeding-balanced rations significantly improved milk production, but reduced Ei of milk on lifetime basis by 31.2% and 34.7% in cows and buffaloes, respectively. Implementation of RB program has shown considerable potential to reduce GHG emission intensity under smallholding dairy production system of India.
Additional keywords: balanced feeding, greenhouse gases, life-cycle assessment, smallholder, sustainability.
References
Bayat A, Shingfield KJ (2012) Overview of nutritional strategies to lower enteric methane emissions in ruminants. In ‘Maataloustieteen päivät’. pp. 1–7. Available at http://www.smts.fi/Kotielaintuotanto/Bayat_Overview%20of.pdf [Verified 14 July 2014].Bell MJ, Wall E, Russell G, Simm G, Stott AW (2011) The effect of improving cow productivity, fertility, and longevity on the global warming potential of dairy systems. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 3662–3678.
| The effect of improving cow productivity, fertility, and longevity on the global warming potential of dairy systems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXnvFahtr8%3D&md5=8fbab5230a1a8bcd671fe51b817d4c74CAS | 21700056PubMed |
Berglund M, Cederberg C, Clason C, Henriksson M, Törner L (2009) Climate impact of agriculture: the basis for calculating greenhouse gas emissions at the farm level and analyzes the state of such farms. Interim report of the JOKER project. The agricultural society, Manitoba, Canada.
Beukes PC, Gregorini P, Romera AJ, Levy G, Waghorn GC (2010) Improving production efficiency as a strategy to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions on pastoral dairy farms in New Zealand. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 136, 358–365.
| Improving production efficiency as a strategy to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions on pastoral dairy farms in New Zealand.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3cXisFenurY%3D&md5=ce69dffbe2be8828da9ea26cbeb7ab56CAS |
DAH, D&F (2014) ‘Technical Committee of Direction (TCD) meeting (July 2014). Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture.’ (Government of India: Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi, India)
Daneshi A, Esmaili-sari A, Daneshi M (2014) Greenhouse gas emissions of packaged fluid milk production in Tehran. Journal of Cleaner Production (0959–6526) 80, 150–158.
| Greenhouse gas emissions of packaged fluid milk production in Tehran.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC2cXhtlWrsLvO&md5=1c85c23aea1d997150bdad646c66501cCAS |
de Boer IJM (2003) Environmental impact assessment of conventional and organic milk production. Livestock Production Science 80, 69–77.
| Environmental impact assessment of conventional and organic milk production.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
de Vries M, de Boer I (2010) Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: a review of life cycle assessments. Livestock Science 128, 1–11.
| Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: a review of life cycle assessments.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Di Palo R (1992) Produzione lattea nella bufala con diete tradizionali e con impiego di acidi grassi. PhD Thesis, Università di Napoli, Italy.
Divya PI, Prabu M, Serma Saravana Pandian A, Senthilkumar G, Jaya Varathan B (2012) Energy use efficiency in dairy farming of Tamilnadu. Indian Journal of Energy 1, 50–55.
Eide MH (2002) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of industrial milk production. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 7, 115–126.
| Life cycle assessment (LCA) of industrial milk production.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XjtFSis78%3D&md5=1fce6b7c7255b7e0a6324835c1f3e1c5CAS |
FAO (2010) ‘Greenhouse gas emissions from the dairy sector: a life cycle assessment.’ (FAO: Rome) Available at http://www.foodsec.org/docs/GAUL_DISCLAIMER.pdf [Verified 12 October 2015]
FAO (2012) ‘Balanced feeding for improving livestock productivity: increase in milk production and nutrient use efficiency and decrease in methane emission. Animal production and health paper no. 173 by MR Garg.’ (FAO: Rome)
Feedipedia (2015) ‘Feedipedia: animal feed resources information system.’ (INRA, CIRAD, AFZ and FAO) Available at http://www.feedipedia.org/ [Verified 7 September 2015]
FeedPrint (2015) Carbon FootPrint of Animal Nutrition. Wageningen UR Livestock Research, Version 2015.03. Available at http://www.wageningenur.nl/en/show/Feedprint.htm [Verified 8 January 2016]
Garg MR, Sherasia PL, Bhanderi BM, Phondba BT, Shelke SK, Makkar HPS (2013) Effect of feeding nutritionally balanced rations on animal productivity, feed conversion efficiency, feed nitrogen use efficiency, rumen microbial protein supply, parasitic load, immunity and enteric methane emissions of milking animals under field conditions. Animal Feed Science and Technology 179, 24–35.
| Effect of feeding nutritionally balanced rations on animal productivity, feed conversion efficiency, feed nitrogen use efficiency, rumen microbial protein supply, parasitic load, immunity and enteric methane emissions of milking animals under field conditions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC38XhvVCktLvK&md5=ca508df476a2f06b4ad6c19af58cfb14CAS |
Garg MR, Sherasia PL, Phondba BT, Hossain SA (2014) Effect of feeding a balanced ration on milk production, microbial nitrogen supply and methane emissions in field animals. Animal Production Science 54, 1657–1661.
| Effect of feeding a balanced ration on milk production, microbial nitrogen supply and methane emissions in field animals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC2cXhsVWjt77K&md5=20e580f65d1f9337b49ae28e6cf094f2CAS |
Gerber P, Vellinga T, Opio C, Steinfeld H (2011) Productivity gains and greenhouse gas emissions intensity in dairy systems. Livestock Science 139, 100–108.
| Productivity gains and greenhouse gas emissions intensity in dairy systems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gerber PJ, Steinfeld H, Henderson B, Mottet A, Opio C, Dijkman J, Falcucci A, Tempio G (2013) ‘Tackling climate change through livestock: a global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities.’ (FAO: Rome) Available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3437e/i3437e.pdf [Verified 7 December 2015]
Guinard C, Verones F, Loerincik Y (2009) Environmental/ecological impact of the dairy sector: literature review on dairy products for an inventory of key issues, list of environmental initiative and influences on the dairy sector. Bulletin of the International Dairy Federation, report 436. International Dairy Federation, Brussels. Available at http://www.fil-idf.org [Verified 7 December 2015]
Haas G, Wetterich F, Geier U (2000) Life cycle assessment framework in agriculture on the farm level. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 5, 345–348.
| Life cycle assessment framework in agriculture on the farm level.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hospido A, Moreira MT, Feijoo G (2003) Simplified life cycle assessment of Galician milk production. International Dairy Journal 13, 783–796.
| Simplified life cycle assessment of Galician milk production.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hristov AN, Oh J, Firkins JL, Dijkstra J, Kebreab E, Waghorn G, Makkar HPS, Adesogan AT, Yang W, Lee C, Gerber PJ, Henderson B, Tricarico JM (2013) Special topics: mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: I. A review of enteric methane mitigation options. Journal of Animal Science 91, 5045–5069.
| Special topics: mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: I. A review of enteric methane mitigation options.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXhslKktrrL&md5=0cfa1e01345e20be5c9e6a663f7d8040CAS | 24045497PubMed |
IDF (2010) A common carbon footprint approach for dairy: the IDF guide to standard lifecycle assessment methodology for the dairy sector. Bulletin of the International Dairy Federation’. IDF no. 445/2010. Available at http://www.idf-lca-guide.org [Verified 29 July 2015]
IPCC (2006) ‘Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, prepared by the national greenhouse gas inventories programme.’ (Eds HS Eggleston, L Buendia, K Miwa, T Ngara, K Tanabe) (IGES: Kanagawa, Japan) Available at http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.htm [Verified 17 November 2015]
IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007. The physical science basis. In ‘Contribution of Working Group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’. (Eds S Solomon, D Qin, M Manning, Z Chen, M Marquis, KB Averyt, M Tignor, HL Miller) pp. 20–91. (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK)
ISO 14040 (2006) ‘Environmental management, life cycle assessment: principles and framework. Standard 14040.’ (International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland)
ISO 14044 (2006) ‘Environmental management, life cycle assessment: requirements and guidelines. Standard 14044.’ (International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland)
Kaushal S, Wadhwa M, Hundal JS, Kaur K, Bakshi MPS (2011) Nutritional status of dairy animals of undulating plain zone of Punjab. Animal Nutrition and Feed Technology 11, 277–284.
Kearl LC (1982) ‘Nutrient requirements of ruminants in developing countries.’ (International Feedstuffs Institute, Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, Utah State University: Logan, UT)
Kebreab E, France J, Beever DE, Castillo AR (2001) Nitrogen pollution by dairy cows and its mitigation by dietary manipulation. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 60, 275–285.
| Nitrogen pollution by dairy cows and its mitigation by dietary manipulation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Khochare AB, Kank VD, Gadegaonkar GM, Salunke SC (2010) Strategic supplementation of limiting nutrients to medium yielding dairy animals at field level. In ‘Proceeding of the seventh Animal Nutrition Association conference’. p. 30. (ANA: Bhubaneswar)
Lundie S, Feitz A, Jones M, Dennien G, Morian M (2003) ‘Evaluation of the environmental performance of the Australian dairy processing industry using life cycle assessment: life cycle inventory for milk powder, market milk, cheese, whey, butter, and dessert/yoghurt.’ (Dairy Research and Development Corporation: Sydney)
Makkar HPS (2013) Towards sustainable animal diets. Optimization of feed use efficiency in ruminant production systems. In ‘Proceedings of the FAO symposium, 27 November 2012, Bangkok, Thailand. FAO animal production and health proceedings, no. 16’. (Eds HPS Makkar, D Beever) pp. 67–74. (FAO and Asian–Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies: Rome)
Mangino J, Peterson K, Jacobs H (2003) Development of an emissions model to estimate methane from enteric fermentation in cattle. In ‘Proceedings of the 12th international emission inventory conference on emission inventories: applying new technologies’. (Ed. PA Lorang) pp. 11–21. (US EPA: San Diego, CA)
Mohini M, Singh GP (2010) Effect of supplementation of urea molasses mineral block (UMMB) on the milk yield and methane production in lactating cattle on different plane of nutrition. Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition 27, 96–102.
Nivasarkar AE, Vij PK, Tantia MS (2000) ‘Animal genetic resources of India cattle and buffalo.’ (Directorate of Information and Publications of Agricultural, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Krishi Anusandhan: Bhawan Pusa, New Delhi, India)
NRC (2001) ‘Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle.’ 7th revised edn. (National Research Council, National Academy Press: Washington, DC)
Opio C, Gerber P, Mottet A, Falcucci A, Tempio G, MacLeod M, Vellinga T, Henderson B, Steinfeld H (2013) ‘Greenhouse gas emissions from ruminant supply chains: a global life cycle assessment.’ (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome)
Place SE, Mitloehner FM (2010) Contemporary environmental issues: a review of the dairy industry’s role in climate change and air quality and the potential of mitigation through improved production efficiency. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 3407–3416.
| Contemporary environmental issues: a review of the dairy industry’s role in climate change and air quality and the potential of mitigation through improved production efficiency.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3cXht1GgtbnP&md5=3463b6b08be96bc158e7b0864b130700CAS | 20655409PubMed |
Rotz CA, Montes F, Chianese DS (2010) The carbon footprint of dairy production systems through partial life cycle assessment. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 1266–1282.
| The carbon footprint of dairy production systems through partial life cycle assessment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3cXitlOis7o%3D&md5=37fc60d5df7633bc74a10968122beb20CAS | 20172247PubMed |
Sastry NSR, Thomas CK, Singh RA (1982) ‘Farm animal management and poultry production’ 2nd edn. (Vikas Publishing House: New Delhi, India)
Singh CV, Barwal RS (2010) ‘Buffalo breeding research and improvement strategies in India.’ In ‘Proceedings of the 9th world buffalo congress’. (Ed. F Romero) pp. 1024–1031. (IFB, AACB and ABUAR: Buenos Aires)
Singhal KK, Mohini M, Jha AK, Gupta PK (2005) Methane emission estimates from enteric fermentation in Indian livestock: dry matter intake approach. Current Science 88, 119–127.
Snedecor GW, Cochran WG (1986) ‘Statistical methods.’ (Oxford and IBH Publishing Co.: New Delhi, India)
SPSS (1999) ‘Version 9.00 for Windows.’ (SPSS Inc.: Chicago, IL)
Thoma G, Popp J, Nutter DW, Shonnard DR, Ulrich R, Matlock M, Kim DS, Neiderman Z, Kemper N, East C, Adom F, Kellogg W (2013) Greenhouse gas emissions from milk production and consumption in the United States: a cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment circa 2008. International Dairy Journal 31, S3–S14.
| Greenhouse gas emissions from milk production and consumption in the United States: a cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment circa 2008.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC38Xhs1ajtb7E&md5=34cc75bb0443857e1a13102338ed1ba3CAS |
Thomassen MA, Dalgaard R, Heijungs R, de Boer I (2008) Attributional and consequential LCA of milk production. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 13, 339–349.
| Attributional and consequential LCA of milk production.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXpt1Cmsrw%3D&md5=6ae7bda908b4134a38b69bf0393043b7CAS |
Tiwary MK, Tiwari DP, Kumar A, Mondal BC (2007) Existing feeding practices, nutrient availability and reproductive status of dairy cattle and buffaloes in Haridwar district of Uttarakhand. Animal Nutrition and Feed Technology 7, 177–186.
Vellinga TV, de Haan MHA, Schils RLM, Evers A, van den Pol-van Dasselaar A (2011) Implementation of GHG mitigation on intensive dairy farms: farmers’ preferences and variation in cost effectiveness. Livestock Science 137, 185–195.
| Implementation of GHG mitigation on intensive dairy farms: farmers’ preferences and variation in cost effectiveness.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Weiler V, Udo HMJ, Viets T, Crane TA, de Boer IJM (2014) Handling multi-functionality of livestock in a life cycle assessment: the case of smallholder dairying in Kenya. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 8, 29–38.
| Handling multi-functionality of livestock in a life cycle assessment: the case of smallholder dairying in Kenya.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zehetmeier M, Hoffmann H, Sauer J, Hofmann G, Dorfner G, O’Brien D (2014) A dominance analysis of greenhouse gas emissions, beef output and land use of German dairy farms. Agricultural Systems 129, 55–67.
| A dominance analysis of greenhouse gas emissions, beef output and land use of German dairy farms.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
