Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Dairy Sci ; 105(12): 9297-9326, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36270879

ABSTRACT

Ruminant livestock are an important source of anthropogenic methane (CH4). Decreasing the emissions of enteric CH4 from ruminant production is strategic to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5°C by 2050. Research in the area of enteric CH4 mitigation has grown exponentially in the last 2 decades, with various strategies for enteric CH4 abatement being investigated: production intensification, dietary manipulation (including supplementation and processing of concentrates and lipids, and management of forage and pastures), rumen manipulation (supplementation of ionophores, 3-nitrooxypropanol, macroalgae, alternative electron acceptors, and phytochemicals), and selection of low-CH4-producing animals. Other enteric CH4 mitigation strategies are at earlier stages of research but rapidly developing. Herein, we discuss and analyze the current status of available enteric CH4 mitigation strategies with an emphasis on opportunities and barriers to their implementation in confined and partial grazing production systems, and in extensive and fully grazing production systems. For each enteric CH4 mitigation strategy, we discuss its effectiveness to decrease total CH4 emissions and emissions on a per animal product basis, safety issues, impacts on the emissions of other greenhouse gases, as well as other economic, regulatory, and societal aspects that are key to implementation. Most research has been conducted with confined animals, and considerably more research is needed to develop, adapt, and evaluate antimethanogenic strategies for grazing systems. In general, few options are currently available for extensive production systems without feed supplementation. Continuous research and development are needed to develop enteric CH4 mitigation strategies that are locally applicable. Information is needed to calculate carbon footprints of interventions on a regional basis to evaluate the impact of mitigation strategies on net greenhouse gas emissions. Economically affordable enteric CH4 mitigation solutions are urgently needed. Successful implementation of safe and effective antimethanogenic strategies will also require delivery mechanisms and adequate technical support for producers, as well as consumer involvement and acceptance. The most appropriate metrics should be used in quantifying the overall climate outcomes associated with mitigation of enteric CH4 emissions. A holistic approach is required, and buy-in is needed at all levels of the supply chain.


Subject(s)
Greenhouse Gases , Methane , Animals , Methane/analysis , Biodiversity , Temperature , Ruminants
2.
J Anim Sci ; 100(7)2022 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35657151

ABSTRACT

The contribution of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ruminant production systems varies between countries and between regions within individual countries. The appropriate quantification of GHG emissions, specifically methane (CH4), has raised questions about the correct reporting of GHG inventories and, perhaps more importantly, how best to mitigate CH4 emissions. This review documents existing methods and methodologies to measure and estimate CH4 emissions from ruminant animals and the manure produced therein over various scales and conditions. Measurements of CH4 have frequently been conducted in research settings using classical methodologies developed for bioenergetic purposes, such as gas exchange techniques (respiration chambers, headboxes). While very precise, these techniques are limited to research settings as they are expensive, labor-intensive, and applicable only to a few animals. Head-stalls, such as the GreenFeed system, have been used to measure expired CH4 for individual animals housed alone or in groups in confinement or grazing. This technique requires frequent animal visitation over the diurnal measurement period and an adequate number of collection days. The tracer gas technique can be used to measure CH4 from individual animals housed outdoors, as there is a need to ensure low background concentrations. Micrometeorological techniques (e.g., open-path lasers) can measure CH4 emissions over larger areas and many animals, but limitations exist, including the need to measure over more extended periods. Measurement of CH4 emissions from manure depends on the type of storage, animal housing, CH4 concentration inside and outside the boundaries of the area of interest, and ventilation rate, which is likely the variable that contributes the greatest to measurement uncertainty. For large-scale areas, aircraft, drones, and satellites have been used in association with the tracer flux method, inverse modeling, imagery, and LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), but research is lagging in validating these methods. Bottom-up approaches to estimating CH4 emissions rely on empirical or mechanistic modeling to quantify the contribution of individual sources (enteric and manure). In contrast, top-down approaches estimate the amount of CH4 in the atmosphere using spatial and temporal models to account for transportation from an emitter to an observation point. While these two estimation approaches rarely agree, they help identify knowledge gaps and research requirements in practice.


There is a need to accurately and precisely quantify greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, specifically methane (CH4), to ensure correct reporting of GHG inventories and, perhaps more importantly, determine how to best mitigate CH4 emissions. The objective of this study was to review existing methods and methodologies to quantify and estimate CH4 emissions from ruminants. Historically, most techniques were developed for specific purposes that may limit their widespread use on commercial farms and for inventory purposes and typically required frequent calibration and equipment maintenance. Whole animal and head respiration chambers, spot sampling techniques, and tracer gas methods can be used to measure enteric CH4 from individual animals, but each technique has its own inherent limitations. The measurement of CH4 emissions from manure depends on the type of storage, animal housing, CH4 concentration inside and outside the boundaries of the area of interest, and ventilation rate, which is likely the most complex variable creating many uncertainties. For large-scale areas, aircraft, drones, and satellites have been used in association with the tracer flux method, inverse modeling, imagery, and LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), but research is lagging in validating these methods. Bottom-up approaches to estimating CH4 emissions rely on empirical or mechanistic modeling to quantify the contribution of individual sources. Top-down approaches estimate the amount of CH4 in the atmosphere using spatial and temporal models to account for transportation from an emitter to an observation point.


Subject(s)
Greenhouse Gases , Methane , Animals , Eating , Manure/analysis , Methane/analysis , Ruminants
3.
J Environ Manage ; 241: 293-304, 2019 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31009817

ABSTRACT

Livestock production is important for food security, nutrition, and landscape maintenance, but it is associated with several environmental impacts. To assess the risk and benefits arising from livestock production, transparent and robust indicators are required, such as those offered by life cycle assessment. A central question in such approaches is how environmental burden is allocated to livestock products and to manure that is re-used for agricultural production. To incentivize sustainable use of manure, it should be considered as a co-product as long as it is not disposed of, or wasted, or applied in excess of crop nutrient needs, in which case it should be treated as a waste. This paper proposes a theoretical approach to define nutrient requirements based on nutrient response curves to economic and physical optima and a pragmatic approach based on crop nutrient yield adjusted for nutrient losses to atmosphere and water. Allocation of environmental burden to manure and other livestock products is then based on the nutrient value from manure for crop production using the price of fertilizer nutrients. We illustrate and discuss the proposed method with two case studies.


Subject(s)
Fertilizers , Manure , Agriculture , Animals , Crop Production , Livestock
4.
Integr Environ Assess Manag ; 11(3): 404-16, 2015 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25655187

ABSTRACT

Direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agriculture accounted for approximately 10% of total European Union (EU) emissions in 2010. To reduce farming-related GHG emissions, appropriate policy measures and supporting tools for promoting low-C farming practices may be efficacious. This article presents the methodology and testing results of a new EU-wide, farm-level C footprint calculator. The Carbon Calculator quantifies GHG emissions based on international standards and technical specifications on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and C footprinting. The tool delivers its results both at the farm level and as allocated to up to 5 main products of the farm. In addition to the quantification of GHG emissions, the calculator proposes mitigation options and sequestration actions that may be suitable for individual farms. The results obtained during a survey made on 54 farms from 8 EU Member States are presented. These farms were selected in view of representing the diversity of farm types across different environmental zones in the EU. The results of the C footprint of products in the data set show wide range of variation between minimum and maximum values. The results of the mitigation actions showed that the tool can help identify practices that can lead to substantial emission reductions. To avoid burden-shifting from climate change to other environmental issues, the future improvements of the tool should include incorporation of other environmental impact categories in place of solely focusing on GHG emissions.


Subject(s)
Agriculture/statistics & numerical data , Carbon Footprint , Carbon/analysis , Environmental Monitoring/methods , Climate Change , European Union
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...