175 Effect of age at calving on greenhouse gas emissions from simulated beef farms grazing four stockpiled forage species in late fall/early winter

Better information on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and mitigation potential in the agricultural sector is necessary to manage these emissions and identify responses that are consistent with the food security and economic development priorities of countries. Critical activity data (what crops or livestock are managed in what way) are poor or lacking for many agricultural systems, especially in developing countries. In addition, the currently available methods for quantifying emissions and mitigation are often too expensive or complex or not sufficiently user friendly for widespread use.The purpose of this focus issue is to capture the state of the art in quantifying greenhouse gases from agricultural systems, with the goal of better understanding our current capabilities and near-term potential for improvement, with particular attention to quantification issues relevant to smallholders in developing countries. This work is timely in light of international discussions and negotiations around how agriculture should be included in efforts to reduce and adapt to climate change impacts, and considering that significant climate financing to developing countries in post-2012 agreements may be linked to their increased ability to identify and report GHG emissions (Murphy et al 2010, CCAFS 2011, FAO 2011).

All material supplied via Jukuri is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights. Duplication or sale, in electronic or print form, of any part of the repository collections is prohibited. Making electronic or print copies of the material is permitted only for your own personal use or for educational purposes. For other purposes, this article may be used in accordance with the publisher's terms. There may be differences between this version and the publisher's version. You are advised to cite the publisher's version. This is an electronic reprint of the original article. This reprint may differ from the original in pagination and typographic detail.

Mitigating Curtailment and Carbon Emissions through Load Migration between Data Centers

Major US electric utility climate pledges have the potential to collectively reduce power sector emissions by one-third

This is the fourth Energy Information Administration (EIA) annual report on US emissions of greenhouse gases. This report presents estimates of US anthropogenic (human-caused) emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and several other greenhouse gases for 1988 through 1994. Estimates of 1995 carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and halocarbon emissions are also provided, although complete 1995 estimates for methane are not yet available. Emissions of carbon dioxide increased by 1.9% from 1993 to 1994 and by an additional 0.8% from 1994 to 1995. Most carbon dioxide emissions are caused by the burning of fossil fuels for energy consumption, which is strongly related to economic growth, energy prices, and weather. The US economy grew rapidly in 1994 and slowed in 1995. Estimated emissions of methane increased slightly in 1994, as a result of a rise in emissions from energy and agricultural sources. Estimated nitrous oxide emissions increased by 1.8% in 1995, primarily due to increased use of nitrogen fertilizers and higher output of chemicals linked to nitrous oxide emissions. Estimated emissions of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), which are known to contribute to global warming, increased by nearly 11% in 1995, primarily as a result of increasing substitution for chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). With the exception of methane, the historical emissions estimates presented in this report are only slightly revised from those in last year`s report.

Energy-related activities are a major contributor of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A growing body of knowledge clearly depicts the links between human activities and climate change. Over the last century the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil and other human activities has released carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and other heat-trapping GHG emissions into the atmosphere and thus increased the concentration of atmospheric CO2 emissions. The main human activities that emit CO2 emissions are (1) the combustion of fossil fuels to generate electricity, accounting for about 37% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 31% of total U.S. GHG emissions in 2013, (2) the combustion of fossil fuels such as gasoline and diesel to transport people and goods, accounting for about 31% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 26% of total U.S. GHG emissions in 2013, and (3) industrial processes such as the production and consumption of minerals and chemicals, accounting for about 15% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 12% of total ...

Objectives : In the context where the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from livestock manure (LSM) account for more than half of the GHG emissions in the livestock sector, it is necessary to find alternatives to composting due to the decrease in agricultural land. This study aims to calculate the GHG reduction contribution and economic benefits when converting LSM into solid fuel as an alternative to traditional composting.Methods : The study compares the results of converting the entire LSM generated domestically into solid fuel replacing it with hard coal for fuel (HC-F), bituminous coal for raw materials (BC-R), bituminous coal for fuel (BC-F). The GHG reduction contribution is calculated following the domestic GHG inventory methodology, using the IPCC guidelines and the method for calculating carbon emission reduction effects. For the assessment of economic benefits, were evaluated by aggregating the impacts of reducing coal imports and GHG reduction benefits in line with EU-ETS standards. Economic benefits are assessed by combining the effects of avoiding coal imports and the GHG reduction benefits according to the EU-ETS.Results and Discussion : The GHG reduction effect was found to be highest when replacing with HC-F, and this is attributed to the lower heating value and higher GHG emission coefficient of HC-F compared to BC-R, and BC-F, indicating that the substitution with HC-F is most effective in terms of import avoidance. If 20% of the annual coal consumption in 2022 is replaced with solid fuel from LSM, the GHG reduction effects for coal substitution are 1.4% for HC-F, 2.1% for BC-R, and 1.9% for BC-F based on the LSM generation CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from biomass fuel are considered climate-neutral and are excluded from the national total emissions. Solid fuel from LSM serves as an alternative in addressing the GHG generated during the LSM treatment process, contributing to potential reduction. If all generated LSM is replaced with HC-F, BC-R, or BC-F, there are respective GHG reduction effects of 13,193,591 tGHG, 11,320,572 tGHG, and 11,226,331 tGHG.Conclusion In 2018, the livestock sector accounted for approximately 42% of the GHG emissions in the agricultural sector, totaling 9.4 million tCO<sub>2</sub> eq. Assuming the complete conversion of LSM into solid fuel for coal substitution, regardless of the type of coal replaced, it offsets the entire GHG emissions from the agricultural sector. Currently, there is limited demand for the conversion of LSM into solid fuel due to a lack of proof and awareness, but with some coal-fired power plants scheduled for partial shutdown and the government considering energy options for LSM, a promising stage is anticipated in the future for the substitution and expanded use of solid fuel from LSM in place of coal in the coal fuel. Although it may not be possible to entirely replace the coal used in power plants and steel mills with solid fuel from LSM, it can be utilized by increasing the proportion of coal blending. However, even if not reported in the national GHG inventory, the treatment of pollutants generated by solid fuel combustion remains an ongoing challenge. As solid fuel becomes more commonplace in the future, a comprehensive assessment of the entire process, including potential environmental impacts throughout the life cycle, will be necessary to establish a basis for GHG reduction measures.

Taking Stock of Strategies on Climate Change and the Way Forward: A Strategic Climate Change Framework for Australia

BackgroundPolicies to mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions can yield public health benefits by also reducing emissions of hazardous co-pollutants, such as air toxics and particulate matter. Socioeconomically disadvantaged communities are typically disproportionately exposed to air pollutants, and therefore climate policy could also potentially reduce these environmental inequities. We sought to explore potential social disparities in GHG and co-pollutant emissions under an existing carbon trading program—the dominant approach to GHG regulation in the US and globally.Methods and findingsWe examined the relationship between multiple measures of neighborhood disadvantage and the location of GHG and co-pollutant emissions from facilities regulated under California’s cap-and-trade program—the world’s fourth largest operational carbon trading program. We examined temporal patterns in annual average emissions of GHGs, particulate matter (PM2.5), nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, volatile organic compounds, and air toxics before (January 1, 2011–December 31, 2012) and after (January 1, 2013–December 31, 2015) the initiation of carbon trading. We found that facilities regulated under California’s cap-and-trade program are disproportionately located in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods with higher proportions of residents of color, and that the quantities of co-pollutant emissions from these facilities were correlated with GHG emissions through time. Moreover, the majority (52%) of regulated facilities reported higher annual average local (in-state) GHG emissions since the initiation of trading. Neighborhoods that experienced increases in annual average GHG and co-pollutant emissions from regulated facilities nearby after trading began had higher proportions of people of color and poor, less educated, and linguistically isolated residents, compared to neighborhoods that experienced decreases in GHGs. These study results reflect preliminary emissions and social equity patterns of the first 3 years of California’s cap-and-trade program for which data are available. Due to data limitations, this analysis did not assess the emissions and equity implications of GHG reductions from transportation-related emission sources. Future emission patterns may shift, due to changes in industrial production decisions and policy initiatives that further incentivize local GHG and co-pollutant reductions in disadvantaged communities.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first study to examine social disparities in GHG and co-pollutant emissions under an existing carbon trading program. Our results indicate that, thus far, California’s cap-and-trade program has not yielded improvements in environmental equity with respect to health-damaging co-pollutant emissions. This could change, however, as the cap on GHG emissions is gradually lowered in the future. The incorporation of additional policy and regulatory elements that incentivize more local emission reductions in disadvantaged communities could enhance the local air quality and environmental equity benefits of California’s climate change mitigation efforts.

Globally, agriculture is directly responsible for 14% of annual greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions and induces an additional 17% through land use change, mostlyin developing countries (Vermeulen et al 2012). Agricultural intensification andexpansion in these regions is expected to catalyze the most significant relativeincreases in agricultural GHG emissions over the next decade (Smith et al 2008,Tilman et al 2011). Farms in the developing countries of sub-Saharan Africa andAsia are predominately managed by smallholders, with 80% of land holdingssmaller than ten hectares (FAO 2012). One can therefore posit that smallholderfarming significantly impacts the GHG balance of these regions today and willcontinue to do so in the near future.However, our understanding of the effect smallholder farming has on theEarth’s climate system is remarkably limited. Data quantifying existing andreduced GHG emissions and removals of smallholder production systems areavailable for only a handful of crops, livestock, and agroecosystems (Herrero et al2008, Verchot et al 2008, Palm et al 2010). For example, fewer than fifteenstudies of nitrous oxide emissions from soils have taken place in sub-SaharanAfrica, leaving the rate of emissions virtually undocumented. Due to a scarcity ofdata on GHG sources and sinks, most developing countries currently quantifyagricultural emissions and reductions using IPCC Tier 1 emissions factors.However, current Tier 1 emissions factors are either calibrated to data primarilyderived from developed countries, where agricultural production conditions aredissimilar to that in which the majority of smallholders operate, or from data thatare sparse or of mixed quality in developing countries (IPCC 2006). For the mostpart, there are insufficient emissions data characterizing smallholder agricultureto evaluate the level of accuracy or inaccuracy of current emissions estimates.Consequentially, there is no reliable information on the agricultural GHG budgetsfor developing economies. This dearth of information constrains the capacity totransition to low-carbon agricultural development, opportunities for smallholdersto capitalize on carbon markets, and the negotiating position of developingcountries in global climate policy discourse.Concerns over the poor state of information, in terms of data availability andrepresentation, have fueled appeals for new approaches to quantifying GHGemissions and removals from smallholder agriculture, for both existing conditionsand mitigation interventions (Berry and Ryan 2013, Olander et al 2013).Considering the dependence of quantification approaches on data and the currentdata deficit for smallholder systems, it is clear that in situ measurements must bea core part of initial and future strategies to improve GHG inventories and

Considerable evidence of climate change associated with emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) has resulted in international efforts to reduce GHG emissions. The agriculture sector contributes about 8% of GHG emissions in Canada mostly through methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). The objective of this paper was to compile an integrative review of CH4 and N2O emissions from livestock by taking a whole cycle approach from enteric fermentation to manure treatment and storage, and field application of manure. Basic microbial processes that result in CH4 production in the rumen and hindgut of animals were reviewed. An overview of CH4 and N2O production processes in manure, and controlling factors are presented. Most of the studies conducted in relation to enteric fermentation were in dairy and beef cattle. To date, research has focussed on GHG emissions from the stored manures of dairy, beef cattle and swine; therefore, we focus our review on these. Several methods used to measure GHG emissions from livestock and stored manure were reviewed. A comparison of methods showed that there were agreements between most of the techniques but some systematic differences were also observed. Additional studies with comprehensive comparisons of methodologies are needed in order to allow for comparison of results obtained from studies using contrasting methodologies. The need to standardize measurement methods and reporting to facilitate comparison of results and data integration was identified. Prediction equations are often used to calculate GHG emissions. Various types of mathematical approaches, such as statistical models, mechanistic models and estimates calculated from emission factors, and studies that compare various types of models are discussed herein. A lack of process-based models describing GHG emissions from manure during storage was identified. A brief description of mitigation strategies focussing on recent studies is given. Reduction in CH4 emissions from ruminants through the addition of fats in diets and the use of more starch was achieved and a transient beneficial effect of ionophores was reported. Grazing management and genetic selection also hold promise. Studies focussed on manure treatment options that thave been suggested to reduce gas fluxes from manure storage, composting, anaerobic digestion (AD), diet manipulation, covers and solid-liquid separation, were reviewed. While some of these options have been shown to decrease GHG emissions from stored manure, different studies have obtained conflicting results, and additional research is needed to identify the most promising options. GHG emissions from pasture and croplands after manure application have been the subject of several experimental and modelling studies, but few of these have linked field emissions to diet manipulation or manure treatments. Further work focussing on the entire cycle of GHG formation from feed formulation, animal metabolism, excreta treatment and storage, to field application of manure needs to be conducted. Key words: Greenhouse gases, enteric methane, nitrous oxide, manure management

The dairy Carbon Offset Scenario Tool (COST) was developed to explore the influence of various abatement strategies on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for Australian dairy farms. COST is a static spreadsheet-based tool that uses Australian GHG inventory methodologies, algorithms and emission factors to estimate carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide emissions of a dairy farm system. One of the key differences between COST and other inventory-based dairy GHG emissions calculators is the ability to explore the effect of reducing total farm emissions on farm income, assuming the strategy was compliant with Kyoto rules for carbon offsets. COST provides ten abatement strategies across the four broad theme areas of diet manipulation, herd and breeding management, feedbase management and waste management. Each abatement strategy contains four sections; two sections for data entry (baseline farm data specific to the strategy explored and strategy-specific variables) and two sections for results (milk production results and GHG/economic-related results). Key sensitive variables for each strategy, identified from prior research, and prices for milk production and carbon offsets are adjusted through up/down buttons, which allows users to quickly explore the impact of these variables on farm emissions and profitability. For example, if the cost to implement an abatement strategy is doubled, what carbon offset income would be required to negate this additional cost? Results are presented as changes in carbon offset income, strategy implementation cost, additional milk production income and net farm income on a per annum and on a per GHG emissions intensity of milk production basis. COST currently contains a comprehensive range of strategies for GHG abatement, although some strategies are still in development. As new technologies or farm management practices leading to a reduction in GHG emission become available, these too will be incorporated into COST. To date, two dairy-specific abatement methodologies have been legislated as part of Australia’s commitment to reducing on-farm GHG emissions through it’s the carbon offset scheme, the Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI) and are incorporated into COST. These are the ‘Destruction of methane generated from dairy manure in covered anaerobic ponds’ and the ‘Methodology for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in milking cows through feeding dietary additives’. As an example, we explored the mitigation option Replace supplements with a source of dietary fats (reflecting the second above-mentioned CFI legislated abatement strategy) as feeding a diet higher in dietary fats has been shown to reduce enteric methane emissions per unit of feed intake. A 400 milking herd was fed a baseline diet of 2.6% dietary fat. By replacing grain with hominy meal, at a rate of 5.0 kg dry matter/ cow per day for 90 days during the 3 summer months, the summer diet fat concentration was increased to 6.4%. Enteric methane emissions were reduced by 40 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (t CO 2 e) per annum for the farm. Waste methane and nitrous oxide emissions were also reduced by 0.5 and 1.6 t CO 2 e/annum, respectively. However, as reductions from these two sources of GHG emissions do not qualify for payment with this CFI methodology, their reduction could not be included as an offset income. At a carbon price of $20/ t CO 2 e, the reduction in enteric methane emissions was valued at $800/farm. The implementation cost of replacing grain with hominy was valued at $18,000/farm due to the hominy meal costing an additional $100/t dry matter compared to the grain. However, the additional milk production achieved due to the higher energy concentration of the diet resulted in an additional 70,200 litres and based on a summer milk price of $0.38/ litre, this equated to an additional income from milk valued at $26,676/farm. The overall result was a net increase in farm profit of $9,476/farm when paid on a reduction in total GHG emissions. COST can quickly allow users to ascertain the level of GHG emission reduction possible with various mitigation options and explore the sensitivity of key variables on GHG emissions and farm profitability.

The Australian dairy industry contributes ~1.6% of the nation’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, emitting an estimated 9.3 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) per annum. This study examined 41 contrasting Australian dairy farms for their GHG emissions using the Dairy Greenhouse Gas Abatement Strategies calculator, which incorporates Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Australian inventory methodologies, algorithms and emission factors. Sources of GHG emissions included were pre-farm embedded emissions associated with key farm inputs (i.e. grains and concentrates, forages and fertilisers), CO2 emissions from electricity and fuel consumption, methane emissions from enteric fermentation and animal waste management, and nitrous oxide emissions from animal waste management and nitrogen fertilisers. The estimated mean (±s.d.) GHG emissions intensity was 1.04 ± 0.17 kg CO2 equivalents/kg of fat and protein-corrected milk (kg CO2e/kg FPCM). Enteric methane emissions were found to be approximately half of total farm emissions. Linear regression analysis showed that 95% of the variation in total farm GHG emissions could be explained by annual milk production. While the results of this study suggest that milk production alone could be a suitable surrogate for estimating GHG emissions for national inventory purposes, the GHG emissions intensity of milk production, on an individual farm basis, was shown to vary by over 100% (0.76–1.68 kg CO2e/kg FPCM). It is clear that using a single emissions factor, such as milk production alone, to estimate any given individual farm’s GHG emissions, has the potential to either substantially under- or overestimate individual farms’ GHG emissions.

Greenhouse gas emissions from the Canadian dairy industry in 2001

Effects of dairy cow breed and dietary forage on greenhouse gas emissions from manure during storage and after field application