A case study of the carbon footprint of milk from high-performing confinement and grass-based dairy farms

Relating the carbon footprint of milk from Irish dairy farms to economic performance

PurposeLife cycle assessment (LCA) studies of carbon footprint (CF) of milk from grass-based farms are usually limited to small numbers of farms (<30) and rarely certified to international standards, e.g. British Standards Institute publicly available specification 2050 (PAS 2050). The goals of this study were to quantify CF of milk from a large sample of grass-based farms using an accredited PAS 2050 method and to assess the relationships between farm characteristics and CF of milk.Materials and methodsData was collected annually using on-farm surveys, milk processor records and national livestock databases for 171 grass-based Irish dairy farms with information successfully obtained electronically from 124 farms and fed into a cradle to farm-gate LCA model. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were estimated with the LCA model in CO2 equivalents (CO2-eq) and allocated economically between dairy farm products, except exported crops. Carbon footprint of milk was estimated by expressing GHG emissions attributed to milk per kilogram of fat and protein-corrected milk (FPCM). The Carbon Trust tested the LCA model for non-conformities with PAS 2050. PAS 2050 certification was achieved when non-conformities were fixed or where the effect of all unresolved non-conformities on CF of milk was < ±5 %.Results and discussionThe combined effect of LCA model non-conformities with PAS 2050 on CF of milk was <1 %. Consequently, PAS 2050 accreditation was granted. The mean certified CF of milk from grass-based farms was 1.11 kg of CO2-eq/kg of FPCM, but varied from 0.87 to 1.72 kg of CO2-eq/kg of FPCM. Although some farm attributes had stronger relationships with CF of milk than the others, no attribute accounted for the majority of variation between farms. However, CF of milk could be reasonably predicted using N efficiency, the length of the grazing season, milk yield/cow and annual replacement rate (R 2 = 0.75). Management changes can be applied simultaneously to improve each of these traits. Thus, grass-based farmers can potentially significantly reduce CF of milk.ConclusionsThe certification of an LCA model to PAS 2050 standards for grass-based dairy farms provides a verifiable approach to quantify CF of milk at a farm or national level. The application of the certified model highlighted a wide range between the CF of milk of commercial farms. However, differences between farms’ CF of milk were explained by variation in various aspects of farm performance. This implies that improving farm efficiency can mitigate CF of milk.

The Irish dairy industry aims to increase milk production from grass-based farms following the removal of the EU milk-quota system, but is also required to minimise greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to meet European reduction targets. Consequently, the sector is under increasing pressure to reduce GHG emissions per unit of milk, or carbon footprint (CF). Therefore, the goal of the present study was to determine the main sources of the CF of grass-based milk production and to identify mitigation strategies that can be applied to reduce farm footprints. In total, the CF of milk was estimated for 62 grass-based dairy farms in 2014. The method used to quantify GHG emissions was a life cycle assessment (LCA), independently certified to comply with the British standard for LCA (PAS 2050). The LCA method was applied to calculate annual on- and off-farm GHG emissions associated with dairy production until milk was sold from the farm in CO2-equivalent (CO2-eq). Annual GHG emissions computed using LCA were allocated to milk on the basis of the economic value of dairy products and expressed per kilogram of fat- and protein-corrected milk to estimate CF. Enteric methane was the main source of the CF of milk (46%), followed by emissions from inorganic N fertilisers (16%), manure (16%) and concentrate feedstuffs (8%). The mean CF of milk from the 62 farms was 1.26 kg of CO2-eq per kilogram of fat- and protein-corrected milk, but varied from 0.98 kg to 1.67 kg as measured using the 95% confidence interval. The CF of milk was correlated with numerous farm attributes, particularly N-fertiliser, the percentage of grazed grass in the diet, and production of milk solids. Grass-based dairy farmers can significantly improve these farm attributes by increasing herd genetic merit, extending the length of the grazing season and optimising N fertiliser use and, thereby, reduce the CF of milk.

Milk production has been estimated to contribute 3-4% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, the carbon footprint associated with raw milk can vary, depending on a variety of factors, such as the geographical area, species of cow and production system. In this study, a global overview of research published on the carbon footprint (CF) of raw cow milk is provided. Additionally, two different dairy systems (semi-confinement and pasture-based) have been analysed by life-cycle assessment (LCA) in order to determine their effect on the CF of the milk produced. Inventory data were obtained directly from these facilities, and the main factors involved in milk production were included (co-products, livestock food, water, electricity, diesel, cleaning elements, transport, manure and slurry management, gas emissions to air etc.). In agreement with reviewed literature, it was found that the carbon footprint of milk was basically determined by the cattle feeding system and gas emissions from the cows. The values of milk CF found in the systems under study were within the range for cow milk production worldwide (0.9-4.7 kgCO2eq kgFPCM-1). Specifically, in the semi-confinement and the pasture-based dairy farms, 1.22 and 0.99 kgCO2eq kgFPCM-1 were obtained, respectively. The environmental benefits obtained with the pasture grazing system are not only mainly due to the lower use of purchased fodder but also to the allocation between milk and meat that was found to be a determining methodological factor in CF calculation. Finally, data from the evaluated dairy systems have been employed to analyse the influence of raw milk production on cheese manufacturing. With this aim, the CF of a small-scale cheese factory has also been obtained. The main subsystems involved (raw materials, water, electricity, energy, cleaning products, packaging materials, transport, wastes and gas emissions) were included in the inventory of the cheese factory. CF values were 16.6 and 14.7 kgCO2eq kg-1 of cheese for milk produced in semi-confinement and pasture-based systems, respectively. The production of raw milk represented more than 60% of CO2eq emissions associated with cheese, so the primary production is the critical factor in reducing the GHG emissions due to cheese making.

Evaluation of the effect of accounting method, IPCC v. LCA, on grass-based and confinement dairy systems’ greenhouse gas emissions

Carbon footprint of milk from sheep farming systems in Northern Spain including soil carbon sequestration in grasslands

The development of the carbon footprint (CF) of raw cow milk over time has been scarcely researched. The objectives of this study are (1) to determine the annual raw cow milk CF in the Netherlands between 1990 and 2019 and (2) to identify the factors explaining the development of the raw cow milk CF over time. We applied Life Cycle Assessment (cradle to farm gate) to the average Dutch dairy system and used data collected from national statistics and from the farm accountancy data network.The CF of raw cow milk produced in the Netherlands in 2019 was 992 g CO2-eq. per kg Fat and Protein Corrected Milk (FPCM), while in 1990 it was 1522 g CO2-eq. (kg FPCM)−1. This represents a reduction of 35%. The reduction rate of the CF is affected by the scope of the CF study, i.e. reduction rate is smaller if direct land use change (dLUC) (32%) and soil organic carbon (SOC) balance (29%) are included in the total CF. Methodological choices affect the absolute level of the CF by up to 27%, but the impact on the reduction rate over time is negligible. The results show that continuous improvement in agricultural practices (increased milk and roughage yields, improved feed efficiency and decreased nitrogen application) has played an important role in reducing the CF of milk over the years. Along with this process, the Dutch dairy system has evolved into less grazing and less land devoted to permanent grasslands which decreased carbon sequestration. In order to achieve climate targets, the annual reduction rate needs to be increased and additional efforts are required if the Dutch dairy sector is to play its part in limiting global warming to 1.5 °C. Special attention is needed for the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission from enteric fermentation and manure storage. However, the main challenge for the future is to find a balanced set of measures to integrally reduce all the sources of GHG emission within the carbon footprint of milk.

In recent years, the concept of life cycle assessment (LCA) has proven to be useful because of its potential to assess the integral environmental impacts of agricultural products. Developing countries such as India are good candidates for LCA research because of the large contribution of smallholder dairy system to the production of agricultural products such as milk. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to explore the carbon footprint of milk production under the multi-functional smallholder dairy system in Anand district of Gujarat state, western India. A cradle-to-farm gate LCA was performed by covering 60 smallholder dairy farms within 12 geographically distinct villages of the district. The average farm size was 4.0 animals per farm, and the average number of each category of animal was 2.5 lactating cows, 1.4 lactating buffaloes, 1.8 replacement cows, 1.6 replacement buffaloes, 2.0 retired cows, 1.3 retired buffaloes and 1.0 ox per farm. The emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) on CO2-equivalent (CO2-eq) basis from feed production, enteric fermentation and manure management were allocated to fat- and protein-corrected milk (FPCM) on the basis of mass balance, price and digestibility. Emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O from cattle contributed 11.0%, 75.4% and 13.6%, respectively, to the total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The contribution of CO2, CH4 and N2O from buffalo was 8.2%, 80.5% and 11.3%, respectively, to the total GHG emissions of farms. The average carbon footprint (CF) of cow milk was 2.3, 1.9 and 2.0 kg CO2-eq/kg FPCM on mass, economic and digestibility basis, respectively, whereas for buffalo, milk CF was 3.0, 2.5 and 2.7 kg CO2-eq/kg FPCM, respectively. On the basis of digestibility allocation, emissions from retired (&gt;10 years of age and incapable of or ceased producing milk) cows and buffaloes were 1571.3 and 2556.1 kg CO2-eq/retirement year, respectively. Overall, the CF of milk production under the smallholder dairy system in Anand district was 2.2 kg CO2-eq/kg FPCM, which reduced to 1.7 kg CO2-eq/kg FPCM when milk, manure, finance and insurance were considered as economic functions of the smallholder system. The CF was lower by 65% and 22% for cow and buffalo milk, respectively, than were the estimates of FAO for southern Asia, and this was mainly attributed to difference in the sources of GHG emissions, manure management systems, feed digestibility and milk production data used by FAO.

Making sense of methods to audit emissions – various audit methods to estimate dairy production carbon footprint

Variation in carbon footprint of milk due to management differences between Swedish dairy farms

A life cycle assessment of seasonal grass-based and confinement dairy farms

Greenhouse gas emissions of packaged fluid milk production in Tehran

Temporal, spatial, and management variability in the carbon footprint of New Zealand milk

Carbon footprints, mitigation effects and economic performance of dairy farm systems in Inner Mongolia

Simple SummaryLivestock production has been identified as an important source of greenhouse gas emissions. The current study was conducted to quantify the carbon footprint of Spanish dairy farms and to evaluate the potential of nutritional and management practices for mitigating methane emissions at farm level. The carbon footprint ranged from 0.67 to 0.98 kg CO2-eq/kg of energy corrected milk. Simulation scenarios showed that methane emissions and the carbon footprint of milk could be reduced more through management practices rather than dietary strategies. Modelling may provide policy makers, farmers and stakeholders valuable information for planning and developing strategies to reduce the carbon footprint associated with milk production. Greenhouse gas emissions and the carbon footprint (CF) were estimated in twelve Spanish dairy farms selected from three regions (Mediterranean, MED; Cantabric, CAN; and Central, CEN) using a partial life cycle assessment through the Integrated Farm System Model (IFSM). The functional unit was 1 kg of energy corrected milk (ECM). Methane emissions accounted for the largest contribution to the total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The average CF (kg CO2-eq/kg of ECM) was 0.84, being the highest in MED (0.98), intermediate in CEN (0.84), and the lowest in CAN (0.67). Two extreme farms were selected for further simulations: one with the highest non-enteric methane (MED1), and another with the highest enteric methane (CAN2). Changes in management scenarios (increase milk production, change manure collection systems, change manure-type storage method, change bedding type and installation of an anaerobic digester) in MED1 were evaluated with the IFSM model. Changes in feeding strategies (reduce the forage: concentrate ratio, improve forage quality, use of ionophores) in CAN2 were evaluated with the Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein System model. Results indicate that changes in management (up to 27.5% reduction) were more efficient than changes in dietary practices (up to 3.5% reduction) in reducing the carbon footprint.