Consequences of the Ban of By-Products from Terrestrial Animals in Livestock Feeding in Germany and The European Union: Alternatives, Nutrient and Energy Cycles, Plant Production, and Economic Aspects

Abstract

Consequences of the ban of meat and bone meal (MBM) and animal fat with regard to livestock feeding, cropping, ecology and economy where investigated with an inter-disciplinary approach for Germany and the European Union. Calculations were made for different production systems with pigs and poultry on the basis of statistical data for the production and for the feed markets as well as from requirement data for the respective species and production system. (1.) The ban of MBM from feeding caused a need for alternative protein sources. If all the amount of protein from MBM is to be replaced by soybean meal, in Germany and the EU about 0.30 and 2.30 · 106t would be needed each year (supplementary amino acids not considered). Alternatively, doubling the grain legume acreage in Germany to about 420,000ha would supply a similar amount of protein. A wider application of phase feeding with adjusted dietary amino acid concentrations, however, would allow for saving protein to an extent which is similar to the amount of protein that was contributed by MBM in recent years. Thus, the ban is a minor problem in terms of ensuring amino acid supply. (2.) However, alternative plant ingredients cannot compensate for the gap in P supply that is caused by the ban. An additional demand for inorganic feed phosphates of about 14,000 and 110,000t per year is given in Germany and the EU, respectively. So far, this gap is filled almost completely by increased mining of rock phosphates. Alternatively, a general application of microbial phytase to all diets would largely fill this gap. Until the ban, MBM contributed to 57% of the supplementation of P that was needed for pigs and poultry. The ban of MBM makes large amounts of P irreversibly disappearing from the food chain. (3.) Energy from slaughter offal and cadavers can be utilized in different technologies, in the course of which the efficiency of energy utilisation depends on the technology applied. It is efficient in the cement work or rotation furnace if heat is the main energy required. In contrast, the energetic efficiency of fermentation is low. (4.) Incineration or co-incineration of MBM and other by-products causes pollution gas emissions amounting to about 1.4kg CO2 and 0.2kg NOx per kg. The CO2 production as such is hardly disadvantageous, because heat and electrical energy can be generated by the combustion process. The prevention of dangerous gaseous emissions from MBM burning is current standard in the incineration plants in Germany and does not affect the environment inadmissibly. (5.) The effects of the MBM ban on the price for compound feed is not very significant. Obviously, substitution possibilities between different feed ingredients helped to exchange MBM without large price distortions. However, with each kg MBM not used in pig and poultry feeding economic losses of about 0.14¢ have to considered. In conclusion, the by far highest proportion of raw materials for MBM comes as by-products from the slaughter process. Coming this way, and assuring that further treatment is safe from the hygienic point of view, MBM and animal fat can be regarded as valuable sources of amino acids, minerals and energy in feeding pigs and poultry. Using them as feedstuffs could considerably contribute to the goal of keeping limited nutrients, phosphorus in particular, within the nutrient cycle and dealing responsible with limited resources.