Greenhouse gas emissions from beef production systems in Denmark and Sweden

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.

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).

Carbon Sequestration in Soils of Latin America

To effectively implement the Paris Agreement, capacity in carbon accounting must be strengthened in the developing world, and partnerships with local academic institutions can do the accounting for governments and fill the capacity gap. This paper highlights the Brazilian case, focusing on ways in which climate change science information and transparency are being incorporated in national C accounting initiatives, particularly the national inventory of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals. We report how the third inventory for the sector of land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) was implemented to address scientific challenges involved in the monitoring of carbon stocks and land-use changes of diverse and complex biomes while addressing international and national policy demands (report and decision support) and transparency to various stakeholders. GHG emissions and removals associated with 2002–2010 carbon changes in aboveground, belowground biomass, necromass and soil carbon by land use and land cover changes were estimated for all Brazilian biomes, and for the Amazon estimates were also presented for the periods of 2002–2005 and 2005–2010. The inventory improved regional estimates for carbon stock and national emission factors with the support and engagement of the scientific community. Incorporation of local context is essential to reduce uncertainties and properly monitor efforts to contribute to GHG emission/reduction targets. To promote transparency and make information more accessible, the national inventory results were made available by the National Emissions Registry System (SIRENE). This system was built to support climate change policies as an important legal apparatus and by increasing access to emissions and land-use change data.

Simple SummaryMinimizing the effects of climate change by reducing GHG emissions is crucial and can be accomplished by truly understanding the carbon footprint phenomenon. This study aims to improve the understanding of carbon footprint alteration due to agricultural management and fertility practices. It provides a detailed review of carbon footprint management under the impacts of environmental factors, land use, and agricultural practices. The results show that healthy soils have numerous benefits for the general public and especially farmers. These benefits include being stable and resilient, resistant to erosion, easily workable in cultivated systems, good habitat for soil micro-organisms, fertile and good structure, large carbon sinks, and hence lower carbon footprint. Intensive tillage is harmful to soil structure by oxidizing carbon and causing GHG emissions. If possible, no-till; if not, minimum tillage frequency and depth of tillage, and optimum moisture are recommended. The soil should be at an appropriate level of moisture when tillage takes place. Diverse cropping systems are better for the soil than monocultures. Minimizing machinery operations can help to avoid soil compaction. Building soil organic carbon in the most stable form is the most efficient practice of sustainable crop production.Global attention to climate change issues, especially air temperature changes, has drastically increased over the last half-century. Along with population growth, greater surface temperature, and higher greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, there are growing concerns for ecosystem sustainability and other human existence on earth. The contribution of agriculture to GHG emissions indicates a level of 18% of total GHGs, mainly from carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Thus, minimizing the effects of climate change by reducing GHG emissions is crucial and can be accomplished by truly understanding the carbon footprint (CF) phenomenon. Therefore, the purposes of this study were to improve understanding of CF alteration due to agricultural management and fertility practices. CF is a popular concept in agro-environmental sciences due to its role in the environmental impact assessments related to alternative solutions and global climate change. Soil moisture content, soil temperature, porosity, and water-filled pore space are some of the soil properties directly related to GHG emissions. These properties raise the role of soil structure and soil health in the CF approach. These properties and GHG emissions are also affected by different land-use changes, soil types, and agricultural management practices. Soil management practices globally have the potential to alter atmospheric GHG emissions. Therefore, the relations between photosynthesis and GHG emissions as impacted by agricultural management practices, especially focusing on soil and related systems, must be considered. We conclude that environmental factors, land use, and agricultural practices should be considered in the management of CF when maximizing crop productivity.

Production of organic beef from dairy bull calves in Denmark - Effect of different production strategies on productivity, carbon footprint and biodiversity estimated by modelling

The paper analyses the current ecological consequences of agricultural growth in Russia’s main regions (oblast level) during 2011–2019. Our main hypothesis was that local environ­mental risks, like waste concentration, would be closely related to global climate risks such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the production of crops, meat, milk, eggs, and from land use change (LUC) activities leading to a larger carbon footprint. We first analyze official data for agricultural waste and find that 30% of it is concentrated in just two regions (Belgorod and Kursk), while they produce only 10% of agricultural value of Russia. Next, we find that manure nutrients have a high concentration in regions where the livestock production is not balanced with appropriate nutrient use on croplands (Dagestan, Astrakhan, Leningrad, and Pskov regions) which might lead to the pollution of soils and local waters. Next, we test the GLOBIOM partial equilibrium model to evaluate proper agricultural protein production quantities in Russian regions and respective GHG emissions from crop, livestock and land use change activities. We find that 21% of the GHG emission in 2019 came from the conversion of former abandoned agricultural land into cropland (starting from 2011). While some regions such as Krasnodar, Rostov, and Stavropol increase productivity with low carbon footprint, others, like Amur and Bryansk, increase production by cropland expansion without respective productivity growth which leads to higher carbon footprint. Our results for livestock operations show that the main hypothesis did not hold up because regions which increase meat production, like Belgorod, Kursk, Pskov, and Leningrad, have a lower carbon footprint due to the production of pork meat and poultry which have lower GHG emissions due to specific digestion. On the other hand, these regions experience a higher environmental footprint due to the large concentration of waste which could be harmful for local eco­systems. Finally, we use the model to project possible future development up to 2030. Our results show the possible growth of crop and livestock products in most of the regions driven by external demand for food. The extensive scenario shows additional GHG emissions from cropland expansion, while the intensive scenario reveals a larger growth rate accompanied by productivity growth and lower carbon footprint, which is essential in harmonizing the current agricultural and climate policy of Russia.

Carbon footprint of a typical pomelo production region in China based on farm survey data

Method for calculating carbon footprint of cattle feeds – including contribution from soil carbon changes and use of cattle manure

The interaction between milk and beef production and emissions from land use change – critical considerations in life cycle assessment and carbon footprint studies of milk

U.S. rice paddies, critical for food security, are increasingly contributing to non‐CO2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions like methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). Yet, the full assessment of GHG balance, considering trade‐offs between soil organic carbon (SOC) change and non‐CO2 GHG emissions, is lacking. Integrating an improved agroecosystem model with a meta‐analysis of multiple field studies, we found that U.S. rice paddies were the rapidly growing net GHG emission sources, increased 138% from 3.7 ± 1.2 Tg CO2eq yr−1 in the 1960s to 8.9 ± 2.7 Tg CO2eq yr−1 in the 2010s. CH4, as the primary contributor, accounted for 10.1 ± 2.3 Tg CO2eq yr−1 in the 2010s, alongside a notable rise in N2O emissions by 0.21 ± 0.03 Tg CO2eq yr−1. SOC change could offset 14.0% (1.45 ± 0.46 Tg CO2eq yr−1) of the climate‐warming effects of soil non‐CO2 GHG emissions in the 2010s. This escalation in net GHG emissions is linked to intensified land use, increased atmospheric CO2, higher synthetic nitrogen fertilizer and manure application, and climate change. However, no/reduced tillage and non‐continuous irrigation could reduce net soil GHG emissions by approximately 10% and non‐CO2 GHG emissions by about 39%, respectively. Despite the rise in net GHG emissions, the cost of achieving higher rice yields has decreased over time, with an average of 0.84 ± 0.18 kg CO2eq ha−1 emitted per kilogram of rice produced in the 2010s. The study suggests the potential for significant GHG emission reductions to achieve climate‐friendly rice production in the U.S. through optimizing the ratio of synthetic N to manure fertilizer, reducing tillage, and implementing intermittent irrigation.

Over the last half-century, global attention has focused on climate change, particularly changes in air temperature. Concerns about the sustainability of the Earth’s ecosystems and other human life on the land are increasing along with population growth, rising surface temperature, and higher greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Agriculture is responsible for ~18% of total GHG emissions. Therefore, mitigating the effects of climate change by reducing GHG emissions is essential and can be achieved by careful evaluation of the carbon footprint (CF). The goal of this study was to gain a better understanding of the changes in CF due to agricultural management practices. Carbon footprint is a popular concept in agro-environmental sciences owing to its role in the environmental impact assessments related to alternative solutions and global climate change. The CF of agricultural products is one of the most crucial indicators to assess the effectiveness and long-term viability of agricultural products. Soil-moisture content, soil temperature, porosity, and anoxic conditions are some of the soil properties directly related to GHG emissions. The GHG emissions are also affected by different land-use changes, soil types, and agricultural management practices. Globally, better soil-management techniques can alter atmospheric GHG emissions. Therefore, the relation between photosynthesis and GHG emissions is impacted by agricultural management practices, especially focusing on soil and related systems. When maximizing crop productivity, environmental factors, land use, and agricultural practices all should be considered in CF management. The current review highlights the importance of CF and its role in maintaining the sustainability of agricultural systems.

Carbon footprint of renewable diesel from palm oil, jatropha oil and rapeseed oil

The objective of this work is to characterize regionally representative beef farm systems that represent dominant or typical surveyed management practices for 11 beef-producing regions across Canada. This work fulfills two further purposes 1) to improve and expand the Holos model interface; and 2) to facilitate the estimation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and soil carbon (C) changes on beef farms in different regions of Canada. Holos version 4 is the whole-farm model of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s to estimate GHG emissions and changes in soil C on Canadian farms in response to shifts in management practices. Holos can be implemented in all 10 Canadian provinces and accounts for GHG emissions from crop and livestock production [enteric and manure methane (CH4), manure and soil N2O emissions], farm machines and infrastructure [on-farm energy carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions], as well as from the upstream production of some farm inputs (synthetic fertilizer and pesticides). The model is designed to utilize data readily available on the farm to answer, ‘What if?’ scenarios, whereby the user can test the effect of changing management practices on their whole-farm GHG budget. To reduce the data input burden on the user, Holos V4 has built-in model livestock systems for beef, dairy, swine and poultry production that characterize the dominant features of these operations in Canada at the national scale based on relevant literature/data and expert opinion. Regarding beef production, we have characterized regionally specific model beef farms for incorporation into Holos, one for each of 11 Canadian beef-producing regions. General characteristics and management practices for each farm were based on the 2011 Beef Farm Survey (Sheppard et al., 2015), which summarizes management information from 1,009 Canadian beef farms, combined with data from the Canadian Cow-Calf Cost of Production Network (Canfax 2023). Each regional farm includes cow-calf, backgrounding in confinement, backgrounding on pasture and finishing components, and considers all the specific feed (e.g., forage, grains, by-products) required for each stage of the beef cycle. These 11 model farms are simulated within the current Holos V4 model to explore the impacts of variation in beef management practices on farm GHG emissions across Canada and on soil C stocks on lands used to produce feed and graze cattle. An overview of the national-level dairy, swine and poultry components in Holos will be presented along with a more detailed perspective of whole-farm GHG budget and multi-decadal soil C dynamics in regionalized beef farms. The impact of management and environmental factors that lead to differences in GHG emissions and soil C stocks in beef farms will also be explored.

Intensification pathways for beef and dairy cattle production systems: Impacts on GHG emissions, land occupation and land use change