Investigating the greenhouse gas emissions of grass-fed beef relative to other greenhouse gas abatement strategies

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

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

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).

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.

Who would have believed on 22 April 1970, the 1st Earth Day and thereafter the anniversary of the birth of the modern environmental movement, that by the beginning of the 21st century the scope of environmental challenges facing our planet would also include carbon management. Carbon, as in carbon dioxide—the ubiquitous gas we generate during respiration and that plants use for photosynthesis. No less than the Science Mission Directorate at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)—the US space agency better known for looking beyond this planet—identifies carbon management as a national priority. According to NASA, carbon management is one of the key resource management and policy issues of the 21st century. The atmospheric concentration of CO2 increased by about 25% during the 20th century and is continuing to increase in part due to the burning of fossil fuels and changes in land cover and land use. NASA believes that increases in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 and other greenhouse gases will likely produce significant changes in global climate and accompanying changes in energy and water cycles. These changes will have profound impacts on the Earth's ecosystems and society. There is little doubt our society will soon adopt a global low-carb(on) diet. Most scientific and public opinion have come to the shared conclusions that there is an unreasonable accumulation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, especially CO2, in our atmosphere and that human activity is largely to blame. The carbon management that is envisioned by national and international environmental agencies and organizations is expected to integrate all aspects of manufacturing, agriculture, transportation, and power generation around technologies that produce energy and materials with the lowest GHG emissions. In the future, carbon neutrality will factor into sustainable practices and reliance on renewable resources. It is not so far-fetched to envision that the transition to a low-carbon diet in an economically viable fashion will require society to impose a carbon tax on consumer products and services. At this early stage of the carbon diet, emissions-trading markets that attach cost (per unit output) to GHG emissions are emerging in some countries. If Nobel laureates Mr. Albert Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are to be believed, then globally implemented, nationally coordinated carbon management programs may be the only means to avoid catastrophic climate change. Such programs would likely be the precursors of a carbon-neutral global economy. SETAC and its members take climate change and a low-carbon diet very seriously. Organizers of SETAC annual meetings in Asia/Pacific, Europe, Latin America, and North America are looking closely at companies and organizations that facilitate purchasing of carbon offsets for their annual conferences as part of a new commitment to host carbon-neutral meetings. Pioneered at the 2006 SETAC North America meeting, the success of the carbon-offsets purchase program among delegates has encouraged SETAC to move towards expansion of the program to include all SETAC activities worldwide. Despite the simplicity and popularity of purchasing carbon offsets and becoming carbon neutral, organizers of the 2006 SETAC North America meeting in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA, reminded us of 2 important caveats. These cautions are worth repeating here. First and foremost, carbon offsets should not be anyone's first course of action when attempting to reduce their carbon footprint. Individuals and organizations should look for ways to reduce their carbon footprint through direct emissions reduction or through purchase of emissions-free electricity or electricity from other low-carbon energy sources. Carbon offsets should only be considered once efforts to reduce the use of energy and carbon intensity of that energy have been taken. Second, we are cautioned, based on the experience from organizers of the Milwaukee meeting, that not all carbon offset providers or projects meet the same standard of quality. At this early stage of a new market, it may not be so surprising that the burgeoning carbon offset industry would benefit from increased monitoring and independent certification of carbon offset companies to ensure they are doing what they say they are doing and charging a fair price for their efforts. In the future, SETAC will strive to continue to offer meeting delegates the option to purchase carbon offsets for travel to its annual conferences and workshops. And because the value of meeting in person and learning from peers and colleagues cannot be replaced, supporting a carbon offset program is especially appropriate for offsetting GHG emissions that are somewhat unavoidable, for example, the emissions associated with travel to SETAC events.

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 ...

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.

<p><strong>Background</strong>. Feeding cattle in small-scale silage-based dairy production systems can improve their production efficiency while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. <strong>Objective</strong>. To determine the effect of partial replacement of corn silage with sorghum silage on the concentration of secondary metabolites in terms of Total Phenols (TP), Total Tannins (TT), and Condensed Tannins (CT), as well as to estimate methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. <strong>Methodology</strong>. The treatments were analyzed with a split-plot experimental design where the treatments (main plot) were; T1 = 50% sorghum silage cv Top Green + 50% corn silage, T2 = 50% sorghum silage cv Caña Dulce + 50% corn silage, T3 = 100% corn silage cv Cenzontle (control), and the measurement periods were the minor plots. <strong>Results</strong>. Inclusion of sorghum silage decreased enteric methane and carbon dioxide emissions (P<0.05), even though the concentration of phytochemical compounds among cultivars was not variable (P>0.05). <strong>Implications</strong>. Understanding the impact of changing forage chemical composition on reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in dairy systems is an important issue for mitigating climate change. <strong>Conclusions</strong>. The inclusion of sorghum silage in this study slightly reduced enteric methane and carbon dioxide emissions. Under these conditions, it is suggested that more information be provided on greenhouse gas emission factors and mitigation strategies in small-scale production systems.</p>

_ Maritime transport accounts for around 3% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Well-to-Wake). These GHG emissions must be reduced by at least 50% in absolute values by 2050 to contribute to the ambitions of the Paris Agreement signed in 2015. Switching to zero-carbon fuels made from renewable sources (hydro, wind, or solar) is seen by many as the most promising option to deliver the desired GHG reductions. However, renewable energy is a scarce resource that gives a much larger GHG reduction spent within other sectors. This study explores how to reach the IMO 2050 GHG targets exclusively through energy efficiency measures. The results indicate that by combining wind-assisted ship propulsion (WASP) with a slender hull form, fuel consumption and GHG emissions can be reduced by 30–35%, at a negative abatement cost for speeds exceeding 8 knots. Where the cost saving increases with the speed because at higher speeds, the fuel accounts for a higher share of the total cost, which implies that the cost saving goes from zero at 8 knots, to 5% reduction at 11 knots average speed to 14% reduction of total cost with 15 knots average speed. In comparison, GHG reductions through zero-carbon fuels will increase transport costs by 50–200%. Introduction From the first days of our civilization, sea transport has enabled regional and global trades. Today, sea transport accounts for 80% of the global trade measured in ton-miles (UNCTAD 2021) and 3% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions measured Well-to-Wake (Lindstad et al. 2021). More than 40% of this sea trade is performed by dry bulkers, making them the real workhorses of the sea. Even though sea transport is energy efficient compared to other transport modes, all sectors need to reduce their GHG emissions by at least 50% in absolute values by 2050 to contribute to the Paris Agreement (UNFCCC 2015). According to Bouman et al. (2017), the desired energy and GHG reductions can be achieved through: Design and other technical improvements of ships; Operational improvements; Fuels with zero or low GHG footprints; or a combination of these.

Urban water cycle systems(UWCS), including water treatment facilities, distribution facilities, sewers, and wastewater treatment facilities, are energy intensive and significant source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, making the reduction of GHG emissions and the transition to eco-friendly energy essential. This study identifies specific GHG emission sources at each stage of the UWCS and proposes detailed methods to achieve a 40% reduction in GHG emissions, implement RE100, and attain Net Zero by employing insets and offsets. This study develops scenarios for insets and offsets based on the baseline process of the UWCS, and investigates potential pathways to reduce GHG emissions by quantifying emissions from each process. Internal insets, which are self-implemented and technical measures, are prioritized, while external offsets are applied to compensate for the remaining emissions. Internal insets include the application of anaerobic digesters and combined heat and power(CHP), improvements in energy efficiency of equipment, reduction in water pipe leakage, implementation of water footprint labeling, and installation of on-site photovoltaic system. External offsets comprise renewable energy certificates(REC), power purchase agreements(PPA), green hydrogen fuel for vehicles, natural sequestration improvement, and emission trading system. GHG emissions at each stage within the UWCS are quantified using modeling software. Based on these results, the effectiveness of insets and offsets in achieving a 40% GHG emissions reduction, Net Zero, and RE100 goal is analyzed. The baseline total GHG emissions for the UWCS are estimated at 4,732.8 tCO2eq/yr, of which 56.8% is identified as targets for internal insets, and the remaining 43.2% is reduced through external offsets. A 40% GHG reduction can be achieved through internal insets, and Net Zero can be attained by incorporating additionally applying external offsets. The total power demand of UWCS facilities and equipment is calculated as 572.8 kW. Renewable energy is generated through anaerobic digesters and CHP(116.1kW) as well as on-site PV(395.0 kW), while RE100 compliance is achieved by securing an aditional 61.7 kW through REC/PPA. Achieving Net Zero and RE100 requires prioritizing strategies for insets, offsets and efficient resource allocation. For this, the technical feasibility and self-implementation potential of reduction efforts and the external conditions for offsets, should be carefully reviewed to optimize implementation strategies. GHG reduction and renewable energy utilization in the UWCS are key priorities for addressing the climate crisis and achieving sustainable water resource management, requiring technological innovation and institutional support. The comprehensive and systematic application of GHG insets and offsets is the optimal approach to achieving these goals. Furthermore, modeling software serves as a key tool for quantifying GHG emissions and formulating concrete, viable GHG reduction strategies. In addition to the technical and institutional approaches proposed in this study, achieving Net Zero and implementing RE100 requires the integrated consideration of economic factors in the future.

Abstract. Several strategies are available for mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with dairy manure management in barns, storage units, and fields. For instance, incorporation of manure into the soil, solid-liquid separation, composting, enclosed manure storage, and anaerobic digestion have been identified as good options. However, these strategies are not widely adopted in Canada because clear information on their effectiveness to abate the whole-farm GHG footprint is lacking. Better information on the most cost-effective options for reducing on-farm GHG emissions would assist decision making for dairy producers and foster adoption of the most promising approaches on Canadian dairies. In this context, whole-farm modeling provides a tool for evaluating different GHG abatement strategies. An Excel-based linear optimization model (N-CyCLES) was used to assess the economics and the nutrient and GHG footprints of two representative dairy farms in Québec, Canada. The farms were located in regions with contrasting climates (southwestern and eastern Québec). The model was developed to optimize feeding, cropping, and manure handling as a single unit of management, considering the aforementioned mitigation options. Greenhouse gas emissions from the different simulated milk production systems reached 1.27 to 1.85 kg CO2e kg-1 of corrected milk, allowing GHG reductions of up to 25% compared to the base system described in Part I. Solid-liquid separation had the greatest GHG mitigation potential, followed by the digester-like strategy involving a tight cover for gas burning. However, both options implied a decrease in farm net income. Manure incorporation into the soil and composting were associated with high investment relative to their GHG abatement potential. The most cost-effective option was using a loose cover on the manure storage unit. This approach lessened the manure volume and ammonia-N volatilization, thereby reducing fertilizer and manure spreading costs, increasing crop sales and profit, and enhancing the whole-farm N and GHG footprints. Consequently, covering the manure tanks appears to be an economically viable practice for Québec dairy farms. Keywords: Anaerobic digestion, Composting, Dairy cow, Farm net income, Greenhouse gas emission, Incorporation, Nutrient footprint, Solid-liquid separation, Storage cover, Whole-farm model.

The Earth's surface temperature is steadily increasing due to the accumulation of greenhouse gases, a phenomenon known as global warming. Human activities are the root cause of this significant global issue. Reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is one of the most critical actions in climate change mitigation. Organizations can engage in activities that promote change and reduce greenhouse gases by acknowledging the significance of addressing climate change. By reducing GHG emissions and promoting the use of renewable energy, organizations can begin to address environmental issues. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation is to assess the reduction of GHG emissions in an educational institution by substituting electricity consumption from the electrical grid with renewable energy in the form of a solar PV rooftop on-grid system. The School of Renewable Energy's GHG emissions were assessed, covering three scopes of GHG emissions activities: direct emissions, indirect emissions, and other indirect emissions. The organization's activity data were collected over a 12-month period. Without installing a solar panel system, the organization reported total GHG emissions of 310.40 tCO2e, relying solely on imported electricity for internal use. The highest GHG emissions were from Scope 2, amounting to 239.38 tCO2e, primarily due to electricity importation. Scope 3 had the second highest GHG emissions, totaling 65.76 tCO2e, resulting from employee commuting and the use of purchased goods such as paper and tap water. Scope 1 had the lowest GHG emissions at 5.26 tCO2e, produced by the combustion of diesel and gasoline in both stationary and mobile sources, as well as CH4 emissions from the septic tank. The percentage of GHG emissions from Scope 2 activities was 77.12%, which was considered to have a significant environmental impact and contribute to global warming. This was because 478,851 kWh of electricity were imported. The installation of on-grid solar cells for power generation reduced imported electricity to 113,120 kWh. Consequently, GHG emissions from Scope 2 decreased to 56.55 tCO2e, leading to an overall reduction in the organization's GHG emissions to 127.57 tCO2e. The organization's GHG emissions decreased by 182.83 tCO2e as a result of using alternative energy to generate electricity. This assessment can serve as a database for educational institutions and prepare the government to report greenhouse gas emissions. Furthermore, it can serve as carbon credits for trading and exchanging carbon with other organizations to offset GHG emissions from various activities. In addition, it endorses the government's goal of achieving carbon neutrality and net zero emissions in the future.

In their article discussing the impacts of farm animal production on climate change, Koneswaran and Nierenberg (2008) called for “immediate and far-reaching changes in current animal agriculture practices” to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. One of their recommendations was to switch to organic livestock production, stating that Raising cattle for beef organically on grass, in contrast to fattening confined cattle on concentrated feed, may emit 40% less GHGs and consume 85% less energy than conventionally produced beef. These claims are terribly misleading. Koneswaran and Nierenberg (2008) compared organic beef produced in Sweden (22.3 kg of carbon dioxide-equivalent GHG emissions per kilogram of beef) with unusual and resource-intensive Kobe beef production in Japan (36.4 kg of CO2-equivalent GHG emissions per kilogram) (Cederberg and Stadig 2003; Ogino et al. 2007). To achieve the ultra-high fat levels in meat preferred by Japanese consumers, Japan’s wagyu cattle are raised and fattened for more than twice as long as typical U.S. beef cattle (Cattle Marketing Information Service Inc. 2007; Ogino et al. 2007). Moreover, all of the feed and forage for the Japanese animals (from birth through slaughter) must be shipped especially long distances—> 18,000 miles in the example cited. Hence, this beef has ultra-high GHG emissions and energy requirements. According to several analyses, typical nonorganic beef production in the United States results in only 22 kg of CO2-equivalent GHG emissions per kilogram of beef, which is 0.3 kg less than the Swedish organic beef system (Johnson et al. 2003; Subak 1999). These comprehensive life cycle analyses, which examined all aspects of beef production and all GHG emissions, seem to definitively rule out significant reductions in GHG emissions by switching to organic beef production. In fact, if nitrous oxide and other emissions from land conversion are included in the analysis, a large-scale shift to organic, grass-based extensive livestock production methods would increase overall GHG emissions by nearly 60% per pound of beef produced. According to Searchinger et al. (2008), each acre of cleared land results in 10,400 lb/acre/year of CO2-equivalent GHG (over a 30-year period, based on estimated emissions from a proportion of each land type converted to cultivation in the 1990s). Our own analysis (Avery and Avery 2007) using conservative beef production parameters from Iowa State University’s Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture shows that grain-finishing cattle is at least three times more land efficient per pound of finished beef compared to grass-finishing. Cattle industry statistics [U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2008] show that, in 2007, the United States used 2 billion bushels of corn to produce 22.16 billion lb finished grain-fed beef (17.3 million head steers and 10.2 million head heifers at average dressed weights of 830.2 and 764.8 lb, respectively). At 150 bushels/acre corn, this means we used 13.3 million acres to produce the feed grains. Converting all beef production to grass-based finishing would require at least an additional 26.6 million acres of pasture/grass to produce 2007 U.S. beef output. Using the 22 lb of CO2-equivalent GHG per pound of grain-fed beef from Johnson et al. (2003) and the 22.3 lb CO2-equivalent GHG per pound of beef for organic grass of Cederberg and Stadig (2003), each system producing 22.16 billion lb of beef would directly and indirectly result in 487.5 and 494.2 billion lb of CO2-equivalent GHG emissions, respectively. However, adding the “carbon debt” resulting from the additional cleared land required by the two-thirds less efficient grass finishing process (26.6 million acres × 10,400 lb/acre/year, or 276.6 billion lb/year) results in the organic system totaling 770 billion lb of CO2-equivalent GHG emissions; or 58% higher than the conventional system’s total of 487.5 billion lb.

BackgroundSocietal pressures exist to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from farm animals, especially in beef cattle. Both total GHG and GHG emissions per unit of product decrease as productivity increases. Limitations of previous studies on GHG emissions are that they generally describe feed intake inadequately, assess the consequences of selection on particular traits only, or examine consequences for only part of the production chain. Here, we examine GHG emissions for the whole production chain, with the estimated cost of carbon included as an extra cost on traits in the breeding objective of the production system.MethodsWe examined an example beef production system where economic merit was measured from weaning to slaughter. The estimated cost of the carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) associated with feed intake change is included in the economic values calculated for the breeding objective traits and comes in addition to the cost of the feed associated with trait change. GHG emission effects on the production system are accumulated over the breeding objective traits, and the reduction in GHG emissions is evaluated, for different carbon prices, both for the individual animal and the production system.ResultsMultiple-trait selection in beef cattle can reduce total GHG and GHG emissions per unit of product while increasing economic performance if the cost of feed in the breeding objective is high. When carbon price was $10, $20, $30 and $40/ton CO2-e, selection decreased total GHG emissions by 1.1, 1.6, 2.1 and 2.6% per generation, respectively. When the cost of feed for the breeding objective was low, selection reduced total GHG emissions only if carbon price was high (~ $80/ton CO2-e). Ignoring the costs of GHG emissions when feed cost was low substantially increased emissions (e.g. 4.4% per generation or ~ 8.8% in 10 years).ConclusionsThe ability to reduce GHG emissions in beef cattle depends on the cost of feed in the breeding objective of the production system. Multiple-trait selection will reduce emissions, while improving economic performance, if the cost of feed in the breeding objective is high. If it is low, greater growth will be favoured, leading to an increase in GHG emissions that may be undesirable.

Electrified vehicles, including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and battery electric vehicles (BEVs), have the potential to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from personal transportation by shifting energy demand from gasoline to electricity. GHG reduction potential depends on vehicle design, adoption, driving and charging patterns, charging infrastructure, and electricity generation mix. We construct an optimization model to study these factors by determining optimal design of conventional vehicles (CVs), hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), PHEVs, and BEVs and optimal allocation of vehicle designs and charging infrastructure in the fleet for minimum lifecycle GHG emissions over a range of scenarios. We focus on vehicles with similar size and acceleration to a Toyota Prius under urban EPA driving conditions. We find that under today’s U.S. average grid mix, the vehicle fleet allocated for minimum GHG emissions includes HEVs and PHEVs with ~30 miles (48 km) of electric range. Allocating only CVs, HEVs, PHEVs, or BEVs will produce 86%, 1%, 0%, or 13+% more life cycle GHG emissions, respectively. Unlike BEVs, PHEVs do consume some gasoline; however, PHEVs can power a large portion of vehicle miles on electrical energy while accommodating infrequent long trips without need for a large battery pack, with its corresponding production and weight implications. Availability of workplace charging for 90% of vehicles optimistically reduces optimized GHG emissions by 0.5%. Under decarbonized grid scenarios, larger battery packs are more competitive and reduce life cycle GHG emissions significantly. Future work will relax modeling assumptions and address life cycle cost and cost-effectiveness of GHG reductions.