Climate mitigation by dairy intensification depends on intensive use of spared grassland

Milk and beef production cause 9% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Previous life cycle assessment (LCA) studies have shown that dairy intensification reduces the carbon footprint of milk by increasing animal productivity and feed conversion efficiency. None of these studies simultaneously evaluated indirect GHG effects incurred via teleconnections with expansion of feed crop production and replacement suckler‐beef production. We applied consequential LCA to incorporate these effects into GHG mitigation calculations for intensification scenarios among grazing‐based dairy farms in an industrialized country (UK), in which milk production shifts from average to intensive farm typologies, involving higher milk yields per cow and more maize and concentrate feed in cattle diets. Attributional LCA indicated a reduction of up to 0.10 kg CO₂e kg^?1 milk following intensification, reflecting improved feed conversion efficiency. However, consequential LCA indicated that land use change associated with increased demand for maize and concentrate feed, plus additional suckler‐beef production to replace reduced dairy‐beef output, significantly increased GHG emissions following intensification. International displacement of replacement suckler‐beef production to the “global beef frontier” in Brazil resulted in small GHG savings for the UK GHG inventory, but contributed to a net increase in international GHG emissions equivalent to 0.63 kg CO₂e kg^?1 milk. Use of spared dairy grassland for intensive beef production can lead to net GHG mitigation by replacing extensive beef production, enabling afforestation on larger areas of lower quality grassland, or by avoiding expansion of international (Brazilian) beef production. We recommend that LCA boundaries are expanded when evaluating livestock intensification pathways, to avoid potentially misleading conclusions being drawn from “snapshot” carbon footprints. We conclude that dairy intensification in industrialized countries can lead to significant international carbon leakage, and only achieves GHG mitigation when spared dairy grassland is used to intensify beef production, freeing up larger areas for afforestation.     

Intensification of dairy production can increase the GHG mitigation potential of the land use sector in East Africa

Sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA) could face food shortages in the future because of its growing population. Agricultural expansion causes forest degradation in SSA through livestock grazing, reducing forest carbon (C) sinks and increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Therefore, intensification should produce more food while reducing pressure on forests. This study assessed the potential for the dairy sector in Kenya to contribute to low‐emissions development by exploring three feeding scenarios. The analyses used empirical spatially explicit data, and a simulation model to quantify milk production, agricultural emissions and forest C loss due to grazing. The scenarios explored improvements in forage quality (Fo), feed conservation (Fe) and concentrate supplementation (Co): FoCo fed high‐quality Napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum), FeCo supplemented maize silage and FoFeCo a combination of Napier, silage and concentrates. Land shortages and forest C loss due to grazing were quantified with land requirements and feed availability around forests. All scenarios increased milk yields by 44%–51%, FoCo reduced GHG emission intensity from 2.4 ± 0.1 to 1.6 ± 0.1 kg CO₂eq per kg milk, FeCo reduced it to 2.2 ± 0.1, whereas FoFeCo increased it to 2.7 ± 0.2 kg CO₂eq per kg milk because of land use change emissions. Closing the yield gap of maize by increasing N fertilizer use reduced emission intensities by 17% due to reduced emissions from conversion of grazing land. FoCo was the only scenario that mitigated agricultural and forest emissions by reducing emission intensity by 33% and overall emissions by 2.5% showing that intensification of dairy in a low‐income country can increase milk yields without increasing emissions. There are, however, risks of C leakage if agricultural and forest policies are not aligned leading to loss of forest to produce concentrates. This approach will aid the assessment of the climate‐smartness of livestock production practices at the national level in East Africa.     

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

To identify mitigation options to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from milk production (i.e. the carbon footprint (CF) of milk), this study examined the variation in GHG emissions among dairy farms using data from previous CF studies on Swedish milk. Variations between farms in these production data, which were found to have a strong influence on milk CF, were obtained from existing databases of 1051 dairy farms in Sweden in 2005. Monte Carlo (MC) analysis was used to analyse the impact of variations in seven important parameters on milk CF concerning milk yield (energy-corrected milk (ECM) produced and delivered), feed dry matter intake (DMI), enteric CH4 emissions, N content in feed DMI, N-fertiliser rate and diesel used on farm. The largest between-farm variations among the analysed production data were N-fertiliser rate (kg/ha) and diesel used (l/ha) on farm (CV = 31% to 38%). For the parameters concerning milk yield and feed DMI, the CV was approximately 11% and 8%, respectively. The smallest variation in production data was found for N content in feed DMI. According to the MC analysis, these variations in production data led to a variation in milk CF of between 0.94 and 1.33 kg CO2 equivalents (CO2e)/kg ECM, with an average value of 1.13 kg CO2e/kg ECM. We consider that this variation of ±17%, which was found to be based on the used farm data, would be even greater if all Swedish dairy farms were included, as the sample of farms in this study was not totally unbiased. The variation identified in milk CF indicates that a potential exists to reduce GHG emissions from milk production on both the national and farm levels through changes in management. As milk yield and feed DMI are two of the most influential parameters for milk CF, feed conversion efficiency (i.e. units ECM produced/unit DMI) can be used as a rough key performance indicator for predicting CF reductions. However, it must be borne in mind that feeds have different CF due to where and how they are produced.     

Estimating the impact of clinical mastitis in dairy cows on greenhouse gas emissions using a dynamic stochastic simulation model: a case study

The increasing attention for global warming is likely to contribute to the introduction of policies or other incentives to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions related to livestock production, including dairy. The dairy sector is an important contributor to GHG emissions. Clinical mastitis (CM), an intramammary infection, results in reduced milk production and fertility, increases culling and mortality of cows and, therefore, has a negative impact on the efficiency (output/input) of milk production. This may increase GHG emissions per unit of product. Our objective was to estimate the impact of CM in dairy cows on GHG emissions of milk production for the Dutch situation. A dynamic stochastic simulation model was developed to simulate the dynamics and losses of CM for individual lactations. Cows receive a parity (1 to 5+), a milk production and a calving interval (CI). Based on the parity, cows have a risk of CM, with a maximum of three cases in a lactation. Pathogens causing CM were classified as gram-positive bacteria, gram-negative bacteria, or other. Based on the parity and pathogen combinations, cows had a reduced milk production, discarded milk, prolonged CI and a risk of removal (culling and mortality) that reduce productivity of dairy cows and therefore increase GHG emissions per unit of product. Using life cycle assessment, emissions of GHGs were estimated from cradle to farm gate for processes along the milk production chain that are affected by CM. Processes included were feed production, enteric fermentation, and manure management. Emissions of GHGs were expressed as kg CO₂ equivalents per ton of fat-and-protein-corrected milk (kg CO₂e/t FPCM). Emissions of cows with CM increased on average by 57.5 (6.2%) kg CO₂e/t FPCM compared with cows without CM. This increase was caused by removal (39%), discarded milk (38%), reduced milk production (17%) and prolonged CI (6%). The GHG emissions increased by 48 kg CO₂e/t FPCM for cows with one case of CM, by 69 kg CO₂e/t FPCM for cows with two cases of CM and by 92 kg CO₂e/t FPCM for cows with three cases of CM compared with cows without CM. Preventing CM can be an effective strategy for farmers to reduce GHG emissions and can contribute to sustainable development of the dairy sector, because this also can improve the income of farmers and the welfare of cows. The impact of CM on GHG emissions, however, will vary between farms due to environmental conditions and management practices.     

Decoupling of greenhouse gas emissions from global agricultural production: 1970–2050

Since 1970 global agricultural production has more than doubled; contributing ~1/4 of total anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) burden in 2010. Food production must increase to feed our growing demands, but to address climate change, GHG emissions must decrease. Using an identity approach, we estimate and analyse past trends in GHG emission intensities from global agricultural production and land‐use change and project potential future emissions. The novel Kaya–Porter identity framework deconstructs the entity of emissions from a mix of multiple sources of GHGs into attributable elements allowing not only a combined analysis of the total level of all emissions jointly with emissions per unit area and emissions per unit product. It also allows us to examine how a change in emissions from a given source contributes to the change in total emissions over time. We show that agricultural production and GHGs have been steadily decoupled over recent decades. Emissions peaked in 1991 at ~12 Pg CO₂‐eq. yr^?1 and have not exceeded this since. Since 1970 GHG emissions per unit product have declined by 39% and 44% for crop‐ and livestock‐production, respectively. Except for the energy‐use component of farming, emissions from all sources have increased less than agricultural production. Our projected business‐as‐usual range suggests that emissions may be further decoupled by 20–55% giving absolute agricultural emissions of 8.2–14.5 Pg CO₂‐eq. yr^?1 by 2050, significantly lower than many previous estimates that do not allow for decoupling. Beyond this, several additional costcompetitive mitigation measures could reduce emissions further. However, agricultural GHG emissions can only be reduced to a certain level and a simultaneous focus on other parts of the food‐system is necessary to increase food security whilst reducing emissions. The identity approach presented here could be used as a methodological framework for more holistic food systems analysis.     

Cattle feed or bioenergy? Consequential life cycle assessment of biogas feedstock options on dairy farms

On‐farm anaerobic digestion (AD) of wastes and crops can potentially avoid greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but incurs extensive environmental effects via carbon and nitrogen cycles and substitution of multiple processes within and outside farm system boundaries. Farm models were combined with consequential life cycle assessment (CLCA) to assess plausible biogas and miscanthus heating pellet scenarios on dairy farms. On the large dairy farm, the introduction of slurry‐only AD led to reductions in global warming potential (GWP) and resource depletion burdens of 14% and 67%, respectively, but eutrophication and acidification burden increases of 9% and 10%, respectively, assuming open tank digestate storage. Marginal GWP burdens per Mg dry matter (DM) feedstock codigested with slurry ranged from –637 kg CO₂e for food waste to +509 kg CO₂e for maize. Codigestion of grass and maize led to increased imports of concentrate feed to the farm, negating the GWP benefits of grid electricity substitution. Attributing grass‐to‐arable land use change (LUC) to marginal wheat feed production led to net GWP burdens exceeding 900 kg CO₂e Mg^?1 maize DM codigested. Converting the medium‐sized dairy farm to a beef‐plus‐AD farm led to a minor reduction in GWP when grass‐to‐arable LUC was excluded, but a 38% GWP increase when such LUC was attributed to marginal maize and wheat feed required for intensive compensatory milk production. If marginal animal feed is derived from soybeans cultivated on recently converted cropland in South America, the net GWP burden increases to 4099 kg CO₂e Mg^?1 maize DM codigested – equivalent to 55 Mg CO₂e yr^?1 per hectare used for AD‐maize cultivation. We conclude that AD of slurry and food waste on dairy farms is an effective GHG mitigation option, but that the quantity of codigested crops should be strictly limited to avoid potentially large international carbon leakage via animal feed displacement.     

Energy balances and greenhouse gas emissions of palm oil biodiesel in Indonesia

This study presents a cradle‐to‐gate assessment of the energy balances and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of Indonesian palm oil biodiesel production, including the stages of land‐use change (LUC), agricultural phase, transportation, milling, biodiesel processing, and comparing the results from different farming systems, including company plantations and smallholder plantations (either out growers or independent growers) in different locations in Kalimantan and Sumatra of Indonesia. The findings demonstrate that there are considerable differences between the farming systems and the locations in net energy yields (43.6–49.2 GJ t^?1 biodiesel yr^?1) as well as GHG emissions (1969.6–5626.4 kg CO_2eq t^?1 biodiesel yr^?1). The output to input ratios are positive in all cases. The largest GHG emissions result from LUC effects, followed by the transesterification, fertilizer production, agricultural production processes, milling, and transportation. Ecosystem carbon payback times range from 11 to 42 years.     

Carbon footprint and land requirement for dairy herd rations: impacts of feed production practices and regional climate variations

Feed production is a significant source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from dairy production and demands large arable and pasture acreage. This study analysed how regional conditions influence GHG emissions of dairy feed rations in a life cycle perspective, that is the carbon footprint (CF) and the land area required. Factors assessed included regional climate variations, grass/clover silage nutrient quality, feedstuff availability, crop yield and feed losses. Using the Nordic feed evaluation model NorFor, rations were optimised for different phases of lactation, dry and growing periods for older cows, first calvers and heifers by regional feed advisors and combined to annual herd rations. Feed production data at farm level were based on national statistics and studies. CF estimates followed standards for life cycle assessment and used emissions factors provided by IPCC. The functional unit was ‘feed consumption to produce 1 kg energy corrected milk (ECM) from a cow with annual milk yield of 9 900 kg ECM including replacement animals and feed losses’. Feed ration CF varied from 417 to 531 g CO₂ e/kg ECM. Grass/clover silage contributed more than 50% of total GHG emissions. Use of higher quality silage increased ration CF by up to 5% as a result of an additional cut and increased rates of synthetic N-fertiliser. Domestically produced horse bean (Vicia faba), by-products from the sugar industry and maize silage were included in the rations with the lowest CF, but horse bean significantly increased ration land requirement. Rations required between 1.4 to 2 m² cropland and 0.1 to 0.2 m²/kg semi-natural grassland per kg ECM and year. Higher yield levels reduced ration total CF. Inclusion of GHG emissions from land use change associated with Brazilian soya feed significantly increased ration CF. Ration CF and land use depended on ration composition, which was highly influenced by the regional availability and production of feedstuffs. The impact of individual feedstuffs on ration CF varies due to, for example, cultivation practices and climate conditions and feedstuffs should therefore be assessed in a ration and regional perspective before being used to decrease milk CF. Land use efficiency should be considered together with ration CF, as these can generate goal conflicts.     

Meat,dairy, and more: Analysis of material,energy, and greenhouse gas flows of the meat and dairy supply chains in the EU28 for 2016

To decarbonize the European Union, protein consumption must transition to diets low in meat and dairy which will drastically change the material and energy flows in current meat and dairy supply chains. To understand the impacts on current flows, a baseline is required. Although recent studies have improved the scope of reported greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, no quantitative overview exists including intermediate and final product flows. To address this knowledge gap, we structured the meat and dairy supply chains into a connected set of transformation nodes and distribution nodes. The former are processes transforming inputs into outputs, whereas the latter distribute the outputs to other processes using them as inputs. Currently, livestock play a central role in agriculture and other industries through the consumption of 271 Mt fodder crops, 108 Mt grain, 85 Mt grazed biomass, 49 Mt oil meal, and 16 Mt feed by‐products. This feed is transformed into 64 Mt dairy and 35 Mt meat which ensures that the EU28 is a net exporter of meat and dairy while providing 25 Mt of by‐products. This production also leads to 435 Mt CO₂‐eq. with the main contribution from beef cattle (35%), dairy cattle (32%), and swine (20%). Thus, the lower GHG intensities of dairy products compared to meat do not imply a low contribution to the total emissions. By mapping the material, energy, and GHG emission flows, we have created a baseline suitable for identifying potential supply chain changes and their related GHG increase or decrease resulting from the protein transition.     

Localising livestock protein feed production and the impact on land use and greenhouse gas emissions

Livestock farmers in Sweden usually grow feed grains for livestock but import protein feed from outside Sweden. Aside from the economic implications, some environmental issues are associated with this practice. We used life cycle assessment to evaluate the impact of local protein feed production on land use and greenhouse gas emissions, compared with the use of imported protein feed, for pig meat and dairy milk produced in Sweden. Our results showed that local production reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 4.5% and 12%, respectively, for pigs and dairy cows. Land use for feed production in Sweden increased by 11% for pigs and 25% for dairy cows, but total land use decreased for pig production and increased for dairy milk production. Increased protein feed cultivation in Sweden decreased inputs needed for animal production and improved some ecological processes (e.g. nutrient recycling) of the farm systems. However, the differences in results between scenarios are relatively small and influenced to an extent by methodological choices such as co-product allocation. Moreover, it was difficult to assess the contribution of greenhouse emissions from land use change. The available accounting methods we applied did not adequately account for the potential land use changes and in some cases provided conflicting results. We conclude that local protein feed production presents an opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but at a cost of increasing land occupation in Sweden for feed production.     

The impacts of Japanese food losses and food waste on global natural resources and greenhouse gas emissions

Japan depends heavily on imports for its food supply. Since 2000, the food self‐sufficiency ratio has remained approximately 40% on a caloric basis. Japanese food wastage (i.e., food losses and food waste) is estimated to have been 6.42 million tonnes (50 kg per capita of wastage) in 2012. These values indicate that food wastage leads to wasted natural resources and excessive greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions both in Japan and in countries that export to Japan. This study estimates Japanese food wastage by food item to evaluate impacts on land and water resources and global GHG emissions during the processing, distribution, and consumption phases of the food supply chain while also considering the feed crops needed for livestock production. Despite uncertainties due to data limitations, in 2012, 1.23 million hectares of harvested land were used to produce food that was eventually wasted, and 413 million m³ of water resources were wasted due to Japanese food wastage in agricultural production. Furthermore, unnecessary GHG emissions were 3.51 million tonnes of CO₂ eq. in agricultural production and 0.49 million tonnes of CO₂ eq. in international transportation. The outcomes of the present study can be used to develop countermeasures to food wastage in industrializing Asian countries where food imports are projected to increase and food wastage issues in the consumption stage are expected to become as serious as they currently are in Japan.     

Does increasing milk yield per cow reduce greenhouse gas emissions? A system approach

Milk yield per cow has continuously increased in many countries over the last few decades. In addition to potential economic advantages, this is often considered an important strategy to decrease greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per kg of milk produced. However, it should be considered that milk and beef production systems are closely interlinked, as fattening of surplus calves from dairy farming and culled dairy cows play an important role in beef production in many countries. The main objective of this study was to quantify the effect of increasing milk yield per cow on GHG emissions and on other side effects. Two scenarios were modelled: constant milk production at the farm level and decreasing beef production (as co-product; Scenario 1); and both milk and beef production kept constant by compensating the decline in beef production with beef from suckler cow production (Scenario 2). Model calculations considered two types of production unit (PU): dairy cow PU and suckler cow PU. A dairy cow PU comprises not only milk output from the dairy cow, but also beef output from culled cows and the fattening system for surplus calves. The modelled dairy cow PU differed in milk yield per cow per year (6000, 8000 and 10 000 kg) and breed. Scenario 1 resulted in lower GHG emissions with increasing milk yield per cow. However, when milk and beef outputs were kept constant (Scenario 2), GHG emissions remained approximately constant with increasing milk yield from 6000 to 8000 kg/cow per year, whereas further increases in milk yield (10 000 kg milk/cow per year) resulted in slightly higher (8%) total GHG emissions. Within Scenario 2, two different allocation methods to handle co-products (surplus calves and beef from culled cows) from dairy cow production were evaluated. Results showed that using the 'economic allocation method', GHG emissions per kg milk decreased with increasing milk yield per cow per year, from 1.06 kg CO2 equivalents (CO2eq) to 0.89 kg CO2eq for the 6000 and 10 000 kg yielding dairy cow, respectively. However, emissions per kg of beef increased from 10.75 kg CO2eq to 16.24 kg CO2eq due to the inclusion of suckler cows. This study shows that the environmental impact (GHG emissions) of increasing milk yield per cow in dairy farming differs, depending upon the considered system boundaries, handling and value of co-products and the assumed ratio of milk to beef demand to be satisfied.     

Animal board invited review: Specialising and intensifying cattle production for better efficiency and less global warming: contrasting results for milk and meat co-production at different scales

Cattle are the world’s largest consumers of plant biomass. Digestion of this biomass by ruminants generates high methane emissions that affect global warming. In the last decades, the specialisation of cattle breeds and livestock systems towards either milk or meat has increased the milk production of dairy cows and the carcass weight of slaughtered cattle. At the animal level and farm level, improved animal performance decreases feed use and greenhouse gas emissions per kg of milk or carcass weight, mainly through a dilution of maintenance requirements per unit of product. However, increasing milk production per dairy cow reduces meat production from the dairy sector, as there are fewer dairy cows. More beef cows are then required if one wants to maintain the same meat production level at country scale. Meat produced from the dairy herd has a better feed efficiency (less feed required per kg of carcass weight) and emits less methane than the meat produced by the cow-calf systems, because the intake of lactating cows is largely for milk production and marginally for meat, whereas the intake of beef cows is entirely for meat. Consequently, the benefits of breed specialisation assessed at the animal level and farm level may not hold when milk and meat productions are considered together. Any change in the milk-to-meat production ratio at the country level affects the numbers of beef cows required to produce meat. At the world scale, a broad diversity in feed efficiencies of cattle products is observed. Where both productions of milk per dairy cow and meat per head of cattle are low, the relationship between milk and meat efficiencies is positive. Improved management practices (feed, reproduction, health) increase the feed efficiency of both products. Where milk and meat productivities are high, a trade-off between feed efficiencies of milk and meat can be observed in relation to the share of meat produced in either the dairy sector or the beef sector. As a result, in developing countries, increasing productivities of both dairy and beef cattle herds will increase milk and meat efficiencies, reduce land use and decrease methane emissions. In other regions of the world, increasing meat production from young animals produced by dairy cows is probably a better option to reduce feed use for an unchanged milk-to-meat production ratio.     

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

Life cycle assessment (LCA) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) guideline methodology, which are the principal greenhouse gas (GHG) quantification methods, were evaluated in this study using a dairy farm GHG model. The model was applied to estimate GHG emissions from two contrasting dairy systems: a seasonal calving pasture-based dairy farm and a total confinement dairy system. Data used to quantify emissions from these systems originated from a research study carried out over a 1-year period in Ireland. The genetic merit of cows modelled was similar for both systems. Total mixed ration was fed in the Confinement system, whereas grazed grass was mainly fed in the grass-based system. GHG emissions from these systems were quantified per unit of product and area. The results of both methods showed that the dairy system that emitted the lowest GHG emissions per unit area did not necessarily emit the lowest GHG emissions possible for a given level of product. Consequently, a recommendation from this study is that GHG emissions be evaluated per unit of product given the growing affluent human population and increasing demand for dairy products. The IPCC and LCA methods ranked dairy systems’ GHG emissions differently. For instance, the IPCC method quantified that the Confinement system reduced GHG emissions per unit of product by 8% compared with the grass-based system, but the LCA approach calculated that the Confinement system increased emissions by 16% when off-farm emissions associated with primary dairy production were included. Thus, GHG emissions should be quantified using approaches that quantify the total GHG emissions associated with the production system, so as to determine whether the dairy system was causing emissions displacement. The IPCC and LCA methods were also used in this study to simulate, through a dairy farm GHG model, what effect management changes within both production systems have on GHG emissions. The findings suggest that single changes have a small mitigating effect on GHG emissions (<5%), except for strategies used to control emissions from manure storage in the Confinement system (14% to 24%). However, when several management strategies were combined, GHG emissions per unit of product could be reduced significantly (15% to 30%). The LCA method was identified as the preferred approach to assess the effect of management changes on GHG emissions, but the analysis indicated that further standardisation of the approach is needed given the sensitivity of the approach to allocation decisions regarding milk and meat.     

Production,partial cash flows and greenhouse gas emissions of simulated dairy herds with extended lactations

The transition period is the most critical period in the lactation cycle of dairy cows. Extended lactations reduce the frequency of transition periods, the number of calves and the related labour for farmers. This study aimed to assess the impact of 2 and 4 months extended lactations on milk yield and net partial cash flow (NPCF) at herd level, and on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per unit of fat- and protein-corrected milk (FPCM), using a stochastic simulation model. The model simulated individual lactations for 100 herds of 100 cows with a baseline lactation length (BL), and for 100 herds with lactations extended by 2 or 4 months for all cows (All+2 and All+4), or for heifers only (H+2 and H+4). Baseline lactation length herds produced 887 t (SD: 13) milk/year. The NPCF, based on revenues for milk, surplus calves and culled cows, and costs for feed, artificial insemination, calving management and rearing of youngstock, was k€174 (SD: 4)/BL herd per year. Extended lactations reduced milk yield of the herd by 4.1% for All+2, 6.9% for All+4, 1.1% for H+2 and 2.2% for H+4, and reduced the NPCF per herd per year by k€7 for All+2, k€12 for All+4, k€2 for H+2 and k€4 for H+4 compared with BL herds. Extended lactations increased GHG emissions in CO₂-equivalents per t FPCM by 1.0% for All+2, by 1.7% for All+4, by 0.2% for H+2 and by 0.4% for H+4, but this could be compensated by an increase in lifespan of dairy cows. Subsequently, production level and lactation persistency were increased to assess the importance of these aspects for the impact of extended lactations. The increase in production level and lactation persistency increased milk production of BL herds by 30%. Moreover, reductions in milk yield for All+2 and All+4 compared with BL herds were only 0.7% and 1.1% per year, and milk yield in H+2 and H+4 herds was similar to BL herds. The resulting NPCF was equal to BL for All+2 and All+4 and increased by k€1 for H+2 and H+4 due to lower costs for insemination and calving management. Moreover, GHG emissions per t FPCM were equal to BL herds or reduced (0% to −0.3%) when lactations were extended. We concluded that, depending on lactation persistency, extending lactations of dairy cows can have a positive or negative impact on the NPCF and GHG emissions of milk production.     

The Greenhouse Gas Footprint of China's Food System: An Analysis of Recent Trends and Future Scenarios

Food chain systems (FCSs), which begin in agricultural production and end in consumption and waste disposal, play a significant role in China's rising greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This article uses scenario analysis to show China's potential trajectories to a low‐carbon FCS. Between 1996 and 2010, the GHG footprint of China's FCSs increased from 1,308 to 1,618 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (Mt CO₂‐eq), although the emissions intensity of all food categories, except for aquatic food, recorded steep declines. We project three scenarios to 2050 based on historical trends and plausible shifts in policies and environmental conditions: reference scenario; technology improvement scenario; and low GHG emissions scenario. The reference scenario is based on existing trends and exhibits a large growth in GHG emissions, increasing from 1,585 Mt CO₂‐eq in 2010 to 2,505 Mt CO₂‐eq in 2050. In the technology improvement scenario, emissions growth is driven by rising food demand, but that growth will be counterbalanced by gains in agricultural technology, causing GHG emissions to fall to 1,413 Mt CO₂‐eq by 2050. Combining technology improvement with the shift to healthier dietary patterns, GHG emissions in the low GHG emissions scenario will decline to 946 Mt CO₂‐eq in 2050, a drop of 41.5% compared with the level in 2010. We argue that these are realistic projections and are indeed indicative of China's overall strategy for low‐carbon development. Improving agricultural technology and shifting to a more balanced diet could significantly reduce the GHG footprint of China's FCSs. Furthermore, the transition to a low‐carbon FCS has potential cobenefits for land sustainability and public health.     

Livestock greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation potential in Europe

The livestock sector contributes considerably to global greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). Here, for the year 2007 we examined GHG emissions in the EU27 livestock sector and estimated GHG emissions from production and consumption of livestock products; including imports, exports and wastage. We also reviewed available mitigation options and estimated their potential. The focus of this review is on the beef and dairy sector since these contribute 60% of all livestock production emissions. Particular attention is paid to the role of land use and land use change (LULUC) and carbon sequestration in grasslands. GHG emissions of all livestock products amount to between 630 and 863 Mt CO₂e, or 12–17% of total EU27 GHG emissions in 2007. The highest emissions aside from production, originate from LULUC, followed by emissions from wasted food. The total GHG mitigation potential from the livestock sector in Europe is between 101 and 377 Mt CO₂e equivalent to between 12 and 61% of total EU27 livestock sector emissions in 2007. A reduction in food waste and consumption of livestock products linked with reduced production, are the most effective mitigation options, and if encouraged, would also deliver environmental and human health benefits. Production of beef and dairy on grassland, as opposed to intensive grain fed production, can be associated with a reduction in GHG emissions depending on actual LULUC emissions. This could be promoted on rough grazing land where appropriate.     

The Contribution of Agriculture,Forestry and other Land Use activities to Global Warming, 1990–2012

We refine the information available through the IPCC AR5 with regard to recent trends in global GHG emissions from agriculture, forestry and other land uses (AFOLU), including global emission updates to 2012. Using all three available AFOLU datasets employed for analysis in the IPCC AR5, rather than just one as done in the IPCC AR5 WGIII Summary for Policy Makers, our analyses point to a down‐revision of global AFOLU shares of total anthropogenic emissions, while providing important additional information on subsectoral trends. Our findings confirm that the share of AFOLU emissions to the anthropogenic total declined over time. They indicate a decadal average of 28.7 ± 1.5% in the 1990s and 23.6 ± 2.1% in the 2000s and an annual value of 21.2 ± 1.5% in 2010. The IPCC AR5 had indicated a 24% share in 2010. In contrast to previous decades, when emissions from land use (land use, land use change and forestry, including deforestation) were significantly larger than those from agriculture (crop and livestock production), in 2010 agriculture was the larger component, contributing 11.2 ± 0.4% of total GHG emissions, compared to 10.0 ± 1.2% of the land use sector. Deforestation was responsible for only 8% of total anthropogenic emissions in 2010, compared to 12% in the 1990s. Since 2010, the last year assessed by the IPCC AR5, new FAO estimates indicate that land use emissions have remained stable, at about 4.8 Gt CO₂ eq yr^?1 in 2012. Emissions minus removals have also remained stable, at 3.2 Gt CO₂ eq yr^?1 in 2012. By contrast, agriculture emissions have continued to grow, at roughly 1% annually, and remained larger than the land use sector, reaching 5.4 Gt CO₂ eq yr^?1 in 2012. These results are useful to further inform the current climate policy debate on land use, suggesting that more efforts and resources should be directed to further explore options for mitigation in agriculture, much in line with the large efforts devoted to REDD+ in the past decade.     

GHG emissions and other environmental impacts of indirect land use change mitigation

The implementation of measures to increase productivity and resource efficiency in food and bioenergy chains as well as to more sustainably manage land use can significantly increase the biofuel production potential while limiting the risk of causing indirect land use change (ILUC). However, the application of these measures may influence the greenhouse gas (GHG) balance and other environmental impacts of agricultural and biofuel production. This study applies a novel, integrated approach to assess the environmental impacts of agricultural and biofuel production for three ILUC mitigation scenarios, representing a low, medium and high miscanthus‐based ethanol production potential, and for three agricultural intensification pathways in terms of sustainability in Lublin province in 2020. Generally, the ILUC mitigation scenarios attain lower net annual emissions compared to a baseline scenario that excludes ILUC mitigation and bioethanol production. However, the reduction potential significantly depends on the intensification pathway considered. For example, in the moderate ILUC mitigation scenario, the net annual GHG emissions in the case study are 2.3 MtCO₂‐eq yr^?1 (1.8 tCO₂‐eq ha^?1 yr^?1) for conventional intensification and ?0.8 MtCO₂‐eq yr^?1 (?0.6 tCO₂‐eq ha^?1 yr^?1) for sustainable intensification, compared to 3.0 MtCO₂‐eq yr^?1 (2.3 tCO₂‐eq ha^?1 yr^?1) in the baseline scenario. In addition, the intensification pathway is found to be more influential for the GHG balance than the ILUC mitigation scenario, indicating the importance of how agricultural intensification is implemented in practice. Furthermore, when the net emissions are included in the assessment of GHG emissions from bioenergy, the ILUC mitigation scenarios often abate GHG emissions compared to gasoline. But sustainable intensification is required to attain GHG abatement potentials of 90% or higher. A qualitative assessment of the impacts on biodiversity, water quantity and quality, soil quality and air quality also emphasizes the importance of sustainable intensification.