Limits...
A Greenhouse Gas and Soil Carbon Model for Estimating the Carbon Footprint of Livestock Production in Canada.

Vergé XP, Dyer JA, Worth DE, Smith WN, Desjardins RL, McConkey BG - Animals (Basel) (2012)

Bottom Line: The payback period was defined as the number of years required for a GHG reduction to equal soil carbon lost from the associated land use shift.Displacing beef cattle with hogs resulted in a surplus area of forage.Agricultural GHG mitigation policies will inevitably involve a trade-off between production, land use and GHG emission reduction.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: AAFC Consultant, Ottawa, ON, K2A 1G6, Canada. Xavier_vrg@yahoo.fr.

ABSTRACT
To assess tradeoffs between environmental sustainability and changes in food production on agricultural land in Canada the Unified Livestock Industry and Crop Emissions Estimation System (ULICEES) was developed. It incorporates four livestock specific GHG assessments in a single model. To demonstrate the application of ULICEES, 10% of beef cattle protein production was assumed to be displaced with an equivalent amount of pork protein. Without accounting for the loss of soil carbon, this 10% shift reduced GHG emissions by 2.5 TgCO₂e y(-1). The payback period was defined as the number of years required for a GHG reduction to equal soil carbon lost from the associated land use shift. A payback period that is shorter than 40 years represents a net long term decrease in GHG emissions. Displacing beef cattle with hogs resulted in a surplus area of forage. When this residual land was left in ungrazed perennial forage, the payback periods were less than 4 years and when it was reseeded to annual crops, they were equal to or less than 40 years. They were generally greater than 40 years when this land was used to raise cattle. Agricultural GHG mitigation policies will inevitably involve a trade-off between production, land use and GHG emission reduction. ULICEES is a model that can objectively assess these trade-offs for Canadian agriculture.

No MeSH data available.


Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from four types of livestock in eastern and western Canada separated into enteric and non-enteric sources (land use and manure storage systems) in 2001.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4494297&req=5

animals-02-00437-f002: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from four types of livestock in eastern and western Canada separated into enteric and non-enteric sources (land use and manure storage systems) in 2001.

Mentions: A summary of GHG emissions from the four livestock industries for eastern (Atlantic Provinces, Québec, Ontario) and western (Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia) Canada is shown in Figure 2. These quantities reflect the respective sizes of the four industries as much as differences in GHG emission types. Since changes in soil carbon relate to interactions among livestock populations, GHG emissions were grouped in a way that most closely relates to ruminant and non-ruminant livestock systems. Hence, the GHG emissions in Figure 2 are distinguished as either enteric or non-enteric. Non-enteric GHG emissions include manure methane, N2O from both the soil and stored manure, and fossil CO2. The main sources of the non-enteric GHGs are the annual crops that supply the feed grains for non-ruminants (hogs and poultry), and the grain component of cattle diets. Canadian livestock accounted for 53 TgCO2e in 2001 with 22 TgCO2e coming from enteric methane. The Canadian beef industry emitted 31 TgCO2e. Western beef accounted for 26 TgCO2e, 14 of which were enteric methane. Dairy and pork production accounted for 10 and 7 TgCO2e, respectively. At 5 TgCO2e, poultry was the lowest source of GHG from the livestock industry in Canada.


A Greenhouse Gas and Soil Carbon Model for Estimating the Carbon Footprint of Livestock Production in Canada.

Vergé XP, Dyer JA, Worth DE, Smith WN, Desjardins RL, McConkey BG - Animals (Basel) (2012)

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from four types of livestock in eastern and western Canada separated into enteric and non-enteric sources (land use and manure storage systems) in 2001.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4494297&req=5

animals-02-00437-f002: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from four types of livestock in eastern and western Canada separated into enteric and non-enteric sources (land use and manure storage systems) in 2001.
Mentions: A summary of GHG emissions from the four livestock industries for eastern (Atlantic Provinces, Québec, Ontario) and western (Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia) Canada is shown in Figure 2. These quantities reflect the respective sizes of the four industries as much as differences in GHG emission types. Since changes in soil carbon relate to interactions among livestock populations, GHG emissions were grouped in a way that most closely relates to ruminant and non-ruminant livestock systems. Hence, the GHG emissions in Figure 2 are distinguished as either enteric or non-enteric. Non-enteric GHG emissions include manure methane, N2O from both the soil and stored manure, and fossil CO2. The main sources of the non-enteric GHGs are the annual crops that supply the feed grains for non-ruminants (hogs and poultry), and the grain component of cattle diets. Canadian livestock accounted for 53 TgCO2e in 2001 with 22 TgCO2e coming from enteric methane. The Canadian beef industry emitted 31 TgCO2e. Western beef accounted for 26 TgCO2e, 14 of which were enteric methane. Dairy and pork production accounted for 10 and 7 TgCO2e, respectively. At 5 TgCO2e, poultry was the lowest source of GHG from the livestock industry in Canada.

Bottom Line: The payback period was defined as the number of years required for a GHG reduction to equal soil carbon lost from the associated land use shift.Displacing beef cattle with hogs resulted in a surplus area of forage.Agricultural GHG mitigation policies will inevitably involve a trade-off between production, land use and GHG emission reduction.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: AAFC Consultant, Ottawa, ON, K2A 1G6, Canada. Xavier_vrg@yahoo.fr.

ABSTRACT
To assess tradeoffs between environmental sustainability and changes in food production on agricultural land in Canada the Unified Livestock Industry and Crop Emissions Estimation System (ULICEES) was developed. It incorporates four livestock specific GHG assessments in a single model. To demonstrate the application of ULICEES, 10% of beef cattle protein production was assumed to be displaced with an equivalent amount of pork protein. Without accounting for the loss of soil carbon, this 10% shift reduced GHG emissions by 2.5 TgCO₂e y(-1). The payback period was defined as the number of years required for a GHG reduction to equal soil carbon lost from the associated land use shift. A payback period that is shorter than 40 years represents a net long term decrease in GHG emissions. Displacing beef cattle with hogs resulted in a surplus area of forage. When this residual land was left in ungrazed perennial forage, the payback periods were less than 4 years and when it was reseeded to annual crops, they were equal to or less than 40 years. They were generally greater than 40 years when this land was used to raise cattle. Agricultural GHG mitigation policies will inevitably involve a trade-off between production, land use and GHG emission reduction. ULICEES is a model that can objectively assess these trade-offs for Canadian agriculture.

No MeSH data available.