Limits...
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants.

Basarab J, Baron V, López-Campos Ó, Aalhus J, Haugen-Kozyra K, Okine E - Animals (Basel) (2012)

Bottom Line: Calf-fed reduced the carbon footprint by 6.3-7.5% compared with yearling-fed.When expressed as kg CO₂e per kg carcass weight per year the carbon footprint of calf-fed production was 73.9-76.1% lower than yearling-fed production, and calf-fed implanted was 85% lower than hormone-free yearling-fed.Reducing GHG emissions from beef production may be accomplished by improving the feed efficiency of the cow herd, decreasing the days on low quality feeds, and reducing the age at harvest of youthful cattle.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Lacombe Research Centre, 6000 C & E Trail, Lacombe, AB T4L 1W1, Canada. john.basarab@gov.ab.ca.

ABSTRACT
A spring calving herd consisting of about 350 beef cows, 14-16 breeding bulls, 60 replacement heifers and 112 steers were used to compare the whole-farm GHG emissions among calf-fed vs. yearling-fed production systems with and without growth implants. Carbon footprint ranged from 11.63 to 13.22 kg CO₂e per kg live weight (19.87-22.52 kg CO₂e per kg carcass weight). Enteric CH₄ was the largest source of GHG emissions (53-54%), followed by manure N₂O (20-22%), cropping N₂O (11%), energy use CO₂ (9-9.5%), and manure CH₄ (4-6%). Beef cow accounted for 77% and 58% of the GHG emissions in the calf-fed and yearling-fed. Feeders accounted for the second highest GHG emissions (15% calf-fed; 35-36% yearling-fed). Implants reduced the carbon footprint by 4.9-5.1% compared with hormone-free. Calf-fed reduced the carbon footprint by 6.3-7.5% compared with yearling-fed. When expressed as kg CO₂e per kg carcass weight per year the carbon footprint of calf-fed production was 73.9-76.1% lower than yearling-fed production, and calf-fed implanted was 85% lower than hormone-free yearling-fed. Reducing GHG emissions from beef production may be accomplished by improving the feed efficiency of the cow herd, decreasing the days on low quality feeds, and reducing the age at harvest of youthful cattle.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Breakdown of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from hormone free and growth implanted calf-fed and yearling-fed beef production systems (CO2) equivalents, 160 cow-herd assumed). (a) Calf-fed, Hormone Free Animal GHG emissions = 922,107 kg CO2e. (b) Calf-fed, growth implanted Animal GHG emissions = 928,344 kg CO2e. (c) Yearling-fed, Hormone Free Animal GHG emissios = 1,219,659 kg CO2e. (d) Yearling-fed, Growth Implanted Animal GHG emissions = 1,237,082 kg CO2e.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4494322&req=5

animals-02-00195-f001: Breakdown of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from hormone free and growth implanted calf-fed and yearling-fed beef production systems (CO2) equivalents, 160 cow-herd assumed). (a) Calf-fed, Hormone Free Animal GHG emissions = 922,107 kg CO2e. (b) Calf-fed, growth implanted Animal GHG emissions = 928,344 kg CO2e. (c) Yearling-fed, Hormone Free Animal GHG emissios = 1,219,659 kg CO2e. (d) Yearling-fed, Growth Implanted Animal GHG emissions = 1,237,082 kg CO2e.

Mentions: The breakdown of GHG emissions by source (Table A7, illustrated in Figure 1) showed that 53–54% of GHG emissions result from enteric CH4, 20–22% from manure N2O, 11% from cropping N2O, 9–9.5% from energy use and 4–6% from manure CH4, regardless of beef production strategy. These proportions are somewhat different than those presented by Beauchemin et al. [11] which were 63%, 23%, 4%, 5% and 5% for enteric CH4, manure N2O, cropping N2O, energy use CO2 and manure CH4, respectively. The primarily reason for these differences are because in our study (1) a enteric methane emission factor of 6.5% [22] was used for wintering cow and bull diets instead of 7.0% for poorer quality mixed hay diets, (2) more fertilizer N and equipment time was used to produce the crops for feeding cattle, and (3) the cropping mix used was more complicated than the barley grain, hay and barley silage used in the simulated southern Alberta study. However, the relative proportion of GHG emission from enteric CH4 was well within the range of 40–63% reported for North American beef production systems [11,46].


Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants.

Basarab J, Baron V, López-Campos Ó, Aalhus J, Haugen-Kozyra K, Okine E - Animals (Basel) (2012)

Breakdown of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from hormone free and growth implanted calf-fed and yearling-fed beef production systems (CO2) equivalents, 160 cow-herd assumed). (a) Calf-fed, Hormone Free Animal GHG emissions = 922,107 kg CO2e. (b) Calf-fed, growth implanted Animal GHG emissions = 928,344 kg CO2e. (c) Yearling-fed, Hormone Free Animal GHG emissios = 1,219,659 kg CO2e. (d) Yearling-fed, Growth Implanted Animal GHG emissions = 1,237,082 kg CO2e.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4494322&req=5

animals-02-00195-f001: Breakdown of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from hormone free and growth implanted calf-fed and yearling-fed beef production systems (CO2) equivalents, 160 cow-herd assumed). (a) Calf-fed, Hormone Free Animal GHG emissions = 922,107 kg CO2e. (b) Calf-fed, growth implanted Animal GHG emissions = 928,344 kg CO2e. (c) Yearling-fed, Hormone Free Animal GHG emissios = 1,219,659 kg CO2e. (d) Yearling-fed, Growth Implanted Animal GHG emissions = 1,237,082 kg CO2e.
Mentions: The breakdown of GHG emissions by source (Table A7, illustrated in Figure 1) showed that 53–54% of GHG emissions result from enteric CH4, 20–22% from manure N2O, 11% from cropping N2O, 9–9.5% from energy use and 4–6% from manure CH4, regardless of beef production strategy. These proportions are somewhat different than those presented by Beauchemin et al. [11] which were 63%, 23%, 4%, 5% and 5% for enteric CH4, manure N2O, cropping N2O, energy use CO2 and manure CH4, respectively. The primarily reason for these differences are because in our study (1) a enteric methane emission factor of 6.5% [22] was used for wintering cow and bull diets instead of 7.0% for poorer quality mixed hay diets, (2) more fertilizer N and equipment time was used to produce the crops for feeding cattle, and (3) the cropping mix used was more complicated than the barley grain, hay and barley silage used in the simulated southern Alberta study. However, the relative proportion of GHG emission from enteric CH4 was well within the range of 40–63% reported for North American beef production systems [11,46].

Bottom Line: Calf-fed reduced the carbon footprint by 6.3-7.5% compared with yearling-fed.When expressed as kg CO₂e per kg carcass weight per year the carbon footprint of calf-fed production was 73.9-76.1% lower than yearling-fed production, and calf-fed implanted was 85% lower than hormone-free yearling-fed.Reducing GHG emissions from beef production may be accomplished by improving the feed efficiency of the cow herd, decreasing the days on low quality feeds, and reducing the age at harvest of youthful cattle.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Lacombe Research Centre, 6000 C & E Trail, Lacombe, AB T4L 1W1, Canada. john.basarab@gov.ab.ca.

ABSTRACT
A spring calving herd consisting of about 350 beef cows, 14-16 breeding bulls, 60 replacement heifers and 112 steers were used to compare the whole-farm GHG emissions among calf-fed vs. yearling-fed production systems with and without growth implants. Carbon footprint ranged from 11.63 to 13.22 kg CO₂e per kg live weight (19.87-22.52 kg CO₂e per kg carcass weight). Enteric CH₄ was the largest source of GHG emissions (53-54%), followed by manure N₂O (20-22%), cropping N₂O (11%), energy use CO₂ (9-9.5%), and manure CH₄ (4-6%). Beef cow accounted for 77% and 58% of the GHG emissions in the calf-fed and yearling-fed. Feeders accounted for the second highest GHG emissions (15% calf-fed; 35-36% yearling-fed). Implants reduced the carbon footprint by 4.9-5.1% compared with hormone-free. Calf-fed reduced the carbon footprint by 6.3-7.5% compared with yearling-fed. When expressed as kg CO₂e per kg carcass weight per year the carbon footprint of calf-fed production was 73.9-76.1% lower than yearling-fed production, and calf-fed implanted was 85% lower than hormone-free yearling-fed. Reducing GHG emissions from beef production may be accomplished by improving the feed efficiency of the cow herd, decreasing the days on low quality feeds, and reducing the age at harvest of youthful cattle.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus