The Carbon Footprint of Energy Consumption in Pastoral and Barn Dairy Farming Systems: A Case Study from Canterbury, New Zealand
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Farm Energy Inputs
3.1.1. Fossil Fuel
3.1.2. Electricity
3.1.3. Fertilizer
3.1.4. Imported Feed Supplements
3.1.5. Machinery and Equipment
4. Results
Carbon Footprints of PDF and BDF Dairy Systems
5. Discussion
- Fossil Fuels: Fuel is mainly used in farm vehicles and tractors for farming operations. The use of new and efficient machinery accompanied by reduced operations, such as minimum tillage depth, could reduce the fuel consumption and associated carbon footprints in NZ dairy systems.
- Electricity: Electricity consumption was mainly involved in irrigation and dairy shed activities such as milk extraction, milk refrigeration and water heating, etc. in both dairy systems. Improved irrigation systems and the use of the latest and most efficient electrical equipment along with renewable energy resources (solar) could provide environmental and financial benefits to farmers through cutting energy consumption and related costs.
- Imported Feed Supplements: Off-farm the production of imported feed supplements involves energy consumption through inputs such as fossil fuel, fertilizer, machinery and equipment etc., which release CO2 into the atmosphere. Thus, using feed types which require less energy consumption both on- and off-farm, primarily nitrogen fertilizer, would lower carbon footprints as well as nutrients losses to waterways.
- Fertilizer: Fertilizers, particularly nitrogen, are one of the leading sources of CO2 emissions in the NZ pastoral system and indirectly responsible for nutrient losses to waterways. Thus, a reduction in fertilizer consumption can provide environmental benefits as well as financial savings for farmers. In this regard, efficiency improvement and better fertilizer management through application of the latest technology, e.g., precision application, can play a significant role in reducing carbon footprints without affecting crop yield. Thus, fertilizer management particularly the type of fertilizer products, method of fertilizer application and the amount of fertilizer usage must be taken into consideration to save energy consumption and related carbon footprints within NZ dairy systems.
- Strategic use of off-pasture structures: In the present study, on-average the BDF farmers used barn facilities for the duration of 4–6 months with a varying range of 8–14 h per day, depending upon pasture growth, weather conditions and availability of feed. The main advantage of using barn structures is less fertilizer consumption in the BDF system, which is due to more effluent collection because of the barn operation. However, there is a high installation cost which may off-set the barn benefits. In addition to that, the use of barn facilities intensifies the system, both stocking rate and input-wise, to cover the barn costs, which leads to increased energy consumption through importing feed supplements. Contrary to that, fertilizer consumption is higher in the PDF system because of the need for high pasture production. Under these scenarios, the pastoral system potentially can achieve some of these barn benefits through the strategic use of off-pasture structures within the farm system such as a stand-off or feed pad together with a good effluent management facility. Removing cattle from the pasture for defined periods can provide better control on effluent under severe weather and deliver additional benefits such as reduced soil structure damage and reduction in fertilizer consumption due to improved effluent collection.
6. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Dairy, N.Z.; Livestock Improvement Corporation Limited (LIC). New Zealand Dairy Statistics 2016-17; Livestock Improvement Corporation Limited: Waikato, New Zealand, 2017; Available online: https://www.dairynz.co.nz/media/5788611/quickstats_new_zealand_web_2017.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2019).
- Dairy, N.Z.; Livestock Improvement Corporation Limited (LIC). New Zealand Dairy Statistics 2016-17; Livestock Improvement Corporation Limited: Waikato, New Zealand, 2017; Available online: https://www.dairynz.co.nz/media/5788533/nz-dairy-statistics- web-2016-17.pdf (accessed on 25 May 2019).
- Basset-Mens, C.; Ledgard, S.; Boyes, M. Eco-efficiency of intensification scenarios for milk production in New Zealand. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 1615–1625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Brien, D.; Capper, J.; Garnsworthy, P.; Grainger, C.; Shalloo, L. A case study of the carbon footprint of milk from high-performing confinement and grass-based dairy farms. J. Dairy Sci. 2014, 97, 1835–1851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. Growing for Good, Intensive Farming, Sustainability and New Zealand’s Environment; Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment: Wellington, New Zealand, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Pow, T.; Longhurst, B.; Pow, Z. The future of NZ dairy farming systems: Self managing cows with access to partial housing. In Fertilizer and Lime Research Centre (FLRC) Workshop 2014; Massey University: Wellington, New Zealand, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Newman, M.; Journeaux, P. Wintering Barns No Quick Fix for Profit; DairyNZ: Hamilton, New Zealand, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, P.; Martino, D.; Cai, Z.; Gwary, D.; Janzen, H.; Kumar, P.; McCarl, B.; Ogle, S.; O’Mara, F.; Rice, C. Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2007, 363, 789–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Crosson, P.; Shalloo, L.; O’Brien, D.; Lanigan, G.; Foley, P.; Boland, T.; Kenny, D.A. A review of whole farm systems models of greenhouse gas emissions from beef and dairy cattle production systems. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2011, 166, 29–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Food and Agriculture Organization. Livestock’s Long Shadow; Environmental Issues and Options; Animal Production and Health Division: Rome, Italy, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Food and Agriculture Organization. Environmental Performance of Large Ruminant Supply Chains: Guidelines for Assessment; Livestock Environmental Assessment and Performance Partnership; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Gerber, P.J.; Steinfeld, H.; Henderson, B.; Mottet, A.; Opio, C.; Dijkman, J.; Falcucci, A.; Tempio, G. Tackling Climate Change through Livestock: A Global Assessment of Emissions and Mitigation Opportunities; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Rome, Italy, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Ministry for the Environment. New Zealand’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990–2017; Ministry for the Environment: Wellington, New Zealand, 2019.
- Beukes, P.; Gregorini, P.; Romera, A. Estimating greenhouse gas emissions from New Zealand dairy systems using a mechanistic whole farm model and inventory methodology. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2011, 166, 708–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beukes, P.; Gregorini, P.; Romera, A.; Levy, G.; Waghorn, G. Improving production efficiency as a strategy to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions on pastoral dairy farms in New Zealand. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2010, 136, 358–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry for the Environment (MfE). New Zealand’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990–2014; Ministry for the Environment: Wellington, New Zealand, 2016.
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories; Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) for the International Panel on Climate Change: Kanagawa, Japan, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- West, T.O.; Marland, G. A synthesis of carbon sequestration, carbon emissions, and net carbon flux in agriculture: comparing tillage practices in the United States. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2002, 91, 217–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry for the Environment (MfE). About New Zealand’s Emissions Reduction Targets; Ministry for the Environment: Wellington, New Zealand, 2019. Available online: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/climate-change-and-government/emissions-reduction-targets/about-our-emissions (accessed on 24 April 2019).
- DairyNZ. Zero Carbon Bill. 2019. Available online: https://www.dairynz.co.nz/environment/climate-change/zero-carbon-bill/ (accessed on 1 June 2019).
- Wells, C. Total Energy Indicators of Agricultural Sustainability: Dairy Farming Case Study; MAF: Wellington, New Zealand, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Saunders, C.M.; Barber, A. Comparative Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of New Zealand’s and the UK’s Dairy Industry; The Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit (AERU), Lincoln University: Christchurch, New Zealand, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Saunders, C.M.; Barber, A.; Taylor, G.J. Food Miles-Comparative Energy/Emissions Performance of New Zealand’s Agriculture Industry; The Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit (AERU), Lincoln University: Christchurch, New Zealand, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Bos, J.F.; de Haan, J.; Sukkel, W.; Schils, R.L. Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in organic and conventional farming systems in the Netherlands. NJAS Wagening. J. Life Sci. 2014, 68, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cederberg, C.; Mattsson, B. Life cycle assessment of milk production—a comparison of conventional and organic farming. J. Clean. Prod. 2000, 8, 49–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomassen, M.A.; van Calker, K.J.; Smits, M.C.; Iepema, G.L.; de Boer, I.J. Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands. Agric. Syst. 2008, 96, 95–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murgia, L.; Todde, G.; Caria, M.; Pazzona, A. A partial life cycle assessment approach to evaluate the energy intensity and related greenhouse gas emission in dairy farms. J. Agric. Eng. 2013, 44, 186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Todde, G.; Murgia, L.; Caria, M.; Pazzona, A. A Comprehensive Energy Analysis and Related Carbon Footprint of Dairy Farms, Part 1: Direct Energy Requirements. Energies 2018, 11, 463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flysjö, A.; Henriksson, M.; Cederberg, C.; Ledgard, S.; Englund, J.E. The impact of various parameters on the carbon footprint of milk production in New Zealand and Sweden. Agric. Syst. 2011, 104, 459–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Brien, D.; Shalloo, L.; Patton, J.; Buckley, F.; Grainger, C.; Wallace, M. A life cycle assessment of seasonal grass-based and confinement dairy farms. Agric. Syst. 2012, 107, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dairy, N.Z. QuickStats about Dairying-Canterbury Region; DairyNZ: Hammerton, New Zealand, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Lal, R. Carbon emission from farm operations. Environ. Int. 2004, 30, 981–990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Safa, M.; Samarasinghe, S. CO2 emissions from farm inputs “Case study of wheat production in Canterbury, New Zealand”. Environ. Pollut. 2012, 171, 126–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kitani, O. CIGR Handbook of agricultural engineering. Energy Biomass Eng. 1999, 5, 330. [Google Scholar]
- Bertocco, M.; Basso, B.; Sartori, L.; Martin, E.C. Evaluating energy efficiency of site-specific tillage in maize in NE Italy. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99, 6957–6965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Serrano, J.M.; Peça, J.O.; da Silva, J.M.; Pinheiro, A.; Carvalho, M. Tractor energy requirements in disc harrow systems. Biosyst. Eng. 2007, 98, 286–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siemens, J.C.; Bowers, W.; Holmes, R.G. Machinery Management: How to Select Machinery to Fit the Real Needs of Farm Managers; Deere & Company, John Deere Pub.: Morin, IL, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Ministry of Economic Development (MED). Energy Data File 2011; Ministry of Economic Development: Wellington, New Zealand, 2012.
- Podstolski, M. The Evolution of Total Energy Inputs in the New Zealand Dairy Industry. Master’s Thesis, Lincoln University, Lincoln, New Zealand, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Nebel, B. Electricity and Transport Data for MAF GHG Projects; MAF. Scion: Rotorua, New Zealand, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Stout, B.A. Handbook of Energy for World Agriculture; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Vlek, P.L.; Rodríguez-Kuhl, G.; Sommer, R. Energy use and CO2 production in tropical agriculture and means and strategies for reduction or mitigation. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2004, 6, 213–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carran, R.; Ledgard, S.; Wedderburn, M.; Jollands, N. A Life Cycle Assessment of Milk Production on a New Zealand Dairy Farm. Client Report. 2004. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228348136_First_life_cycle_assessment_of_milk_production_from_New_Zealand_dairy_farm_systems (accessed on 3 September 2019).
- Hartman, K.; Sims, R. Saving energy on the dairy farm makes good sense. In Proceedings of the 4th Dairy3 Conference held at Hamilton New Zealand. Centre for Professional Development and Conferences; Massey University: Palmerston North, New Zealand, 2006; pp. 11–22. [Google Scholar]
- Ilyas, H.M.A.; Safa, M.; Bailey, A.; Rauf, S.; Cullen, M. Evaluation of Energy Footprint of Pastoral and Barn Dairy Farming Systems in New Zealand. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Farm Management Association (IFMA) Congress, Tasmania, Australia, 3–8 March 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Fertilizer Association. Fertilizer Use in New Zealand; Fertilizer Association: Paris, France, 2019; Available online: http://www.fertiliser.org.nz/Site/about/fertiliser_use_in_nz.aspx (accessed on 25 June 2019).
- Snyder, C.; Bruulsema, T.; Jensen, T.; Fixen, P. Review of greenhouse gas emissions from crop production systems and fertilizer management effects. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2009, 133, 247–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ledgard, S.F.; Boyes, M.; Brentrup, F. Life Cycle Assessment of Local and Imported Fertilisers Used on New Zealand Farms; Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry: Tokyo, Japan, 2011.
- Ministry for Primary Industries. Pastoral Input Trends in New Zealand: A Snapshot; Ministry for Primary Industries: Wellington, New Zealand, 2012.
- Wheeler (Ed.) OVERSEER Technical Manual: Carbon Dioxide, Emboided and Other Gaseous Emissions; AgResearch Ltd.: Hammerton, New Zealand, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Dillon, P.; Hennessy, T.; Shalloo, L.; Thorne, F.; Horan, B. Future outlook for the Irish dairy industry: A study of international competitiveness, influence of international trade reform and requirement for change. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2008, 61, 16–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doole, G. Economic feasibility of supplementary feeding on dairy farms in the Waikato region of New Zealand. N. Z. J. Agric. Res. 2014, 57, 90–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, R.; Clark, D.; Macdonald, K. Resource Efficient Dairying trial: measurement criteria for farm systems over a range of resource use. Proc. N. Z. Grassl. Assoc. 2005, 67, 47–52. [Google Scholar]
- Dairy, N.Z. Facts and Figures for New Zealand Dairy Farmers, 2nd ed.; DairyNZ: Hamilton, New Zealand, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Safa, M.; Samarasinghe, S. Determination and modelling of energy consumption in wheat production using neural networks:“A case study in Canterbury province, New Zealand”. Energy 2011, 36, 5140–5147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASAE). Agricultural Machinery Management Data; D497.7 March 2011; ASAE: St. Joseph, MI, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Knapp, J.; Laur, G.; Vadas, P.; Weiss, W.; Tricarico, J. Invited review: Enteric methane in dairy cattle production: Quantifying the opportunities and impact of reducing emissions. J. Dairy Sci. 2014, 97, 3231–3261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Morais, T.; Teixeira, R.; Rodrigues, N.; Domingos, T. Carbon footprint of milk from pasture-based dairy farms in Azores, Portugal. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- A Greener World. A Breath of Fresh Air: The truth about pasture-based livestock production and environmental sustainability. Virginia: Animal Welfare Approved. 2013. Available online: https://www.agricology.co.uk/resources/breath-fresh-air (accessed on 3 September 2019).
- Alan Rotz, C.; Soder, K.J.; Howard Skinner, R.; Dell, C.J.; Kleinman, P.J.; Schmidt, J.P.; Bryant, R.B. Grazing can reduce the environmental impact of dairy production systems. In Forage and Grazinglands; 2009. Available online: https://pubag.nal.usda.gov/pubag/downloadPDF.xhtml?id=44272&content=PDF (accessed on 3 September 2019).
- Todde, G.; Murgia, L.; Caria, M.; Pazzona, A. A Comprehensive Energy Analysis and Related Carbon Footprint of Dairy Farms, Part 2: Investigation and Modeling of Indirect Energy Requirements. Energies 2018, 11, 463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latham, N.L. Carbon Footprints in the New Zealand Dairy Industry: A Comparison of Farming Systems; Lincoln University: Canterbury, New Zealand, 2010. [Google Scholar]
Grass Silage | Maize Silage | Hay | Grains | Concentrates | Straw | References | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Energy Coefficients (MJ/Kg DM) | 1.781 | 1.564 | 1.329 | 3.905 | 1.800 | 0.187 | Wheeler [50] |
Emission Factors (KgCO2/MJ) | 0.08 | 0.1 | 0.09 | 0.12 | 0.08 | 0.13 |
Pastoral | Barn | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Inputs | Avg | SD | Min | Max | Avg | SD | Min | Max |
Direct Inputs Emission | ||||||||
Diesel | 121 | 52 | 29 | 274 | 339 | 317 | 104 | 1046 |
Petrol | 45 | 25 | 7 | 116 | 78 | 30 | 59 | 145 |
Electricity | 597 | 487 | 110 | 2629 | 647 | 373 | 336 | 1133 |
Indirect Inputs Emission | ||||||||
Fertilizer | 708 | 243 | 151 | 1306 | 499 | 390 | 0 | 1276 |
Feed Supplements | 602 | 428 | 0 | 1785 | 1015 | 204 | 656 | 1306 |
Machinery | 784 | 253 | 96 | 1561 | 801 | 219 | 357 | 1042 |
Total Emission | 2857 | 781 | 1190 | 5052 | 3379 | 705 | 2236 | 4348 |
Pastoral | Barn | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Inputs | Avg | SD | Min | Max | Avg | SD | Min | Max |
Direct Inputs Emission | ||||||||
Diesel | 81 | 41 | 24 | 193 | 229 | 261 | 75 | 813 |
Petrol | 29 | 16 | 6 | 79 | 49 | 25 | 28 | 104 |
Electricity | 403 | 338 | 58 | 1918 | 392 | 219 | 175 | 754 |
Indirect Inputs Emission | ||||||||
Fertilizer | 488 | 226 | 100 | 983 | 338 | 288 | 0 | 914 |
Feed Supplements | 398 | 283 | 0 | 1000 | 623 | 149 | 487 | 911 |
Machinery | 521 | 211 | 81 | 1261 | 495 | 178 | 302 | 747 |
Total Emission | 1920 | 694 | 782 | 3867 | 2130 | 718 | 1416 | 3116 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ilyas, H.M.A.; Safa, M.; Bailey, A.; Rauf, S.; Pangborn, M. The Carbon Footprint of Energy Consumption in Pastoral and Barn Dairy Farming Systems: A Case Study from Canterbury, New Zealand. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4809. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174809
Ilyas HMA, Safa M, Bailey A, Rauf S, Pangborn M. The Carbon Footprint of Energy Consumption in Pastoral and Barn Dairy Farming Systems: A Case Study from Canterbury, New Zealand. Sustainability. 2019; 11(17):4809. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174809
Chicago/Turabian StyleIlyas, Hafiz Muhammad Abrar, Majeed Safa, Alison Bailey, Sara Rauf, and Marvin Pangborn. 2019. "The Carbon Footprint of Energy Consumption in Pastoral and Barn Dairy Farming Systems: A Case Study from Canterbury, New Zealand" Sustainability 11, no. 17: 4809. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174809