Life Cycle Assessment of Greenhouse Gases for Milk Production: A Review

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madhu Mohini ◽  
Shiva Gupta ◽  
Chander Datt ◽  
Goutam Mondal
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 6906
Author(s):  
Federica Rossi ◽  
Camilla Chieco ◽  
Nicola Di Virgilio ◽  
Teodoro Georgiadis ◽  
Marianna Nardino

While a substantial reduction of GHG (greenhouse gases) is urged, large-scale mitigation implies a detailed and holistic knowledge on the role of specific cropping systems, including the effect of management choices and local factors on the final balance between emissions and removals, this last typical of cropping systems. Here, a conventionally managed irrigated kiwifruit orchard has been studied to assess its greenhouse gases emissions and removals to determine its potential action as a C sink or, alternately, as a C source. The paper integrates two independent approaches. Biological CO2 fluxes have been monitored during 2012 using the micrometeorological Eddy covariance technique, while life cycle assessment quantified emissions derived from the energy and material used. In a climatic-standard year, total GHG emitted as consequence of the management were 4.25 t CO2-eq−1 ha−1 yr−1 while the net uptake measured during the active vegetation phase was as high as 4.9 t CO2 ha−1 yr−1. This led to a positive contribution of the crop to CO2 absorption, with a 1.15 efficiency ratio (sink-source factor defined as t CO2 stored/t CO2 emitted). The mitigating activity, however, completely reversed under extremely unfavorable climatic conditions, such as those recorded in 2003, when the efficiency ratio became 0.91, demonstrating that the occurrence of hotter and drier conditions are able to compromise the capability of Actinidia to offset the GHG emissions, also under appropriate irrigation.


2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (2s) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lelia Murgia ◽  
Giuseppe Todde ◽  
Maria Caria ◽  
Antonio Pazzona

Dairy farming is constantly evolving towards more intensive levels of mechanization and automation which demand more energy consumption and result in higher economic and environmental costs. The usage of fossil energy in agricultural processes contributes to climate change both with on-farm emissions from the combustion of fuels, and by off-farm emissions due to the use of grid power. As a consequence, a more efficient use of fossil resources together with an increased use of renewable energies can play a key role for the development of more sustainable production systems. The aims of this study were to evaluate the energy requirements (fuels and electricity) in dairy farms, define the distribution of the energy demands among the different farm operations, identify the critical point of the process and estimate the amount of CO2 associated with the energy consumption. The inventory of the energy uses has been outlined by a partial Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach, setting the system boundaries at the farm level, from cradle to farm gate. All the flows of materials and energy associated to milk production process, including crops cultivation for fodder production, were investigated in 20 dairy commercial farms over a period of one year. Self-produced energy from renewable sources was also accounted as it influence the overall balance of emissions. Data analysis was focused on the calculation of energy and environmental sustainability indicators (EUI, CO2-eq) referred to the functional units. The production of 1 kg of Fat and Protein Corrected Milk (FPCM) required on average 0.044 kWhel and 0.251 kWhth, corresponding to a total emission of 0.085 kg CO2-eq). The farm activities that contribute most to the electricity requirements were milk cooling, milking and slurry management, while feeding management and crop cultivation were the greatest diesel fuel consuming operation and the largest in terms of environmental impact of milk production (73% of energy CO2-eq emissions). The results of the study can assist in the development of dairy farming models based on a more efficient and profitable use of the energy resources.


2021 ◽  
Vol XXIV (Issue 1) ◽  
pp. 890-912
Author(s):  
Jerzy Bienkowski ◽  
Rafal Baum ◽  
Malgorzata Holka

2008 ◽  
Vol 96 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 95-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.A. Thomassen ◽  
K.J. van Calker ◽  
M.C.J. Smits ◽  
G.L. Iepema ◽  
I.J.M. de Boer

2011 ◽  
Vol 92 (3) ◽  
pp. 372-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming-Jia Yan ◽  
James Humphreys ◽  
Nicholas M. Holden

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 1139-1152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeerasak Chobtang ◽  
Sarah J. McLaren ◽  
Stewart F. Ledgard ◽  
Daniel J. Donaghy

EDIS ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Van Treese, II ◽  
Edward A. Hanlon ◽  
N. Y. Amponsah ◽  
J. L. Izursa ◽  
J. C. Capece

This 5-page fact sheet gives an overview of two methods for evaluating energy transformations in biofuels production. The Life Cycle Assessment approach involves measurements affecting greenhouse gases, which can be linked to the energy considerations used in the Emergy Assessment. Although these two methods have their basis in energy or greenhouse gas emission evaluations, their approaches can lead to a reliable judgment regarding a biofuel process. We can use them to evaluate the economic environmental component of a biofuel process, and decide which biofuel processes favor sustainability. The intended audiences of this publication are growers, researchers, students, and any other readers interested in agriculture and ecology. Written by J. Van Treese II, E. A. Hanlon, N. Y. Amponsah, J. L. Izursa, and J. C. Capece, and published by the UF Department of Soil and Water Science, March 2013. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss579


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document