Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from livestock operations can be achieved through improved production efficiency, manure management, and energy efficiency. Options vary by species but include diet manipulation, herd health improvements, methane capture, and land application best practices. Additional benefits include reduced odor, renewable energy, and improved water quality.
Agriculture has been and continues to be the most important sector in Indian economy. Climate change is one of the most important environmental issues facing the world today. The impact of climate change is a reality and it cuts across all climates sensitive sectors including the Agriculture sector. In this situation this seminar focuses on the climate smart agriculture. CSA brings together practices, policies and institutions that are not necessarily new but are used in the context of climatic changes which is prime requirement in arena of climate change. Farmers possessed low level of knowledge regarding climate change, and they adopted traditional methods to mitigate the impact of climate change. Small land holdings, poor extension services and non availability of stress tolerant verities were the major problems faced by the farmers in adoption to climate change. Extension functionaries were having medium level awareness about impact of climate change on agriculture. They used electronic media, training and conferences and seminars as major sources of information for climate change. They need training on climate smart agriculture aspects. Based on the above facts this presentation focuses on analyzing the opportunities and challenges of climate smart agriculture.
Agriculture in developing countries must undergo a significant transformation in order to meet the related challenges of achieving food security and responding to climate change. Projections based on population growth and food consumption patterns indicate that agricultural production will need to increase by at least 70 percent to meet demands by 2050. Most estimates also indicate that climate change is likely to reduce agricultural productivity, production stability and incomes in some areas that already have high levels of food insecurity. Developing climate-smart agriculture is thus crucial to achieving future food security and climate change goals. This seminar describe an approach to deal with the above issue viz. Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) and also examines some of the key technical, institutional, policy and financial responses required to achieve this transformation. Building on cases from the field, the seminar try to outlines a range of practices, approaches and tools aimed at increase the resilience and productivity of agricultural product systems, while also reducing and removing emissions. A part of the seminar elaborates institutional and policy options available to promote the transition to climate-smart agriculture at the smallholder level. Finally, the paper considers current gaps and makes innovative suggestion regarding the combined use of different sources, financing mechanism and delivery systems.
Carbon sequestration potential of forestry plantation.Sandeep Kumar
This document provides an overview of carbon sequestration through forestry practices with a focus on India. It discusses key topics like the carbon cycle, carbon pools in forests, carbon stock estimates for various Indian states and forests types. Plantation forestry is presented as an important option for increasing carbon stocks. The document also shares statistics on India's progress with plantation activities and their potential to sequester carbon.
Impact and effect of climate change on agricultureDevegowda S R
1) A study analyzed the awareness and perceptions of 150 farmers in Bijapur, India on the impacts of climate change on agriculture. The results showed that 40% of farmers had high awareness of changes in precipitation patterns, while 58% had high awareness of temperature increases.
2) The majority of farmers perceived negative effects of climate change on soil fertility, crops grown, cropping patterns, use of chemical fertilizers, pest infestation, and grain yield. Nearly all farmers observed effects on timing of operations and increased pesticide use.
3) Regarding livestock, the vast majority (over 90%) of farmers perceived negative effects on the type and number of livestock reared as well as reduced milk yields from climate
Presentation by Julie Doll, Michigan State University, for the Climate Change and Midwest Agriculture: Impacts, Challenges, & Opportunities workshop held by the USDA Midwest Climate Hub on March 1-2, 2016.
This presentation was presented during the Plenary 1, Opening Ceremony of the Global Symposium on Soil Organic Carbon that took place in Rome 21-23 March 2017. The presentation was made by Mr. Luca Montanarella from EU Commission’s Joint Research Centre, in FAO Hq, Rome
1. The document discusses the impacts of climate change on Indian agriculture. It is expected to affect agricultural productivity and shift crop patterns due to factors like increasing temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, and more frequent extreme weather events.
2. Studies have shown that increases in temperature could reduce yields of crops like rice and wheat. Climate change may also lead to a change in suitable areas for growing certain crops. Rain-fed agriculture is expected to be more severely impacted than irrigated agriculture.
3. The impacts of climate change on agriculture could have wide-ranging implications for issues like food security, trade, livelihoods, and water conservation in India given the country's dependence on agriculture. Adaptation and mitigation strategies will
How does agriculture, especially animal agriculture, impact greenhouse gas emissions? What is adaptation and mitigation and how are these different? For more materials on this topic visit http://www.extension.org/pages/63908/greenhouse-gases-and-animal-agriculture
Agriculture has been and continues to be the most important sector in Indian economy. Climate change is one of the most important environmental issues facing the world today. The impact of climate change is a reality and it cuts across all climates sensitive sectors including the Agriculture sector. In this situation this seminar focuses on the climate smart agriculture. CSA brings together practices, policies and institutions that are not necessarily new but are used in the context of climatic changes which is prime requirement in arena of climate change. Farmers possessed low level of knowledge regarding climate change, and they adopted traditional methods to mitigate the impact of climate change. Small land holdings, poor extension services and non availability of stress tolerant verities were the major problems faced by the farmers in adoption to climate change. Extension functionaries were having medium level awareness about impact of climate change on agriculture. They used electronic media, training and conferences and seminars as major sources of information for climate change. They need training on climate smart agriculture aspects. Based on the above facts this presentation focuses on analyzing the opportunities and challenges of climate smart agriculture.
Agriculture in developing countries must undergo a significant transformation in order to meet the related challenges of achieving food security and responding to climate change. Projections based on population growth and food consumption patterns indicate that agricultural production will need to increase by at least 70 percent to meet demands by 2050. Most estimates also indicate that climate change is likely to reduce agricultural productivity, production stability and incomes in some areas that already have high levels of food insecurity. Developing climate-smart agriculture is thus crucial to achieving future food security and climate change goals. This seminar describe an approach to deal with the above issue viz. Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) and also examines some of the key technical, institutional, policy and financial responses required to achieve this transformation. Building on cases from the field, the seminar try to outlines a range of practices, approaches and tools aimed at increase the resilience and productivity of agricultural product systems, while also reducing and removing emissions. A part of the seminar elaborates institutional and policy options available to promote the transition to climate-smart agriculture at the smallholder level. Finally, the paper considers current gaps and makes innovative suggestion regarding the combined use of different sources, financing mechanism and delivery systems.
Carbon sequestration potential of forestry plantation.Sandeep Kumar
This document provides an overview of carbon sequestration through forestry practices with a focus on India. It discusses key topics like the carbon cycle, carbon pools in forests, carbon stock estimates for various Indian states and forests types. Plantation forestry is presented as an important option for increasing carbon stocks. The document also shares statistics on India's progress with plantation activities and their potential to sequester carbon.
Impact and effect of climate change on agricultureDevegowda S R
1) A study analyzed the awareness and perceptions of 150 farmers in Bijapur, India on the impacts of climate change on agriculture. The results showed that 40% of farmers had high awareness of changes in precipitation patterns, while 58% had high awareness of temperature increases.
2) The majority of farmers perceived negative effects of climate change on soil fertility, crops grown, cropping patterns, use of chemical fertilizers, pest infestation, and grain yield. Nearly all farmers observed effects on timing of operations and increased pesticide use.
3) Regarding livestock, the vast majority (over 90%) of farmers perceived negative effects on the type and number of livestock reared as well as reduced milk yields from climate
Presentation by Julie Doll, Michigan State University, for the Climate Change and Midwest Agriculture: Impacts, Challenges, & Opportunities workshop held by the USDA Midwest Climate Hub on March 1-2, 2016.
This presentation was presented during the Plenary 1, Opening Ceremony of the Global Symposium on Soil Organic Carbon that took place in Rome 21-23 March 2017. The presentation was made by Mr. Luca Montanarella from EU Commission’s Joint Research Centre, in FAO Hq, Rome
1. The document discusses the impacts of climate change on Indian agriculture. It is expected to affect agricultural productivity and shift crop patterns due to factors like increasing temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, and more frequent extreme weather events.
2. Studies have shown that increases in temperature could reduce yields of crops like rice and wheat. Climate change may also lead to a change in suitable areas for growing certain crops. Rain-fed agriculture is expected to be more severely impacted than irrigated agriculture.
3. The impacts of climate change on agriculture could have wide-ranging implications for issues like food security, trade, livelihoods, and water conservation in India given the country's dependence on agriculture. Adaptation and mitigation strategies will
How does agriculture, especially animal agriculture, impact greenhouse gas emissions? What is adaptation and mitigation and how are these different? For more materials on this topic visit http://www.extension.org/pages/63908/greenhouse-gases-and-animal-agriculture
Soil carbon sequestration involves transferring carbon dioxide from the atmosphere into the soil through crop residues and other organic materials. This process helps offset carbon emissions while improving soil quality and productivity. Management practices that maximize biomass addition and minimize soil disturbance, like no-till farming, are most effective for carbon sequestration. Increasing soil organic carbon provides benefits like increased agricultural productivity, improved soil structure and fertility, and enhanced water retention and infiltration. Adopting practices like adding organic amendments, reducing tillage, and using cover crops can help sequester carbon in cropland soils.
Effect of climate change on crop pest interactionversha kumari
Climate change also disrupts and alters the distribution of pests and diseases, which poses a threat to agriculture. Climate change will also modify host physiology and resistance, and alter the stages and rates of the development of pests. IPM provide enough flexibility by which we will able to deal with many of the pests.
Climate resilient agriculture adaptation and mitigation strategiesDevegowda S R
This document discusses climate resilient agriculture and its importance in India. It provides definitions of key terms like climate resilience, adaptation, and mitigation. It outlines various strategies for climate resilient practices in agriculture, including developing drought/heat tolerant crop varieties, improved water management, and diversifying crops and farm practices. The National Initiative on Climate Resilient Agriculture (NICRA) is described as the major government project focused on building resilience through strategic research, technology demonstrations, and capacity building. Several case studies on awareness, adoption and impact of climate resilient practices by farmers in India are summarized.
Strategies for Mitigation and Adaptation in Agriculture in context to Changin...Abhilash Singh Chauhan
- Agriculture is an important sector for India, contributing 17.32% to GDP and providing livelihoods for 54.6% of the population.
- Climate change is causing rising temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, and more frequent extreme weather events that are negatively impacting agricultural production in India. Greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector, such as from livestock, rice cultivation, and fertilizer use, are also contributing to climate change.
- Both adaptation and mitigation strategies are needed to address climate change in agriculture. Adaptation involves making crops, livestock, and farming practices more resilient to climate impacts. Mitigation focuses on reducing agricultural greenhouse gas emissions through practices like improved cropland management, livestock management,
Soil Organic Carbon Sequestration: Importance and State of ScienceExternalEvents
This presentation was presented during the Plenary 1, GSOC17 – Setting the scientific scene for GSOC17 of the Global Symposium on Soil Organic Carbon that took place in Rome 21-23 March 2017. The presentation was made by Mr. Rattan Lal from Carbon Management and Sequestration Center – USA , in FAO Hq, Rome
Enhancing the roles of ecosystem services in agriculture: agroecological prin...FAO
Presentation from Etienne Hainzelin from CIRAD, describing the principles of agroecological systems and the role of research within these. The presentation was prepared and delivered in occasion of the International Symposium on Agroecology for Food Security and Nutrition, held at FAO in Rome on 18-19 September 2014.
CLIMATE CHANGE AND CROP WATER PRODUCTIVITY - IMPACT AND MITIGATIONDebjyoti Majumder
This document discusses the impacts of climate change on crop water productivity and mitigation strategies. It begins with definitions of climate change and the greenhouse effect. It then shows data on increasing greenhouse gas concentrations and rising global temperatures. Various impacts are described, such as effects on crop yields from increased temperature and CO2 levels. Strategies to improve water use efficiency and mitigate impacts are covered, such as mulching, land configuration, irrigation scheduling and precision land leveling. Overall, the document analyzes how climate change affects crop water productivity and different agricultural practices that can help address this.
This document outlines an assessment of climate-smart agriculture (CSA). It discusses indicators for measuring CSA's contributions to food security, adaptation, and mitigation. It provides examples of successful CSA projects from FAO and others, including those focusing on improved rice cultivation techniques in Vietnam, drought-tolerant maize varieties in Africa, and livestock insurance programs in Kenya and Ethiopia. The document concludes with instructions for a breakout group exercise to further assess the CSA potential of case studies.
Along with changes in temperature, climate change will bring changes in global rainfall amounts and distribution patterns. And since temperature and water are two factors that have a large influence on the processes that take place in soils, climate change will therefore cause changes in the world’s soils
Agriculture in developing countries must undergo a significant transformation in order to meet the related challenges of achieving food security and responding to climate change. Projections based on population growth and food consumption patterns indicate that agricultural production will need to increase by at least 70 percent to meet demands by 2050. Most estimates also indicate that climate change is likely to reduce agricultural productivity, production stability and incomes in some areas that already have high levels of food insecurity. Developing climate-smart agriculture is thus crucial to achieving future food security and climate change goals. This seminar describe an approach to deal with the above issue viz. Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) and also examines some of the key technical, institutional, policy and financial responses required to achieve this transformation. Building on cases from the field, the seminar try to outlines a range of practices, approaches and tools aimed at increase the resilience and productivity of agricultural product systems, while also reducing and removing emissions. A part of the seminar elaborates institutional and policy options available to promote the transition to climate-smart agriculture at the smallholder level. Finally, the paper considers current gaps and makes innovative suggestion regarding the combined use of different sources, financing mechanism and delivery systems.
Carbon sequestration involves capturing carbon dioxide emissions from large point sources like power plants and storing it long-term to mitigate climate change. There are three main carbon sequestration methods: terrestrial through plants and soils, geological by injecting CO2 underground, and ocean storage by injecting it deep into the ocean. While carbon sequestration could help reduce emissions, concerns include potential leakage of stored CO2 and impacts on ocean life from ocean storage. More research is still needed but carbon sequestration may prove effective if sites are carefully selected and monitored.
The document provides an overview of options for greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. It discusses:
1) Agriculture contributes significantly to global emissions and reductions are necessary to meet climate targets. Many mitigation practices are compatible with sustainable development goals.
2) Key greenhouse gases from agriculture include methane, nitrous oxide, and carbon dioxide. Soils can also store carbon.
3) Common mitigation practices discussed include alternate wetting and drying of rice fields, livestock management improvements, efficient fertilizer use, agroforestry, and reducing food loss and waste.
4) The EX-ACT tool is introduced as a way to estimate and compare emissions between baseline and project scenarios to identify mitigation opportunities in agriculture
Soil Health definition and relationship to soil biology
Characteristics of healthy soil
Assessment of soil health
Framework for evaluating soil health
Indicators
Types of indicators
Biological indicators
Role of biological indicators
The document discusses sustainable agriculture and its ability to feed the world. It notes that over 1 billion people currently experience hunger daily and that food production will need to double in the next 25-50 years to meet demand. However, business as usual approaches will not work due to threats like climate change, water scarcity, and loss of biodiversity. Advanced technologies may help boost yields but risks need to be carefully evaluated. Policies should promote sustainability, small farmers, and rural development through improved access to resources, markets and knowledge.
Conservation Agriculture (CA) is a concept for resource-saving agricultural crop production system that strives to achieve acceptable profits together with high and sustained production levels while conserving the environment.
It is based on minimum tillage, crop residue retention, and crop rotations, has been proposed as an alternative system combining benefits for the farmer with advantages for the society.
Conservation Agriculture remains an important technology that improves soil processes, controls soil erosion and reduces production cost.
This document provides an overview of assessing soil quality. It discusses the importance of evaluating soil quality to understand the impacts of management practices on soil functions. Key parameters for assessing soil quality are organized into physical, chemical, and biological indicators. Common methods for evaluating soil quality indicators include statistical analysis, soil quality indexing, and case studies. Maintaining or improving soil quality is important for ensuring soil health and sustainable agricultural productivity over the long term.
This document discusses sustainable pork production. It notes that population growth will require more food production in the future. Today's farmers are much more efficient, feeding 155 people on average compared to 26 people in 1960 using fewer inputs. The pork industry aims to safeguard the environment, animal well-being, public health, and natural resources. It has developed metrics to measure its sustainability performance over time in areas like carbon footprint, water footprint, and land use. The goal is to continuously improve practices to benefit people, pigs, and the environment.
Jamie Burr - Sustainability in Pork Production - Pigs, Planet, PeopleJohn Blue
This document discusses sustainable pork production. It notes that population growth will require more food production in the future. Today's farmers are much more efficient, feeding 155 people on average compared to 26 people in 1960 using fewer inputs. The pork industry aims to safeguard the environment, animal well-being, public health, and natural resources. It has developed metrics to measure its sustainability performance over time in areas like carbon footprint, water footprint, and land use. The goal is to continuously improve practices to benefit people, pigs, and the environment.
Soil carbon sequestration involves transferring carbon dioxide from the atmosphere into the soil through crop residues and other organic materials. This process helps offset carbon emissions while improving soil quality and productivity. Management practices that maximize biomass addition and minimize soil disturbance, like no-till farming, are most effective for carbon sequestration. Increasing soil organic carbon provides benefits like increased agricultural productivity, improved soil structure and fertility, and enhanced water retention and infiltration. Adopting practices like adding organic amendments, reducing tillage, and using cover crops can help sequester carbon in cropland soils.
Effect of climate change on crop pest interactionversha kumari
Climate change also disrupts and alters the distribution of pests and diseases, which poses a threat to agriculture. Climate change will also modify host physiology and resistance, and alter the stages and rates of the development of pests. IPM provide enough flexibility by which we will able to deal with many of the pests.
Climate resilient agriculture adaptation and mitigation strategiesDevegowda S R
This document discusses climate resilient agriculture and its importance in India. It provides definitions of key terms like climate resilience, adaptation, and mitigation. It outlines various strategies for climate resilient practices in agriculture, including developing drought/heat tolerant crop varieties, improved water management, and diversifying crops and farm practices. The National Initiative on Climate Resilient Agriculture (NICRA) is described as the major government project focused on building resilience through strategic research, technology demonstrations, and capacity building. Several case studies on awareness, adoption and impact of climate resilient practices by farmers in India are summarized.
Strategies for Mitigation and Adaptation in Agriculture in context to Changin...Abhilash Singh Chauhan
- Agriculture is an important sector for India, contributing 17.32% to GDP and providing livelihoods for 54.6% of the population.
- Climate change is causing rising temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, and more frequent extreme weather events that are negatively impacting agricultural production in India. Greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector, such as from livestock, rice cultivation, and fertilizer use, are also contributing to climate change.
- Both adaptation and mitigation strategies are needed to address climate change in agriculture. Adaptation involves making crops, livestock, and farming practices more resilient to climate impacts. Mitigation focuses on reducing agricultural greenhouse gas emissions through practices like improved cropland management, livestock management,
Soil Organic Carbon Sequestration: Importance and State of ScienceExternalEvents
This presentation was presented during the Plenary 1, GSOC17 – Setting the scientific scene for GSOC17 of the Global Symposium on Soil Organic Carbon that took place in Rome 21-23 March 2017. The presentation was made by Mr. Rattan Lal from Carbon Management and Sequestration Center – USA , in FAO Hq, Rome
Enhancing the roles of ecosystem services in agriculture: agroecological prin...FAO
Presentation from Etienne Hainzelin from CIRAD, describing the principles of agroecological systems and the role of research within these. The presentation was prepared and delivered in occasion of the International Symposium on Agroecology for Food Security and Nutrition, held at FAO in Rome on 18-19 September 2014.
CLIMATE CHANGE AND CROP WATER PRODUCTIVITY - IMPACT AND MITIGATIONDebjyoti Majumder
This document discusses the impacts of climate change on crop water productivity and mitigation strategies. It begins with definitions of climate change and the greenhouse effect. It then shows data on increasing greenhouse gas concentrations and rising global temperatures. Various impacts are described, such as effects on crop yields from increased temperature and CO2 levels. Strategies to improve water use efficiency and mitigate impacts are covered, such as mulching, land configuration, irrigation scheduling and precision land leveling. Overall, the document analyzes how climate change affects crop water productivity and different agricultural practices that can help address this.
This document outlines an assessment of climate-smart agriculture (CSA). It discusses indicators for measuring CSA's contributions to food security, adaptation, and mitigation. It provides examples of successful CSA projects from FAO and others, including those focusing on improved rice cultivation techniques in Vietnam, drought-tolerant maize varieties in Africa, and livestock insurance programs in Kenya and Ethiopia. The document concludes with instructions for a breakout group exercise to further assess the CSA potential of case studies.
Along with changes in temperature, climate change will bring changes in global rainfall amounts and distribution patterns. And since temperature and water are two factors that have a large influence on the processes that take place in soils, climate change will therefore cause changes in the world’s soils
Agriculture in developing countries must undergo a significant transformation in order to meet the related challenges of achieving food security and responding to climate change. Projections based on population growth and food consumption patterns indicate that agricultural production will need to increase by at least 70 percent to meet demands by 2050. Most estimates also indicate that climate change is likely to reduce agricultural productivity, production stability and incomes in some areas that already have high levels of food insecurity. Developing climate-smart agriculture is thus crucial to achieving future food security and climate change goals. This seminar describe an approach to deal with the above issue viz. Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) and also examines some of the key technical, institutional, policy and financial responses required to achieve this transformation. Building on cases from the field, the seminar try to outlines a range of practices, approaches and tools aimed at increase the resilience and productivity of agricultural product systems, while also reducing and removing emissions. A part of the seminar elaborates institutional and policy options available to promote the transition to climate-smart agriculture at the smallholder level. Finally, the paper considers current gaps and makes innovative suggestion regarding the combined use of different sources, financing mechanism and delivery systems.
Carbon sequestration involves capturing carbon dioxide emissions from large point sources like power plants and storing it long-term to mitigate climate change. There are three main carbon sequestration methods: terrestrial through plants and soils, geological by injecting CO2 underground, and ocean storage by injecting it deep into the ocean. While carbon sequestration could help reduce emissions, concerns include potential leakage of stored CO2 and impacts on ocean life from ocean storage. More research is still needed but carbon sequestration may prove effective if sites are carefully selected and monitored.
The document provides an overview of options for greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. It discusses:
1) Agriculture contributes significantly to global emissions and reductions are necessary to meet climate targets. Many mitigation practices are compatible with sustainable development goals.
2) Key greenhouse gases from agriculture include methane, nitrous oxide, and carbon dioxide. Soils can also store carbon.
3) Common mitigation practices discussed include alternate wetting and drying of rice fields, livestock management improvements, efficient fertilizer use, agroforestry, and reducing food loss and waste.
4) The EX-ACT tool is introduced as a way to estimate and compare emissions between baseline and project scenarios to identify mitigation opportunities in agriculture
Soil Health definition and relationship to soil biology
Characteristics of healthy soil
Assessment of soil health
Framework for evaluating soil health
Indicators
Types of indicators
Biological indicators
Role of biological indicators
The document discusses sustainable agriculture and its ability to feed the world. It notes that over 1 billion people currently experience hunger daily and that food production will need to double in the next 25-50 years to meet demand. However, business as usual approaches will not work due to threats like climate change, water scarcity, and loss of biodiversity. Advanced technologies may help boost yields but risks need to be carefully evaluated. Policies should promote sustainability, small farmers, and rural development through improved access to resources, markets and knowledge.
Conservation Agriculture (CA) is a concept for resource-saving agricultural crop production system that strives to achieve acceptable profits together with high and sustained production levels while conserving the environment.
It is based on minimum tillage, crop residue retention, and crop rotations, has been proposed as an alternative system combining benefits for the farmer with advantages for the society.
Conservation Agriculture remains an important technology that improves soil processes, controls soil erosion and reduces production cost.
This document provides an overview of assessing soil quality. It discusses the importance of evaluating soil quality to understand the impacts of management practices on soil functions. Key parameters for assessing soil quality are organized into physical, chemical, and biological indicators. Common methods for evaluating soil quality indicators include statistical analysis, soil quality indexing, and case studies. Maintaining or improving soil quality is important for ensuring soil health and sustainable agricultural productivity over the long term.
This document discusses sustainable pork production. It notes that population growth will require more food production in the future. Today's farmers are much more efficient, feeding 155 people on average compared to 26 people in 1960 using fewer inputs. The pork industry aims to safeguard the environment, animal well-being, public health, and natural resources. It has developed metrics to measure its sustainability performance over time in areas like carbon footprint, water footprint, and land use. The goal is to continuously improve practices to benefit people, pigs, and the environment.
Jamie Burr - Sustainability in Pork Production - Pigs, Planet, PeopleJohn Blue
This document discusses sustainable pork production. It notes that population growth will require more food production in the future. Today's farmers are much more efficient, feeding 155 people on average compared to 26 people in 1960 using fewer inputs. The pork industry aims to safeguard the environment, animal well-being, public health, and natural resources. It has developed metrics to measure its sustainability performance over time in areas like carbon footprint, water footprint, and land use. The goal is to continuously improve practices to benefit people, pigs, and the environment.
Sustainability in Pork Production - Pigs, Planet, People National Pork Board
This document discusses sustainable pork production. It notes that population growth will require more food production in the future. Today's farmers are much more efficient, feeding 155 people on average compared to 26 people in 1960 using fewer inputs. The pork industry aims to safeguard the environment, animal well-being, public health, and natural resources. It has developed metrics to measure its sustainability performance over time in areas like carbon footprint, water footprint, and land use. The goal is to continuously improve practices to benefit people, pigs, and the environment.
Mr. Allan Stokes - The Sustainable Pork FrameworkJohn Blue
The Sustainable Pork Framework - Mr. Allan Stokes, Director of Environmental Programs, National Pork Board, from the 2015 NIAA Annual Conference titled 'Water and the Future of Animal Agriculture', March 23 - March 26, 2015, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
More presentations at http://www.trufflemedia.com/agmedia/conference/2015_niaa_water_future_animal_ag
"International experiences with reduction of greenhouse gasses from dairy farms: strategy and implementation: U.S." was presented by Joe McMahan at the Kick-off meeting on "Piloting and scaling of low emission development options in large scale dairy farms in China" on September 28th, 2020.
Presented by Ben Lukuyu, Leonard Marwa, Chrispinus Rubanza, Anthony Kimaro and Christopher Mutungi at at the Africa RISING ESA Project Review and Planning Meeting, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, 11-12 September 2019.
The document provides initial recommendations for a Climate-Smart Agriculture Project proposal in Malawi. It defines Climate-Smart Agriculture as increasing productivity sustainably, enhancing resilience to climate change impacts, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The recommendations focus on the first two pillars of CSA - sustainably increasing productivity and adaptation. Specific recommendations include incorporating flood management techniques, sustainable water management, soil management to increase carbon content, integrating trees into farming systems, and investing in research, extension, and monitoring programs to track progress of CSA interventions.
Presented by Ciniro Costa Jr., CCAFS, on 28 June 2021 at the Asian Development Bank (ADB) Webinar on Sustainable Protein Case Study: Outputs and Synthesis of Results.
This document discusses sustainable livestock and crop production. It begins with definitions of sustainability in agriculture. It then describes several sustainability initiatives and certification programs in Canada including the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, and Sustainable Agriculture Initiative Platform. The rest of the document focuses on describing a theoretical model sustainable farm in Ontario with details on its crop rotations, livestock species included, feed requirements, manure and nutrient outputs, and protein production potentials of different livestock combinations.
Mitigating methane in livestock systems: Scaling up feed additives & evidence...Sadie W Shelton
This presentation was given on May 18, 2022, by Sinead Waters, The Agriculture and Food Development Authority, Ireland, and the Livestock Research Group of the GRA.
The presentation was part of the "Scaling up feed additives & evidence for impacts" webinar, an Aim4Climate Ideation event.
This event is coordinated by The Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT in partnership with:
• New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre (NZAGRC)
• Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases (GRA)
• The Gund Institute for Environment at the University of Vermont
• Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)
• United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
• Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC)
• Aim4Climate, USDA
Eco-Intensification - the science of organic farming: A guide to climate resi...IFOAM
Organic farming practices like increasing soil organic matter, recycling nutrients on-farm, and optimizing animal health can help mitigate climate change. Soil management in organic systems builds soil carbon by increasing soil organic matter levels up to 60% on average. This sequesters carbon from the atmosphere. Organic livestock systems also aim to use roughages that don't compete with food production and prioritize animal welfare. Improving animal health, fertility and udder health can boost productivity while lowering emissions per unit of milk. Overall, eco-intensification shows potential climate benefits through increased carbon storage, reduced energy use, and diversified management practices that enhance resilience to climate impacts.
Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in animal agricultureLPE Learning Center
What steps can animal agriculture take to reduce (mitigate) the greenhouse gas emissions from their farms? What is carbon sequestration and how will that play a role? For more on this topic, visit: http://extension.org/60702
Mr. Karl Williams - Beef Sustainability in Oxfordshire, UKJohn Blue
Beef Sustainability in Oxfordshire, UK - Mr. Karl Williams (Europe), from the 2016 Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (GRSB), October 5 - 6, 2016, Banff, Alberta, Canada.
More presentations at http://trufflemedia.com/agmedia/conference/2016-global-roundtable-sustainable-beef
Application of digestibility values in poultry and bioassay and analytical procedures using poultry
Sri Venkateswara veterinary university
Animal nutrition
Vishnu Vardhan Reddy
This document discusses strategies for reducing agricultural emissions and transitioning to a more sustainable food system in the UK. It proposes reducing livestock production which would free up 75% of grazing land for alternative uses like growing biomass crops, expanding forests and restoring peatlands to capture carbon. Transitioning to a plant-based diet with less meat and dairy would reduce emissions, land usage, and improve health. Vertical farming in urban areas is presented as a potential solution to food access issues, though more research is still needed to evaluate its feasibility.
Are proteases beneficial for the environment- Kyriazakis, I. Workshop 3 presented at the Feed Proteases and enzyme seminar, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 2014.
Presentation at workshop: Reducing the costs of GHG estimates in agriculture to inform low emissions development
November 10-12, 2014
Sponsored by the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
Animal agriculture adaptation planning guide (climate change)LPE Learning Center
This 44-page publication produced by the AACC project is a planning guide to help guide farmers through the process of future farm planning considering climate change.
Format: Factsheet or Publication - Reference: Schmidt, D., E. Whitefield, D. Smith. 2014. Produced for Animal Agriculture in a Changing Climate Project.
What is the difference when talking about weather versus climate? How do you measure and describe the atmosphere? How are models used in predicting weather or climate? For more on this topic, visit: http://extension.org/60702
What are some of the basic principles and terminology involved in climate change? Learn more about the Earth's atmosphere, energy balance, and how the greenhouse effect can alter both climate and weather. What is climate forcing? What is climate feedback? For more on this topic, visit: http://extension.org/60702
The current state of cap-and-trade in the U.S. and the mandatory greenhouse g...LPE Learning Center
There are currently two operational cap-and-trade programs in the US - the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative involving nine Northeast states, and the California market. These programs allow regulated entities to meet emissions reductions obligations by purchasing carbon offsets achieved by other businesses such as agriculture. Farmers can generate offsets by capturing carbon through anaerobic digestion of manure and selling the reductions. The EPA also has a greenhouse gas reporting rule requiring facilities emitting over 25,000 tons of CO2e annually to report emissions, though this does not currently apply to livestock due to congressional restrictions. An opportunity exists for animal agriculture to benefit financially from these programs by generating carbon offsets.
Contribution of greenhouse gas emissions: animal agriculture in perspectiveLPE Learning Center
What are the emissions of relevant greenhouse gases from animal agriculture production and how does that compare to other industries? For more on this topic, visit: http://extension.org/60702
Blue, green, and gray water categorize sources of water used in hog production. Blue water comes from surface and groundwater sources, green water is rainwater used by crops, and gray water is the water required to dilute polluted water. A water footprint measures the total water used and impacted in producing goods and services, including direct water used by hogs in a barn and indirect water used on farm operations. The Pig Production Environmental Calculator provides hog farmers data on their water footprint in gallons for total use, per pig per year, and per pound of pork, categorized by sources like feed, management, and facilities. This allows farmers to identify areas to reduce their water usage and environmental impact.
A land footprint is the amount of land used to produce a product and only accounts for actual land area, not greenhouse gas emissions. The National Pork Board's Pig Production Environmental Footprint Calculator estimates the land footprint of swine facilities by accounting for the land needed to produce all feed ingredients. The calculator allows users to understand how individual feed ingredients and changes to them can impact the total land footprint of a farming operation. Environmental footprint calculators help agricultural producers improve efficiencies while minimizing environmental impacts from their practices.
Impact of aerosols on respiratory health of dairy workers and residents livin...LPE Learning Center
This document summarizes recent research on the impact of aerosols on respiratory health among dairy workers and residents living near dairies. It discusses studies showing associations between endotoxin exposure from livestock farms and reduced risk of asthma and allergies. However, other studies have found occupational exposures to be associated with respiratory symptoms and lung function reductions in dairy workers. The document calls for identifying high exposure tasks and locations, implementing engineering and protective controls, providing medical monitoring, and training to help manage risks to worker and community health from agricultural aerosols in the face of scientific uncertainties.
Estimation of infectious risks in residential populations near a center pivot...LPE Learning Center
This document summarizes a quantitative microbial risk assessment of infectious risks from land application of dairy wastewater via center pivot irrigation. The study used an exposure model to estimate pathogen concentrations in air at different distances from the pivot based on emission rates. A dose-response model then estimated infection risks from inhalation and ingestion. Results showed risks of infection were very low during daytime applications but potentially higher at night. The study concludes risks can be managed by applying wastewater during daylight hours at the lowest percentage to minimize airborne pathogens and recommends these practices to safely use dairy wastewater for irrigation.
User capabilities and next generation phosphorus (p) indicesLPE Learning Center
Full proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/72814
The phosphorus (P) index is the primary approach to identify field management strategies and/or manure application strategies likely to lead to excessive risk of P loss. It has been over 40 years since the first research connecting agronomic P management and water quality and over 20 years since the initial publication defining a P Index. This session will consider opportunities to build on and expand existing P Index strategies to make them more effective at protecting water quality and friendlier to the target user.
Full proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/72818
Phosphorus indices provide relative loss ratings that then have a corresponding management response. Because most state Phosphorus Indices are qualitative it is not clear how the relative loss rating corresponds to actual phosphorus inputs into the receiving water and how the receiving water would react to these additions. Even with qualitative Phosphorus Indices, unless the water resource has a specific Total Maximum Daily Load, it is not clear how losses correspond to water quality outcomes. These issues will be discussed in the context of the 590 Natural Resources Conservation Standard for nutrient management.
Full proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/72868
There has been a tremendous amount of activity and funding of conservation programs with regional and watershed-specific cost-share initiatives. While there have been some successes, water quality response in many areas has not been as great as expected. This has led many to question the efficacy of these measures and to call for stricter land and nutrient management strategies. In many cases, this limited response has been due to the legacies of past management activities, where sinks and stores of phosphorus along the land-freshwater continuum mask the effects of reductions in edge-of-field losses of phosphorus.
Estimation of phosphorus loss from agricultural land in the southern region o...LPE Learning Center
Full Proceedings is available at: http://www.extension.org/72817
The purpose of our work was to determine, within the southern region (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, MS, NC, OK, SC, TN, and TX), the feasibility of using different models to determine potential phosphorus loss from agricultural fields in lieu of phosphorus indices.
Estimation of phosphorus loss from agricultural land in the heartland region ...LPE Learning Center
Full Proceedings is available at: http://www.extension.org/72813
Phosphorus (P) indices are a key tool to minimize P loss from agricultural fields but there is insufficient water quality data to fully test them. Our goal is to use the Agricultural Policy/Environmental eXtender Model (APEX), calibrated with existing edge-of-field runoff data, to refine P indices and demonstrate their utility as a field assessment tool capable of protecting water quality. In this phase of the project our goal is to use existing small-watershed data from the Heartland Region (IA, KS, MO and NE) to determine the level of calibration needed for APEX before using the model to generate estimates of P loads appropriate for evaluating a P Index.
Checking ambition with reality the pros and cons of different approaches to s...LPE Learning Center
Full proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/72793
The revision of the USDA-NRCS national standard for nutrient management in 2011 was driven, in part, by inconsistencies in state phosphorus (P) indices, rekindling debates over standardizing indices at regional or national scales. Reasonable arguments exist for maintaining the status quo, which allows for state specific site assessment approaches, as well as for regional and national P Indices, which would take advantage of expertise, resources and technologies that may not exist locally. In addition, a diversity of site assessment approaches have now been proposed that differ from the original P Index. Understanding the benefits and limitations provided with these approaches is key to advancing site assessment for P management.
Removing phosphorus from drainage water the phosphorus removal structureLPE Learning Center
Full proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/72839
We constructed a phosphorus (P) removal structure on a poultry farm in Eastern OK; this is a BMP that can remove dissolved P loading in the short term until soil legacy P concentrations decrease below levels of environmental concern. A P removal structure contains P sorbing materials (PSMs) and are placed in a location to intercept runoff or subsurface drainage with high dissolved P concentrations. As high P water flows through the PSMs, dissolved P is sorbed onto the materials by several potential mechanisms, allowing low P water to exit the structure. While they vary in form, P removal structures contain three main elements: 1) use of a filter material that has a high affinity for P, 2) containment of the material, and 3) the ability to remove that material and replace it after it becomes saturated with P and is no longer effective.
Legacy phosphorus in calcareous soils effects of long term poultry litter app...LPE Learning Center
Full proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/72864
Livestock manures, including poultry litter, are often applied to soil as crop fertilizer or as a disposal mechanism near livestock housing. Manures can improve soil quality and fertility; however, over-application can result in negative environmental consequences, such as eutrophication of surface waters following runoff of soluble or particulate-associate phosphorus (P). In soil, P exists in many forms (inorganic/organic, labile/stable) and the fate of manure P is highly dependent upon soil properties, including soil texture and microbial activity. The Houston Black series is a calcareous (~17% calcium carbonate), high-clay soil that occupies roughly 12.6 million acres in east-central Texas. These Blackland vertizols are agronomically important for the production of cotton, corn, hay, and other crops, but their high calcium and clay content could lead to accumulation of P in forms that are not readily available for plant utilization. Accumulated P could serve as a source of legacy P if mineralized or otherwise transformed in situ or transported with soil particles in runoff.
Identify and synthesize methods to refine phosphorus indices from three regio...LPE Learning Center
The full proceedings paper is at: http://www.extension.org/72867
This project was started to work with regional CIG projects to calibrate and harmonize Phosphorus Indices across the U.S., demonstrate their accuracy in identifying the magnitude and extent of phosphorus loss risk, and provide suggestions to refine or improve existing Indices. This research is important to provide consistency among state Phosphorus Indices and their subsequent recommendations.
Modeling phosphorus runoff in the chesapeake bay region to test the phosphoru...LPE Learning Center
Full Proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/72795
The revision of USDA-NRCS’s standard for nutrient management coincided with significant assessment of the performance of Phosphorus (P) Indices in the six states that are tied to the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The 64,000 square mile watershed is the focus of unprecedented activity around nutrient management as a result of a 2011 Total Maximum Daily Load for P, nitrogen (N), and sediment under the Clean Water Act. In addition, the state of Maryland had required updates to it’s original P Index, resulting in broad scrutiny by various interest groups. Within this setting, USDA-NRCS funded a multi-state project to help advance the testing and harmonization of P-based management in the Chesapeake region.
Measuring Nitrous Oxide & Methane from Feedyard Surfaces - the NFT-NSS Chambe...LPE Learning Center
Full proceedings at: http://www.extension.org/72909 Accurate estimation of greenhouse gas emissions, including nitrous oxide and methane, from open beef cattle feedlots is an increasing concern given the current and potential future reporting requirements for GHG emissions. Research measuring emission fluxes of GHGs from open beef cattle feedlots, however, has been very limited. Soil and environmental scientists have long used various chamber based techniques, particularly non-flow-through - non-steady-state (NFT-NSS) chambers for measuring soil fluxes. Adaptation of this technique to feedyards presents a series of challenges, including spatial variability, presence of animals, chamber base installation issues, gas sample collection and storage, concentration analysis range, and flux calculations.
8. What is ‘mitigation’?
• Practices that reduce the net amount of heat
trapping gases released into the atmosphere
• Fewer air miles
• Better fuel efficiency
• Cleaner burning fuels
• Energy conservation
• Carbon capture
• Production efficiency
• Carbon sequestration
• Fertilizer efficiency
21. Pasture/Rangeland Sustainability
• Proper stocking rates
• Genetics compatible to local climate
• High input low or no input
• Calving season in sync with forage availability
25. Reducing Methane per Unit of Milk
on an Individual Cow Basis
Approach #1
Milk/cow
DMI/cow
CH4/cow
Approach #2
• Maintain milk/cow
• Reduce maintenance energy
CH4/cow
26. • Increasing lifetime productivity will indirectly reduce
methane emissions per unit of milk
• Tradeoffs:
– Increased incidence of common diseases
– Lower heat stress threshold (Rauw et al., 1998 & Ravagnolo and Miszt,
2000)
– Increased energy maintenance needs
Genetics
27. • Improve overall herd health
• Reduce death loss,
lameness, and diseases
• Utilize performance
enhancing technologies
(rBST)
• Improve estrus detection and
synchronization
• Reduce heat stress
• Reduce culled cows due to
poor reproduction
Management and Fertility
Mitigation Strategies
Trends in milk yield (●) and Daughter
Pregnancy Rate (○) for US Holsteins.
Source: Hansen, 2008
Data are from USDA-ARS Animal Improvement
Programs Laboratory, February 2007
28. • Improve feed efficiency
• Increase number of piglets
weaned over the sow’s lifetime
• Improve herd health
• Reduce animal stress
• Increase energy efficiency
• Manure storage and management
Swine Operations
32. • Crude protein reduced from 19 to 16%
• Fed amino acid supplements
• CH4 was reduced 27.3%
• CO2 reduced 3.8%
(Atakora, et al., 2003)
Reducing Crude Protein
33. Reducing Crude Protein
• Finisher pigs & sows fed wheat-barely-canola
• Crude protein reduced and amino acid
supplemented
• CO2-equivalent reduced 14.3 to 16.5%
Atakora et al. (2004)
34. Reducing Crude Protein
• 20% reduction in dietary protein
• Amino acid supplement
• Nitrogen excretion reduced 35%
(Möhn and Susenbeth, 1995)
37. Poultry Operations
(Dunkley, 2011)
Propane Use:
• Broiler and pullet farms – 68%
of emissions
• Breeder farms – 3% of
emissions
Reduce heat loss in houses
• Insulated curtains (houses
without walls)
• Insulate walls and ceilings
38. Poultry Operations
Electricity Use:
• Breeder farms – 85% of emissions
Reduce electricity use in houses
• Improve energy efficiency
• exhaust fans
• lighting
• generators
• incinerators
• Install circulatory fans to reduce
temperature stratification
• Use radiant instead of gas heaters
for brooding
(Dunkley, 2011)
43. Other Benefits
• Odor control
• Renewable energy generation
• Potential revenue source
• Pathogen reduction
• Improvement in water quality
• Conversion of nutrients from organic
to inorganic form
44. • Reduce storage time
• Biological treatment
• Crop nutrient source
• Build organic matter
Land Application
45. Land Application
Mitigation Strategies
• Reduce initial N concentration
• Avoid application to wet soils
• Maintain pH > 6.5
• Apply to a growing crop
• Balance manure nutrient application with crop needs
• Apply or move manure subsurface
46. Land & Pasture Management
• Maintain vegetation
• Plant trees - Silvopasture
• Fertilizer application BMP’s
47. • Grazing system changes
− Changing from traditional pasture
grazing to intensive feedlot system
• Feeding strategies
− Lipid supplements
− Ionophores
− Plant compounds
− Probiotics and organic acids
− Improved genetics
− Lower protein diet (swine)
• Manure management
− Manure compaction
− Frequency of spreading
− Manure aeration
− Solid-liquid separation (swine)
− Bedding materials (swine)
Emerging Mitigation Practices
(Archibeque et al., 2012)
48. Summary
• Mitigation practices reduce the amount of
greenhouse gases released into the
atmosphere.
• Mitigation options vary depending with
species, type of operation, and local
environment.
• Mitigation practices can have additional
environmental and financial benefits.
49. Livestock and Poultry
Environmental Learning Center
Project Support
This project was supported by Agricultural and Food Research Initiative
Competitive Grant No. 2011-67003-30206 from the USDA National
Institute of Food and Agriculture.
50. www.animalagclimatechange.org
National Lead: University of
Nebraska
Regional Partners: University of
Georgia; Cornell University;
University of Minnesota; Texas
A&M AgriLife Extension, and
Washington State University.
Project Partners
Our Mission
Animal agriculture in a changing climate fosters animal production
practices that are: environmentally sound and economically viable,
and that create resiliency for animal producers and their partners.
51. Graphic Sources
http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/AFGGInventory1990_2008.htm
Capper, J. L., R. A. Cady and D. E. Bauman (2009) “The Environmental
Impact of Dairy Production, 1944 vs 2007.” J. An Sci. 2009.87:2160-2167
Adapted from: Capper, J. L., R. A. Cady and D. E. Bauman. 2009. “The
Environmental Impact of Dairy Production, 1944 vs 2007.” J. An Sci.
2009.87:2160-2167, and Capper, J.L. 2011. “The environmental impact
of beef production in the United States: 1977 compared with 2007.” J.
An Sci. 2011.89:4249-4261
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html
67. References
Archibeque et al., 2012. Greenhouse gas mitigation opportunities for livestock
management in the United States. NI B 12-01. July 2012. Policy Brief – Nicholas
Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions. Duke University. Accessed
2/20/2012. http://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/ecosystem/land/greenhouse-gas-
mitigation-opportunities-for-livestock-management-in-the-united-states
Atakora, JKA, S Möhn and RO Ball 2003b Low protein diets maintain performance
and reduce greenhouse gas production in finisher pigs.Adv Pork Production 14:
A17.
Atakora JKA, S. Möhn, and R.O. Ball. 2004. Effects of dietary protein reduction on
greenhouse gas emission from pigs Advances in Pork Production. Volume 15,
Abstract #30.
68. References
Capper, J. L., R. A. Cady and D. E. Bauman, 2009. The environmental impact of
dairy production, 1944 vs 2007. J. An Sci. 2009.87:2160-2167
Capper, J.L., 2011. The environmental impact of beef production in the United
States: 1977 compared with 2007. J. An Sci. 2011.89:4249-4261
Bergstrom J. R., Nelssen J. L.,Tokach M. D., Dritz S. S., Goodband R. D.,
DeRouchey J. M.. 2012. The effects of two feeder designs and adjustment
strategies on the growth performance and carcass characteristics of growing-
finishing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 90(90):4555–4566.
Bergstrom, J. R., Tokach, M. D., Dritz, S. S., Nelssen, J. L., DeRouchey, J. M., and
Goodband, R. D.. Effects of Design on Growth Performance and Carcass
Characteristics of Finishing Pigs. http://www.asi.k-state.edu/doc6306.ashx
69. References
Dunkley, Claudia S., 2011. Global Warming: How does it relate to poultry? UGA
Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1382. Accessed 12/4/2012.
http://www.caes.uga.edu/applications/publications/files/pdf/B%201382_1.PDF
EPA. 2012. Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990-2010.
Accessed Dec 17, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html
Lucy, 2001 -
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030201701580
Möhn, S. and A. Susenbeth. 1995. Influence of dietary protein content on
efficiency of energy utilization in growing pigs. Archives of Animal Nutrition.
47:361-372.
70. References
USDA, 2011. U.S. Agriculture and Forestry Greenhouse Gas Inventory: 1990-2008.
Accessed Dec 17, 2012.
http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/AFGGInventory1990_2008.htm
71. Livestock and Poultry
Environmental Learning Center
Project Support
This project was supported by Agricultural and Food Research Initiative
Competitive Grant No. 2011-67003-30206 from the USDA National
Institute of Food and Agriculture.
72. www.animalagclimatechange.org
National Lead: University of
Nebraska
Regional Partners: University of
Georgia; Cornell University;
University of Minnesota; Texas
A&M AgriLife Extension, and
Washington State University.
Project Partners
Our Mission
Animal agriculture in a changing climate fosters animal production
practices that are: environmentally sound and economically viable,
and that create resiliency for animal producers and their partners.
Editor's Notes
Hello and welcome to this lesson on Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. My name is David Smith and I’m a Program Specialist with Texas A&M AgriLife Extension in the Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering at Texas A&M University.
In the previous lesson, we looked at some of the contributions of greenhouse gases from different types of livestock and poultry operations.
We saw that in the US, animal agriculture has dramatically increased its production efficiency, as it continues to produce more product with fewer resources.
We should also now recognize that the overall carbon footprint of agriculture is relatively small compared to other sectors of the economy such as transportation.
While this is true, animal agriculture is often called upon to defend its impact on the environment, and therefore must continually demonstrate its commitment to stewardship. One way to do that is to identify and adopt best management practices that continue to improve production efficiency while at the same time reduce its share of greenhouse gas emissions.
In this lesson, we will define what we mean by mitigation in the context of greenhouse gas emissions. We will discuss several species-specific mitigation options available to farmers and ranchers. And finally, we will consider how some of these mitigation practices might have other environmental and financial benefits beyond just reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Let’s start out by defining what we mean by mitigation in the context of this lesson. Mitigation is defined as any practice that reduces the amount of heat trapping gases, called greenhouse gases, from being released into the atmosphere. Let’s take a look at some examples from other industries. In the airline industry, we talk about mitigation in terms of flying fewer miles (by improving flight schedules), or improving the fuel efficiency of airplanes. In the energy sector, mitigation might include cleaner burning fuels (drilling for more natural gas compared to mining more coal), as well as improving energy conservation throughout an electrical grid. Manufacturing facilities might look at carbon capture methods or improving the production efficiency through automation and control. And in agriculture, we might consider soil carbon sequestration and improved fertilizer efficiency, which improves crop production while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
So if you look at animal agriculture from a big picture perspective, there are really four main categories of mitigation practices. First, we can look at production efficiency (producing more output of meat, milk and eggs per unit input). Second, there’s a lot we can do to improve manure management practices that not only reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but at the same time address water and air quality concerns. Third is energy efficiency. As we continue the trend toward more controlled environments within animal production, there is a growing need to be more energy efficient in our lighting, heating and cooling systems. And finally, a win-win for farmers is carbon capture and storage (called carbon sequestration) by increasing organic matter in soils and maintaining cover crops and trees on crop, pasture, and range lands.
One of the challenges in identifying effective mitigation practices for livestock and poultry operations is that animal agriculture is extremely diverse. This is true even within a given animal species.
Just look at beef cattle operations. You have confined feeder operations, cow-calf operations, and stocker operations. You also have seedstock and niche markets to consider. With each of these you’re dealing with different environments, from non-vegetative feedlots with high-density stocking, to pasture and rangeland environments with variable stocking rates. Where greenhouse gas emissions occur and what mitigation options are most appropriate will ultimately depend upon the type of operation.
Greenhouse gas mitigation options are also somewhat dependent upon location and climate.
Dairy operations in the American southwest, for example, may have access to a greater amount of cropland and pastures and long growing season which provides more flexibility and increased opportunity for land application. In the northeast, where cropland and growing season is limited, mitigation might focus more on manure storage and utilization for energy production. Also, whether a dairy is totally confined, totally pasture-based, or a mix of the two will determine which mitigation options might be appropriate from a dietary standpoint. Each type of operation produces greenhouse gases in different amounts and at different points along the production system.
In beef cattle operations, one of the most effective mitigation strategies is to increase cattle production efficiency. In a cow-calf operation it all starts with improving fertility, pregnancy rate, and successful deliveries through good breeding practices. Maintaining a healthy herd also results in fewer culled cattle and lower mortality rates. This minimizes feed and pasture resources spent on unhealthy cattle and replacements, as well as reducing overall greenhouse gas emissions. Faster weight gain through improved pastures and supplements is something many ranchers already do to increase profitability, but it also can reduce greenhouse gas emissions per unit of beef produced.
If we look at feeder cattle operations, there’s a lot of ongoing research exploring the potential of dietary additives such as ionophores, oils, and vaccines in reducing enteric methane formation in the rumen.
Results thus far show various levels of effectiveness, particularly long-term impacts.
A recent FAO report reviewed several hundred published research studies and found significant inconsistency feed supplements in reducing rumen methane.
They looked at such things as potential methane mitigating effect and whether the mitigating impact was effective over the long-term. They also considered animal and environmental safety and regional applicability. For many feed additives their mitigating effect was short-lived, depended upon diet composition, and affected by other factors such as feed intake and daily weight gain.
For example, research showed that overall, ionophores, such as monensin, do not appear to have a consistent direct effect on reducing enteric methane production in beef cattle and in cases where a reduction did occur, the effect was short lived.
On the other hand, individual studies do indicate improvement in feed efficiency that may reduce methane emissions per unit of meat. When evaluated on this basis, ionophores may have a methane mitigating effect in ruminants after all.
Other diet-related mitigation strategies being studied include inclusion of concentrate feeds, increasing the digestibility of forage, and precision feeding. If you compare methane emission on a per head basis, emissions from grain-fed cattle are typically lower than for cattle on pasture. However, concentrate supplementation is not a very practical substitute for high-quality forage, and in many areas of the world is not an economically feasible or socially acceptable option. Improving forage digestibility by feeding legumes or preserved silage also appears to reduce enteric methane and may also reduce urinary nitrogen losses and, consequently, nitrous oxide emissions from manure deposited on soil. Through feed analysis and precision feeding we can more closely match animal requirements and dietary nutrient needs. This is important for maximizing feed utilization, stabilizing rumen fermentation, improving rumen health, and minimizing nitrogen excretion in manure and urine.
Cattle feedlots also generate a significant amount of ammonia, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions from manure and urine deposited on the ground. The manure is periodically scraped, piled and stored until it is either land applied, used to generate energy, or composted. Later in is this presentation we’ll discuss some of the ways greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced using different manure management methods.
Another approach that’s been practiced throughout history, and is growing in popularity among cow/calf and stocker operators in the US, is rotational grazing (sometimes called controlled or mob grazing). In this system, forage supply and growth is controlled by strategically moving herds of cattle through partitioned paddocks within the ranch. With rotational grazing, along with genetic selection of cattle that conform to local climate conditions, many ranchers are moving from high input operations to a low or no input systems. Using proper stocking rates and adjusting breeding and calving seasons that coincide with forage production cycles, these producers are substantially reducing or totally eliminating supplemental feeding and seeing their profit margins increase. Eliminating inputs such as supplemental hay may also reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the use of fuel and fertilizer-related products needed to apply, grow, harvest, and transport the hay.
The dairy industry in the US has been very successful in increasing milk productivity. While the dairy herd has declined about two million head since 1985, milk production per cow has continued to rise.
The dairy industry has also made public their goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In January 2009, the Innovation Center for U.S. Dairy announced a voluntary goal to reduce the greenhouse gas emission of a gallon of milk, from farm to retail, by 25 percent by 2020.
For dairy operations the key approach to greenhouse gas mitigation is increasing the lifetime production efficiency of the cow, through genetic selection, earlier weaning, dietary changes, improving herd health, and reducing cattle stress.
On an individual cow basis, methane emission per unit of milk can be reduced using two different approaches. The first approach is to increase milk yield per cow with correspondingly smaller increases in dry matter intake. This “dilutes” the cow’s maintenance energy cost and increases its energy efficiency resulting in less methane produced.
The second approach is to reduce body size without reducing milk yield and milk components. This will reduce the maintenance energy requirements of the cow, and thus the methane produced per cow. Both approaches are based on the fact that maintenance energy requirement is largely a function of body size. Because methane production is proportional to the energy intake of the animal, reducing maintenance energy costs and energy intake while maintaining milk yield would decrease enteric methane, both on a per head per day basis and a per pound of milk basis.
Improved genetics and artificial insemination of dairy cattle has greatly enhanced our ability to identify and select for breeds genetically superior for milk production. Genetic approaches that increase lifetime productivity, including those that promote better health, disease resistance, reproduction, and heat tolerance lead to improvements in individual and herd productivity, and indirectly reduce methane emissions per unit of milk.
But we’re also recognizing that breeding for increased milk production does have tradeoffs. Genetics selected primarily for milk productivity have shown to increase the incidences of common diseases in dairy cattle (such as ketosis and mastitis) and have low to moderate heritability (Uribe et al., 1995; Zwald et al., 2004). Studies also show heat tolerance to be a heritable trait (Ravagnolo and Miszt, 2000), and the threshold at which cows begin experiencing heat stress is lower in higher producing dairy cows. Since high producing cows generally eat more, energy needed to maintain body function is also increased.
It makes sense that management practices that enhance the ability of an individual cow to increase milk yields and reach its genetic potential will reduce the amount of methane produced per unit of milk of the whole herd. These management approaches include practices to improve herd health, reduce death loss, lameness and diseases, and using performance enhancing technologies such as BST.
If we look over the past 60 years, we see that as milk yield has steadily increased, pregnancy rate has consistently declined. This decline in fertility, with the advent of artificial insemination and genetic selection, is found in all the major dairy breeds in the U.S., but is most pronounced in Holsteins (Lucy, 2001). This trend is often been associated with the selection for increasing milk yield (Lucy, 2001), however there are many management factors that may be responsible for the declines in reproductive efficiency over this time period. Currently, approximately 19% of culling decisions are for reproductive reasons (Hadley et al., 2006). Better estrus detection, estrus synchronization, prevention of early embryonic death, heat stress abatement, and transition cow health would result in improvements in reproduction, and reducing the number of cows culled due to poor reproduction. In turn, reduced culling reduces the need for replacement animals and can reduce whole herd methane emissions.
In swine operations, mitigating greenhouse gas emissions can come from improved feed efficiencies, and increasing the number of piglets weaned per sow over her lifetime. We know that healthier pigs utilize feed more efficiently, so we can continue to improve herd health and reduce animal stress. Since most swine operations use confined housing, we can also reduce energy consumption by using energy efficient cooling and heating systems, and conducting regular fan maintenance. There is also a lot of research being done on handling, storing, and utilizing manure to minimize odor and reduce amount of greenhouse gases being released. Later, we’ll discuss systems specifically designed to capture and utilize manure methane for on and off-farm energy use.
Much of the attention for reducing greenhouse gas production in swine operation is focused on feeding strategies, such as increasing the average daily gain and minimizing feed waste. One strategy is switching from a dry feed to wet/dry feeders. Several studies have evaluated the effects of conventional dry feeders versus wet/dry feeders on the growth performance of finishing pigs.
Research trials conducted at Kansas State University in 2008 showed pigs using the wet-dry feeder had greater average daily gain, higher daily feed intake, and a final weight comparable to pigs using the conventional dry feeder.
However, pigs using the wet-dry feeder consumed more feed, had a higher feed to gain ratio, and had a higher feed cost per pig than pigs using the conventional feeder. This study also showed a reduction in net income per pig for pigs fed with the wet-dry feeder.
Another mitigation options showing potential for swine operations is use of amino acid supplements to reduce the crude protein content in the diet, which also lowers the amount of manure nitrogen excreted.
In one study, researchers reported a reduction of methane emissions by 27 percent and carbon dioxide emissions by nearly 4 percent when pigs were fed 16 percent crude protein (supplemented with amino acids) diets compared to a diet containing 19 percent crude protein (Atakora et al., 2003).
In another study researchers found that by reducing the crude protein diet and supplementing with amino acids on feeder pigs and sows, they were able to reduce greenhouse gas CO2-equivalents by up to 16 percent.
And in a third study, researchers showed that a 20 percent reduction in dietary protein with amino acid supplements can reduce nitrogen excretion by as much as 35 percent.
For swine facilities, manure management is critical for keeping animals healthy, for reducing nuisance odors, and for controlling greenhouse gas emissions. Proper storage, treatment, and application of manure can help prevent excessive ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, methane and nitrous oxide emissions. Frequent removal of manure from hog facilities helps keep manure methane production to a minimum. Separation of manure into liquid and solids and anaerobically composting the solids has been shown to reduce methane, but may have a variable effect on nitrous oxide emissions, and may even tend to increase ammonia and total manure nitrogen losses.
When compared to beef and dairy cattle and swine, the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions is relatively small. Much of the greenhouse gas contribution from poultry operations is carbon dioxide released during the burning fossil fuels used to produce electricity, power combustion units such as furnaces and incinerators, and to power trucks, tractors and generators used on the farm. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions also occur during manure handling and storage and land application of manure.
A recent University of Georgia study found that the greenhouse gas mitigation practices are largely farm dependent, and the relative amounts of greenhouse gas emissions vary considerably with type of poultry operation. For example, the study found that about 68% of emissions from broiler and pullet farms came from propane use, while only 3% of emissions from breeder farms were from propane use. Propane is mainly used for heating purposes.
Reducing heat loss in poultry barns is key to reducing propane use. For houses without walls, insulated curtains help to limit heat loss, while for enclosed houses, walls and ceiling can be insulated.
On breeder farms, the same study found that electricity used for lighting and ventilation was responsible for about 85% of greenhouse gas emissions. Improving energy efficiency of exhaust fans, lighting, generators and incinerators can reduce the total amount of electricity used, thus resulting in fewer emissions.
Other energy reduction strategies include installing circulatory fans to prevent temperature stratification inside barns and using radiant instead of propane heaters for brooding operations.
With all animal production system, managing large quantities of manure poses both a significant challenge and potential opportunity for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. In the next few slides we will discuss some of these options.
Semi-permeable and impermeable manure storage covers offer many benefits, including odor control and for reducing greenhouse gas emissions as they trap manure gases such as methane, hydrogen sulfide, and ammonia and keep them within the manure liquid, instead of escaping to the atmosphere.
Combusting captured methane under impermeable methane that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere, can be flared off or used to generate on-farm power.
Like covered manure storage systems, anaerobic digesters provide a means to reduce methane emissions from animal manure that would have been emitted into the atmosphere, and using it to generate power for on-farm and off-farm uses. There are several different types and designs of aerobic digesters that can be customized for different livestock and poultry operations and site-specific conditions, such as plug flow, covered lagoons, and complete mix digesters.
Basically the way they work is by separating the biogas (which is mainly methane), from the solids and liquids portion of the manure. The biogas is then conditioned to remove moisture and hydrogen sulfide, and can then be used to power electric generators, boilers, heaters, or chillers. Heat and electricity generated can be used for farm or home use, or in some cases sold to energy companies. The solids and liquids portion of the manure can then be separated. Liquids can be stored in lagoons and used with irrigation as a fertilizer. Solids can be used or sold as organic fertilizer, compost, or bedding material.
This technology is still cost prohibitive to many farmers and ranchers, so of course the benefits of aerobic digesters should be weighed against the initial capital costs. Other benefits such as better control of manure odors, renewable energy generation, as well as potential revenue sources which include a reduction in energy purchased, sale of excess electricity or biogas, value-added products such as fertilizers and compost, and the potential value of carbon credits. This system also reduces manure pathogens and improves water quality.
Land application of solid and liquid manure offers many management and agronomic benefits including reducing the storage time of manure, and providing advanced biological treatment by soil organisms. It also enables beneficial utilization of manure nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus, and helps build soil organic matter.
While surface application techniques are relatively fast and inexpensive compared to other application methods, nitrogen and phosphorus in manure is more susceptible to being lost to runoff and ammonia volatilization. Tilling in, knifing in, or subsurface injection of manure places nutrient under the soil surface where they are less vulnerable to those losses. Soil injection reduces nitrous oxide emissions by minimizing manure nitrogen contact with air and reduces nitrogen losses from leaching and runoff.
There are several strategies for reducing loss of greenhouse gas emissions during land application, such as lowering the overall concentration of nitrogen in manure being applied (applying composted manure for example). It’s also important to avoid applying manure to saturated soils, which encourages conditions and maintaining soil pH above 6.5, as these conditions promote release of nitrous oxide. Other recommendations include restricting application to land during the growing season and balancing the quantity of manure with the nutritional requirements of the crop.
While surface application techniques are relatively fast and inexpensive compared to other application methods, nitrogen and phosphorus in manure is more susceptible to being lost to runoff and ammonia volatilization. Tilling in, knifing in, or subsurface injection of manure places nutrient under the soil surface where they are less vulnerable to those losses. Soil injection reduces nitrous oxide emissions by minimizing manure nitrogen contact with air and reduces nitrogen losses from leaching and runoff.
For livestock systems on pasture and rangeland, there are several different options that can improve our ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well as sequester carbon in our soils. Grassland systems are one of the most productive systems for sequestering carbon into the soil. One of the most important things ranchers can do, especially with beef cattle, is utilize appropriate stocking density to maintain vegetation that can sequester and utilize carbon. As we mentioned earlier, rotational grazing as part of intensive pasture management is showing promise in maintaining healthy pastures.
In some parts of the country, silvopasture is considered a mitigation option – this is where trees are strategically planted within a pasture system and cattle are allowed to graze among the trees. This gives the benefit of shade to the cattle which tends to increase productivity as well as having a double cropping system on that acreage.
We’ve already discussed the importance of using proper land application strategies to minimize loss of methane and nitrous oxide. Whether you’re applying organic or synthetic fertilizer, you should always start with a soil test to determine baseline levels and nutrient deficiency in the soil, and balance fertilizer application with the appropriate needs of the forage. Other practices include using slow-release forms of the fertilizer which slow the microbial processes leading to nitrous oxide formation, scheduling the timing of fertilization with plant uptake, and placing the fertilizer more precisely into the soil so that its more accessible to plant roots.
In this lesson, we discussed several greenhouse gas mitigation options available to animal agriculture production. Archibeque and others in 2012 released a report summarizing the current of mitigation alternatives for beef, dairy, and swine operations. In addition to the practices we discussed already, they listed several new and emerging ones where further research is needed before widespread implementation. In their report they looked at such things as changes in grazing systems, feeding strategies and diets, and manure management. The complete report is listed under the Required Reading portion of this lesson. In it you’ll learn more about these emerging mitigation alternatives.
So in summary, you should now know that mitigation is any practice that reduces the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere. The four main categories of mitigation we’ve discussed here are improved production efficiency, manure management, energy efficiency, and carbon sequestration. However, we should remember that every farm and ranch is different, and that mitigation practices should be tailored to the specific species, type of operation and the local environment.
Finally, while we recognize that some mitigation practices are currently cost prohibitive, we should also weight the additional environmental benefits such as odor reduction, improved air and water quality, and reduced pathogens, as well as potential financial benefits such as the ability to produce biogas or electricity to off-farm users, or market manure bi-products, such as compost and organic fertilizers.