Lovell Co 2 Emissions

7/28/2019 Lovell Co 2 Emissions

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lovell-co-2-emissions 1/40

CO2 Target Implications for

riculture

Scott LovellDairygold Co-op, Agri Trading



Talk Summary• EU & Irish targets on Greenhouse Gases (GHG)

• Economists v Irish Agriculture

• Changing Ag practises to produce GHG offsets

-Dairy

-Beef

• What will be the Irish approach?



EU Targets• March 2008 EU Leaders committed to

target of unilateral reduction in GHG of 20% by 2020 compared to 1990

targets by Dec 08.



Ireland’s GHG story in 2007

14

1618

20

Agriculture

0

2

4

6

8

10

Million tons of CO2 equivalent produced

Transport

Industry

Residential

Waste



EU burden sharing proposals

• Emissions traded sector (energy/heavy industry)

–Must drop by 21%

• Non ETS sector (agriculture, transport,

residential, some industry)

–Must drop by 10% across EU –Ireland given a higher target of -20% because

of high GDP



What this means for Ireland

• Non ETS sector produced 48.3 m tonne

CO2 in 2005

• us rop y . m onne -



What this means for Irish

Agriculture

• Reduction from 19.6 m tonne in 2005 to

17.05 in 2020

• Key questions

- an r s agr cu ure e ver s-How will achieving the reductions impact

on how agriculture develops during this

time



Economics argue• Relevant measure is the impact on

income

-Gross Value Added (contribution to GDP)

- gr cu ure s per emp oyee s ow-High emissions from agriculture (28%)

relative to GDP ( 2.5%)

-Concerted effort of other sectors to

ensure agriculture takes the hit



Why is Agriculture different

• There are some technological solutions in

Agriculture but global reduction in demand

• Reducing Irish herds are likely to increase

herds internationally, leaving no change to

the global problem



GHG Policies targeted to reduce

production

• May nip farmer and agricultural industryconfidence in the bud to proceed with expansion

plans

• Emissions trading scheme for agriculture justified on grounds of global need for food

-Emissions trading needs to be international

-Needs to be confined to Agriculture i.e. no

trading with energy sector.



Agricultural Emissions• Covers agriculture gases

–Methane from enteric fermentation

–Nitrous oxide from animal urine and dung

–Nitrous oxide from synthetic fertilisers



Percentage of emissions as CH4, N2O and

CO2 from Agriculture in Ireland in 2005

40

50

60

0

10

20

30

Methane Nitrous Oxide Carbon

Dioxide

CO2 Equivalents

CSO 2007



Changing Agricultural Practices

Potential to produce GHG offsets in 2

ways:1) Reduce Direct GHG Emissions

eques er ar on



Sequester Carbon• No or low tillage

• Diversified rotations

• Winter cover crops

• Change soil inputs• Improved grazing practices

• Convert marginal agricultural land tograssland or forest



Tillage

• Available bio-fuels from crops at present –Pure Plant Oil and Bio-diesel from oilseed rape

• Targets

–EU target of 5.75% by 2010 (now only 4%)

–National target of >10% by 2020



Bio-fuels

• Expansion of existing first generationproduction would lead to possible CO2

.• Significantly greater production and GHG

mitigation potential from 2nd generation

Bio-fuels



Energy Crops

• Significant Potential for GHG mitigationfrom energy crops

• e a ve y new crops. esearc nee e o –Optimise the agronomy of these species

–How best to farm these species

–Maximise energy & GHG benefit



Forestry• Mitigation strategy using sinks is to

replace terrestrial carbon that’s been lost to the atmosphere from forests, vegetation



Emissions of CO2 equivalents in

a Dairy System

35

4045

50

0

5

10

15

20

25

Enteric Fertiliser Conc Dung Fuel

%

Casey and Holden 2005



Strategies for decreasing CH4

emissions from dairying

1.Increasing the length of the grazing season2.Increasing genetic merit

3.Improving pasture digestibility

.

5.Replacing roughage with concentrates

6.Increasing clover in swards

7.Replacing grass silage with maize/whole cropcereal silage

8.Other supplementary factors



Increasing the length of the

grazing season

• Overall reduction of 0.17% in CO2

equivalents on-farm per one day increase

• A 70 day increase in grazing would result

in ~12% decrease in GHG emissions and

~€9500 greater profit (for a 50 cow herd)



Increasing genetic merit• Decreases CH4 production per kg of milk in a

quota scenario because(a) less cows required to produce the quota

• If quotas are relaxed cow numbers will increase

but the absolute increase in methane output

from the national dairy herd would be lower

• A profitable strategy for dairy farmers



Improving pasture quality

• Theoretically it should reduce enteric CH4

production because of a less fibrous

rumen fermentation

• Data so far not encouraging



Feeding oils

• Feeding 4% oil in the diet would decreaseenteric methane output per cow per day by 23%

•

(a) Does the effect persist over a full lactation?

(b) What are the effects on cow performance?

(c) Is type of oil important –milk composition?(d) Is it a profitable strategy?

Beauchemin et al. 2008



Replacing roughage with

concentrates

• Increased concentrate supplementation

has been shown to decrease enteric CH4

production

~

• Profitable?

Lovett et al. 2006



Increasing clover in swards

• Legume based forages compared to

grasses reduce enteric CH4 production per unit of DMI possibly because of lower fibre

• Need further data

(a) Do they reduce diet digestibility?

(b) What proportion of the forage mixtureshould they constitute to be effective?



Replacing grass silage with

maize/whole crop cereal silage

• In theory this strategy should reduce

enteric CH4 because of greater starchintake resulting in greater propionate

,

(less fermentation in the rumen)

• This strategy may be limited by other

negative environmental impacts



Other supplementary factors with

potential to decrease enteric CH4

• Fumaric and Malic acid (substrates for

succinate/propionate)• Saponins (reduce protozoa)

• nzymes mprove re ges y• Yeast (?)

• Iononphores (antibacterial effects shifting

fermentation towards propionate)



Nitrous Oxide• Sources:

–Soils –Animal excreta

–Legumes

–Fertiliser • Why is it important?

–GHG potential

–A loss of N from the soil/plant/animal system =reduced efficiency



N2O mitigation options• Nitrification (DCD) & urease inhibitors in

pasture and tillage• Reduction in N excreted from animals

• over pas ures• Increasing N efficiency:

–Use of alternative land-spreading

strategies, timing of slurries, amendment

of slurries



Additional Strategies for decreasing

CH4 emissions from beef cattle

1. Ad libitum concentrates to finishing cattle

2. 24-month steers 17-month bulls

3. 34-month steers 24-month steers4. Coconut oil in finishing concentrate

rations



Ad libitum concentrates to

finishing cattle

• Indoor finishing heifers and steers• Increase rate of concentrates to ad libitum

.

• Finishing duration -33 days

• No increase in capital facilities (?)

• 3408 t CH4 less = 78384 t CO2 equivalent• Farm profit reduced (high cost of concentrates)



24-month steers 17-month bulls• Spring-born male calves (100000)

• More concentrates; less grass (much) andsilage; lighter carcass

• 4 ess = 2 equ va en• Farm profit reduced (high cost of

concentrates)



34-month steers 24-month steers• Spring-born late-maturing steers (63500)

• Less concentrates; less grass; less silage;lighter carcass

• 4 ess = 2 equ va en• Farm profit improved (cost reduction >

revenue reduction)



Irish approach?• Follow New Zealand example-That are

practical in terms overall economics, product safety, and animal safety, and will

accepted by the international regulatory authorities and our customers.



Irish approach?• Cut national herd?

• Irish beef, milk, grain etc. replaced byother countries



Irish approach• Carbon tax in programme for government

• Revenue neutral?

• €20 per ton CO2 in 2010

• Rising to €38 per ton CO2 in 2020• €45-86 Dairy Cow

• €22-43 Beef Animal



Conclusions• Challenging targets for Ireland

• Political agendas will push agriculture

• There are strategies available that will

ecrease em ss ons n agr cu ure• Need to ensure those that simultaneously

increase technical efficiency, farm profit

and GHG reductions are strategiesadopted

Lovell Co 2 Emissions

Documents

Transcript of Lovell Co 2 Emissions