Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems
| Autor: | Matthias Gauly, Uta König von Borstel, Verena Angerer, Emilio Sabia |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Environmental Engineering
Farms 0208 environmental biotechnology Biodiversity 02 engineering and technology 010501 environmental sciences Management Monitoring Policy and Law Beef cattle 01 natural sciences Agricultural science Production (economics) Animals Environmental impact assessment Waste Management and Disposal 0105 earth and related environmental sciences business.industry Agriculture General Medicine Eutrophication 020801 environmental engineering Italy Carbon footprint Environmental science Livestock Cattle Female business |
| Zdroj: | Journal of environmental management. 289 |
| ISSN: | 1095-8630 |
| Popis: | Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect