Assessing greenhouse gas emissions of milk production: which parameters are essential?

PurposeLife cycle assessment (LCA) studies of food products, such as dairy, require many input parameters that are affected by variability and uncertainty. Moreover, correlations may be present between input parameters, e.g. between feed intake and milk yield. The purpose of this study was to identify which input parameters are essential to assess the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of milk production, while accounting for correlations between input parameters, and using a systematic approach.MethodsThree diets corresponding to three grazing systems (zero-, restricted and unrestricted grazing) were selected, which were defined to aim for a milk yield of 10,000 kg energy corrected milk (ECM) cow−1 year−1. First, a local sensitivity analysis was used to identify which parameters influence GHG emissions most. Second, a global sensitivity analysis was used to identify which parameters are most important to the output variance. The global analysis included correlations between feed intake and milk yield and between N fertilizer rates and crop yields. The local and global sensitivity analyses were combined to determine which parameters are essential. Finally, we analysed the effect of changing the most important correlation coefficient (between feed intake and milk yield) on the output variance and global sensitivity analysis.Results and discussionThe total GHG emissions for 1 kg ECM ranged from 1.08 to 1.12 kg CO2 e, depending on the grazing system. The local sensitivity analysis identified milk yield, feed intake, and the CH4 emission factor of enteric fermentation of the cows as most influential parameters in the LCA model. The global sensitivity analysis identified the CH4 emission factor of enteric fermentation, milk yield, feed intake and the direct N2O emission factor of crop cultivation as most important parameters. For both grazing systems, N2O emission factor for grazing also turned out to be important. In addition, the correlation coefficient between feed intake and milk yield turned out to be important. The systematic approach resulted in more parameters than previously found.ConclusionsBy combining a local and a global sensitivity analysis, parameters were determined which are essential to assess GHG emissions of milk production. These parameters are the CH4 emission factor of enteric fermentation, milk yield, feed intake, the direct N2O emission factor of crop cultivation and the N2O emission factor for grazing. Future research should focus on reducing uncertainty and improving data quality of these essential parameters.

[1]  R. Veerkamp,et al.  Genetic correlation between days until start of luteal activity and milk yield, energy balance, and live weights. , 2000, Journal of dairy science.

[2]  M. D. Vries,et al.  Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: A review of life cycle assessments , 2010 .

[3]  H. Steinfeld,et al.  Tackling climate change through livestock : a global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities , 2013 .

[4]  W. Walker,et al.  Defining Uncertainty: A Conceptual Basis for Uncertainty Management in Model-Based Decision Support , 2003 .

[5]  M. Corson,et al.  Influence of emission-factor uncertainty and farm-characteristic variability in LCA estimates of environmental impacts of French dairy farms , 2014 .

[6]  D. K. Lovett,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions from pastoral based dairying systems: The effect of uncertainty and management change under two contrasting production systems , 2008 .

[7]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  A generic method for the identification of options for cleaner products , 1994 .

[8]  J. Englund,et al.  The impact of various parameters on the carbon footprint of milk production in New Zealand and Sweden , 2011 .

[9]  Markus Gandorfer,et al.  The impact of uncertainties on predicted GHG emissions of dairy cow production systems , 2014 .

[10]  Annette Prochnow,et al.  The influence of dairy management strategies on water productivity of milk production , 2015 .

[11]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Two-step sensitivity testing of parametrized and regionalized life cycle assessments: methodology and case study. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[12]  George Z. Gertner,et al.  Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis for models with correlated parameters , 2008, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[13]  F. Kelliher,et al.  Uncertainty of global warming potential for milk production on a New Zealand farm and implications for decision making , 2009 .

[14]  R. Heijungs Sensitivity coefficients for matrix-based LCA , 2010 .

[15]  J. Y. Dourmad,et al.  Evaluation of the environmental implications of the incorporation of feed-use amino acids in pig production using Life Cycle Assessment , 2014 .

[16]  Brigitte Eurich-Menden,et al.  Calculations of gaseous and particulate emissions from German agriculture 1990 - 2012 : Report on methods and data (RMD) Submission 2014 , 2014 .

[17]  N. Holden,et al.  An evaluation of life cycle assessment of European milk production. , 2011, Journal of environmental management.

[18]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Identification of key issues for further investigation in improving the reliability of life-cycle assessments , 1996 .

[19]  James M. Gibbons,et al.  Modelling uncertainty in greenhouse gas emissions from UK agriculture at the farm level , 2006 .

[20]  A. Bardow,et al.  Sensitivity coefficient-based uncertainty analysis for multi-functionality in LCA , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[21]  Philippe Roux,et al.  How to conduct a proper sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment: taking into account correlations within LCI data and interactions within the LCA calculation model. , 2015, Environmental science & technology.

[22]  C. Cederberg,et al.  Variation in carbon footprint of milk due to management differences between Swedish dairy farms. , 2011, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[23]  G. Lanigan,et al.  A review of whole farm systems models of greenhouse gas emissions from beef and dairy cattle production systems , 2011 .

[24]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Uncertainty Analysis in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): Case Study on Plant-Protection Products and Implications for Decision Making (9 pp + 3 pp) , 2005 .

[25]  M. Zehetmeier,et al.  Does increasing milk yield per cow reduce greenhouse gas emissions? A system approach. , 2012, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[26]  K. Hungerbühler,et al.  Uncertainty Analysis in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): Case Study on Plant - Protection Products and Implications for Decision Making (3 pp) , 2005 .

[27]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Numerical Approaches to Life Cycle Interpretation - The case of the Ecoinvent’96 database (10 pp) , 2005 .

[28]  E. A. Groen,et al.  An uncertain climate : the value of uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in environmental impact assessment of food , 2016 .

[29]  M. Kirchgessner Tierernährung : Leitfaden für Praxis, Beratung und Studium , 1973 .

[30]  C. Topp,et al.  Effect of cattle genotype and feeding regime on greenhouse gas emissions intensity in high producing dairy cows , 2014 .

[31]  Hans-Jürgen Dr. Klüppel,et al.  The Revision of ISO Standards 14040-3 - ISO 14040: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework - ISO 14044: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines , 2005 .

[32]  Saltelli Andrea,et al.  Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer , 2008 .

[33]  D. Shindell,et al.  Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing , 2014 .

[34]  H. L. Miller,et al.  Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis , 2007 .

[35]  Jeroen B. Guinée,et al.  Uncertainties in a carbon footprint model for detergents; quantifying the confidence in a comparative result , 2009 .

[36]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  The computational structure of life cycle assessment , 2002 .

[37]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Sensitivity analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from a pork production chain , 2016 .