The water, land and carbon footprint of conventional and organic dairy systems in the Netherlands and Spain. A case study into the consequences of ecological indicator selection and methodological choices

IF 8 Q1 ENERGY & FUELS
S. Bronts , P.W. Gerbens-Leenes , P. Guzmán-Luna
{"title":"The water, land and carbon footprint of conventional and organic dairy systems in the Netherlands and Spain. A case study into the consequences of ecological indicator selection and methodological choices","authors":"S. Bronts ,&nbsp;P.W. Gerbens-Leenes ,&nbsp;P. Guzmán-Luna","doi":"10.1016/j.nexus.2023.100217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Dairy farming systems are multifunctional processes that provide milk but also beef, veal and manure. These outputs provided by dairy farms are important foods for humans but their production require natural resources like water and land, and release emissions to the water and air contributing to climate change. Many studies quantified the environmental performance of dairy farms by using a life cycle assessment (LCA) or environmental footprint calculation. This study provides a better understanding of how different methodological decisions (e.g., the choice of system boundary, GHG metric, allocation procedure for multifunctionality, and multi-environmental indicators) influence the environmental performance calculation. From a footprinting point of view, the water footprints (WFs) (i.e., green, blue and grey), land footprints (LFs) and carbon footprints (CFs) of milk, beef and veal produced in two conventional (Dutch and Spanish) and an organic Dutch dairy system are estimated. Here the system boundaries are expanded so calve systems are included. Next, the use of different indicators is discussed, e.g., green WFs and the GWP100 or GWP20. The Dutch conventional system has relatively small footprints due to high efficiency. Green, blue and grey WFs per kg of milk are 0.62, 0.09 and 0.14 m<sup>3</sup>. The Spanish system has green, blue and grey WFs per kg of milk of 0.67, 0.15 and 0.09 m<sup>3</sup>; the Dutch organic system of 0.84, 0.13 and 0.26 m<sup>3</sup>. The Spanish system has the largest LF and CF, caused by feed import from countries with relatively low yields and transport greenhouse gas emissions. Dutch systems use more locally produced feed. Due to lower efficiency, the organic system has larger footprints than the Dutch conventional system. Expanding system boundaries to include calves results in an 8 to 15% CF increase. Green water dominates total WFs, an aspect excluded in LCA studies. For grey WFs, earlier studies only included nitrogen. However, if also pesticides would be included, results might be less favourable for systems relying on feed crops instead of grasslands. Also, water quality standards influence grey WFs. The study emphasizes that indicator choice influences final results. Indicators like animal welfare, biodiversity or pesticide use give different outcomes which might be more favourable for organic production.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93548,"journal":{"name":"Energy nexus","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy nexus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772427123000475","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Dairy farming systems are multifunctional processes that provide milk but also beef, veal and manure. These outputs provided by dairy farms are important foods for humans but their production require natural resources like water and land, and release emissions to the water and air contributing to climate change. Many studies quantified the environmental performance of dairy farms by using a life cycle assessment (LCA) or environmental footprint calculation. This study provides a better understanding of how different methodological decisions (e.g., the choice of system boundary, GHG metric, allocation procedure for multifunctionality, and multi-environmental indicators) influence the environmental performance calculation. From a footprinting point of view, the water footprints (WFs) (i.e., green, blue and grey), land footprints (LFs) and carbon footprints (CFs) of milk, beef and veal produced in two conventional (Dutch and Spanish) and an organic Dutch dairy system are estimated. Here the system boundaries are expanded so calve systems are included. Next, the use of different indicators is discussed, e.g., green WFs and the GWP100 or GWP20. The Dutch conventional system has relatively small footprints due to high efficiency. Green, blue and grey WFs per kg of milk are 0.62, 0.09 and 0.14 m3. The Spanish system has green, blue and grey WFs per kg of milk of 0.67, 0.15 and 0.09 m3; the Dutch organic system of 0.84, 0.13 and 0.26 m3. The Spanish system has the largest LF and CF, caused by feed import from countries with relatively low yields and transport greenhouse gas emissions. Dutch systems use more locally produced feed. Due to lower efficiency, the organic system has larger footprints than the Dutch conventional system. Expanding system boundaries to include calves results in an 8 to 15% CF increase. Green water dominates total WFs, an aspect excluded in LCA studies. For grey WFs, earlier studies only included nitrogen. However, if also pesticides would be included, results might be less favourable for systems relying on feed crops instead of grasslands. Also, water quality standards influence grey WFs. The study emphasizes that indicator choice influences final results. Indicators like animal welfare, biodiversity or pesticide use give different outcomes which might be more favourable for organic production.

Abstract Image

荷兰和西班牙传统和有机乳制品系统的水、土地和碳足迹。生态指标选择和方法选择后果的个案研究
奶牛养殖系统是一种多功能的过程,既提供牛奶,也提供牛肉、小牛肉和粪便。奶牛场提供的这些产出对人类来说是重要的食物,但它们的生产需要水和土地等自然资源,并向水和空气释放排放物,从而导致气候变化。许多研究通过使用生命周期评估(LCA)或环境足迹计算来量化奶牛场的环境绩效。本研究更好地了解了不同的方法决策(例如,系统边界的选择、GHG指标、多功能性的分配程序和多环境指标)如何影响环境绩效计算。从足迹的角度来看,估计了在两种传统(荷兰和西班牙)和一种有机荷兰乳制品系统中生产的牛奶、牛肉和小牛肉的水足迹(WFs)(即绿色、蓝色和灰色)、土地足迹(LF)和碳足迹(CF)。在这里,系统边界被扩展,因此包括了冰裂系统。接下来,讨论不同指标的使用,例如绿色WF和GWP100或GWP20。荷兰的传统系统由于效率高而具有相对较小的占地面积。每公斤牛奶的绿色、蓝色和灰色WF分别为0.62、0.09和0.14 m3。西班牙系统每公斤牛奶的绿色、蓝色和灰色WF分别为0.67、0.15和0.09 m3;0.84、0.13和0.26m3的荷兰有机体系。西班牙系统拥有最大的LF和CF,这是由于从产量相对较低的国家进口饲料和运输温室气体排放造成的。荷兰的系统更多地使用当地生产的饲料。由于效率较低,有机系统的占地面积比荷兰传统系统大。将系统边界扩大到包括小牛会导致CF增加8-15%。绿水在WF总量中占主导地位,这是LCA研究中排除的一个方面。对于灰色WF,早期的研究仅包括氮气。然而,如果还包括杀虫剂,结果可能对依赖饲料作物而不是草原的系统不利。此外,水质标准影响灰色WF。该研究强调,指标选择会影响最终结果。动物福利、生物多样性或杀虫剂使用等指标给出了不同的结果,这可能更有利于有机生产。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Energy nexus
Energy nexus Energy (General), Ecological Modelling, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment, Water Science and Technology, Agricultural and Biological Sciences (General)
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
109 days
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信