Tackling the future challenges of Organic Animal Husbandry - vTI

! Agriculture and Forestry Research, Special Issue No 362 (Braunschweig, 2012) ISSN 0376-0723
Download: www.vti.bund.de/en/startseite/vti-publications/landbauforschung-special-issues.html
58.65 t eq CO2/ha year (Con1 and Con2 respectively). Intensive farms had higher emissions per
hectare (12 and 15 t eq CO2/ha). The range of emission in meat sheep farms in Australia, in 2010,
was between 2.8 t eq CO2/ha and 4.3 t eq CO2/ha (Browne et al., 2011), the resuls are similar to our
organic farms and Con1 whose system is very extensive. For extensive systems, the Australian values
are also similar to ours with 4.1-5.6 t eq CO2/ha and year but higher than general industry (Bell
et al, 2012).
Regarding the distribution of emissions, comparing our results with those obtained in the France
dairy sheep sector (Bordet et al, 2010), the emission of CH4 reachs a level of 48%. It corresponds
with our results, with an exception, the Eco2 farm get a ratio of 14%.
For emissions of N2O, the French results show a 30% of total emissions which corresponds with our
results, except in Int1 and Eco2 wich reach higher values. For CO2 emissions in France, the farms
obtain values of 21%, our farms get all values below 20%.
In conclusion, the largest absolute emissions were obtained by self-sufficient organic farm, but it
had the lowest emissions per hectare. Intensive farms obtain values three times higher than the Australian
meat sheep farms and French dairy sheep ones. Intensive systems require an external supply
of raw materials and it cause great amount of emissions. The semi-extensive organic or conventional
farms have similar emissions to those obtained in the consulted references. The farm Con2 have
large emissions per hectare and year, because although its production system is semi-extensive, it
needed in 2011a large amount of food supplies.
Organic farms has the best level of emissions because they manage their own crops and they become
self-sufficient.
Acknowledgements
The work has been made possible by funding from the Ministry of Science and Innovation for the
project number RTA-2010-00064-C04-03. Thanks also to farmers who have contributed data.
References
Bochu, J-L., Bordet, A-C., Metayer, N., Trevisiol, A.(2010). Références PLANETE 2010, Fiche 1- Généralités
: présentation des exploitations et résultats globaux. Toulouse : SOLAGRO, 29 p.
Bordet, A-C., Bochu, J-L., Trevisiol A. – (2010). Références PLANETE 2010, Fiche 5- Production « Ovins
et caprins lait ». Toulouse : Solagro, 22 p.
Rossier D., 1(998), Ecobilan : adaptation de la méthode écobilan pour la gestion environnementale de
l’exploitation agricole, Service Romand e Vulgarisation Agricole -SRVA, 49p+annexes.
Nieto, J. And Santamaría, J., (2002). Evolución de las Emisiones de Gases de Efecto Invernadero en España
(1990 - 2001). http://www.ecoportal.net/articulos/efecto_inv.htm.
Bochu, JL., Risoud, B., Mousset, J. (2008). Consommation d´énergie et emissions de GES des explotactions
en agriculture biologique: synthèse des résultats PLANETE 2006. International coference Organic agriculture
and climate change. Clemont. Pag-1-8
IPCC, (2007): Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the
Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom
and New York, NY, USA, 996 pp.
Bell, M.J., Eckard, R.J., Cullen, B.R. (2012). The effect of future climate scenarios on the balance between
productivity and greenhouse gas emissions from sheep grazing systems. Livestock Science. In press.
Browne, N.A., Eckard, R.J., Behrendt, R., Kingwell, R.S. (2011). A comparative analysis of on farm greenhouse
gas emissions from agricultural enterprises in south eastern Australia. Animal Feed Science and
Technology 166-167. Pag 641-652.
232