LCA Food 2012 in Saint Malo, France! - Manifestations et colloques ...

PARALLEL SESSION 6A: TOOLS AND DATABASES 8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
4. Discussion
Sensitivity analyses are performed on region of substituted beef system (Denmark and Sweden versus
Brazil), crop yields (reduced by 25%) and milk yield (reduced by 10%). The carbon footprint of Danish and
Swedish milk increased by 28-31% if Danish and Swedish beef systems are used as substituted beef system.
This is because these systems are more efficient compared to the Brazilian beef system. However, the beef
market is global, so there is no reason to belief that the Danish and Swedish beef market are affected when
extra beef is produced by the dairy cows. The effects of decreasing the crop and milks are limited.
For the national baselines, the most important assumptions relate to the identification of substituted beef
system, the animal turnover, the feed composition and land use changes. The collected data on animal turnover
and feed composition in Denmark and Sweden are regarded as being related to a low degree of uncertainty.
The switch mode and the exclusion of land use changes obviously affect the results significantly as shown
in the results.
5. Conclusion
The Arla model which is documented in the current study is prepared for the calculation of farm specific
carbon footprint as well as Danish and Swedish national baselines for milk at the farm gate.
The model is characterised by being parameterised, so that in principle any country or any specific milk
farm carbon footprint can be calculated – just by entering the relevant input parameters. Of course there are
some limitations in data which are entered as background data in the model, e.g. a milk farm in a country
outside EU obviously uses feed inputs with other origins (countries) and maybe also types of feed that is not
included in the model. Currently, the model is prepared for country and farm specific carbon footprints for
Danish and Swedish milk farms and background data are based on year 2005.
Further, the model enables for applying different modelling assumptions or carbon footprint standards:
Consequential (ISO 14040/44); Attributional (average/allocation); IDF guideline and PAS 2050. No additional
data are required for switching between the mentioned standards. It is also possible to operate with
different levels of completeness in the results by switching on and off capital goods, services and land use
changes.
The GHG emissions are slightly higher for Swedish milk than for Danish milk. The major contributions
to the overall result include enteric fermentation (methane emissions from the cattle) and the cultivation and
production of feed inputs. A major part of the impact related to the feed inputs is associated to land use
changes. However, carbon sequestration is not included in the current model, and including this might
change the results (i.e. the CF could be lower for permanent pasture, which stands for a relatively higher
share of the feed in Sweden compared to Denmark). Finally, the results are highly dependent on the choice
of modelling switch mode.
6. References
Carbon Trust, Dairy UK and DairyCo, 2010. Guidelines for the Carbon Footprinting of Dairy Products in the UK. Carbon Trust,
Dairy UK and DairyCo
Cederberg, C., Sonesson, U., Henriksson, M., Sund, V., Davis, J., 2009. Life cycle inventory of greenhouse gas emissions and use of
land and energy in Brazilian beef production. SIK Report No 792. ISBN 978-91-7290-283-1.
Dalgaard, R., Schmidt, J.H., 2012. National and farm level carbon footprint of milk - Life cycle inventory for Danish and Swedish
milk 2005 at farm gate. Arla Foods, Aarhus, Denmark
Dalgaard, R., Schmidt, J., Halberg, N., Christensen, P., Thrane, M., Pengue, W.A., 2008. LCA of soybean meal. Int J LCA (3) 240-
254.
Doreau, M., Dollé, J-B. 2011. Strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in dairy production. A European perspective. Conference
Proceedings. Eastern Nutrition Conference, Montreal, Canada, 12-13 April 2011, 57-77.
FAOSTAT, 2012. FAOSTAT, Food and agriculture organization of the United Nations. http://faostat.fao.org/ (Accessed January
2012)
Flysjö, A., Cederberg, C., Strid, I., 2008. LCA-databas för konventionella fodermedel –miljöpåverkan i samband med produktion.
SIK Report No 772. ISBN 978-91-7290-265-7. In Swedish.
Gerber, P., Vellinga, T., Opio, C., Henderson, B., Steinfeld, H., 2010. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Dairy Sector, A Life
Cycle Assessment. FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Animal Production and Health Division,
Rome, Italy.
IDF, 2010. A common carbon footprint approach for dairy – The IDF guide to standard life cycle assessment methodology for the
dairy sector. Bulletin of the International Dairy Federation 445/2010
Kristensen, T., 2011. Notat: Tilpasning af funktion til estimering af foderbehov afhængig af ydelsesniveau hos malkekøerne (English:
Note: Adaption of the function for establishing feed intake as a function of milk yield for dairy cows). Department of Ecology
and Environment, Aarhus University, Denmark
Plantedirektoratet, 2004. Vejledning og skemaer. Gødningsplanlægning, gødningsregnskab, plantedække, harmoniregler, ændringer i
ejer- og brugerforhold. 2004/2005. Ministeriet for Fødevarer, Landbrug og Fiskeri. In Danish.
482