Dairy – Use low-emission feed ingredients

Use low-emission feed ingredients

System: Dairy Cattle

Applicability

Mainly applicable for: Farms with high external feed input

Not or less applicable for: Self-sufficient farms (no or low external feed input)

Description

Using feed ingredients with relatively low GHG emissions related to their production, processing, transport, and land use change. Examples are the use of beet pulp, sourcing soy bean meal in areas with a lower risk of land use change, or replacing soy cake by rapeseed cake. Some feed materials, such as industrial by-products and crop residues, carry a low carbon footprint but may also have a lower nutritional value or palatability. This can lead to lower feed intake and production levels, or inclusion of other products to balance the diet. Carbon footprints of feed materials (in g CO2-eq/kg product) are available in databases such as GFLI, FeedPrint, Agri-footprint, or Agribalyse. Some feed suppliers provide information about the carbon footprint and methane emission factor of ingredients in compound concentrate feeds.

Mechanism of effect

By replacing feed ingredients with a high carbon footprint by ingredients with a lower carbon footprint (expressed in g CO2-eq/kg product), emissions from production and application of inputs for crop cultivation, on-field cultivation activities and soil emissions, post-harvest processes and transport, and/or land use change are reduced. Industrial by-products and crop residues often carry a low carbon footprint, because emissions are allocated to the main product, however emissions from processing wet by-products may be high. Moreover, the availability of feedstuffs with a low carbon footprint may be limited and not consistent. At a higher system level there might be no, or less, effect because raw materials are just exchanged between sectors. Changes in feed ingredients and feed ration composition can affect emissions from enteric fermentation and manure. A lower nutritional value or palatability leads to lower production levels and less reduction, or even an increase, in GHG emission per kg product. In case of inclusion of other products to balance the diet (e.g., with higher energy value to balance on energy content), the additional changes in the diet may also change direct emissions from animals and manure that have to be considered in total effects.

Effects on GHG emissions

Reference situation: Average European diet

Effect on total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions

Mean effect and range in kg CO2-equivalents	per kg product		per farm
	Mean	Min-Max	Mean	Min-Max	Level of evidence
Use (more) crop residues or by-products	●	● – ●●	●	●–●●	Low
Avoid ingredients associated with land use change	●	o – ●●	●	o-●●	Low
Avoid ingredients with high processing or transport emissions	●	o – ●●	●	o-●●	Low

Legend

● – Small effect (<5%)	o – No effect	? – Effect unknown
●● – Medium effect (5-20%)	● – Unfavourable effect
●●● – Large effect (>20%)	● – ● – Variable effect (depending on farm characteristics or way/level of implementation)

Effect per emission source

Mean effect on absolute emission from	Animal	Manure storage		Feed and forage production			Barn
	CH₄	CH₄	N₂O	CO₂	N₂O	LUC	CO₂
Use (more) crop residues or by-products	?	?	?	●*	●	●●
Avoid ingredients with high processing or transport emissions	?	?	?	●●
Avoid ingredients associated with land use change	?	?	?			●●●

*risk of an adverse effect (see ’cause of variable or unfavourable effect’)

Legend

● – Small effect (<5%)	o – No effect	? – Effect unknown
●● – Medium effect (5-20%)	● – Unfavourable effect
●●● – Large effect (>20%)	● – ● – Variable effect (depending on farm characteristics or way/level of implementation)

Cause of variable or unfavourable effect

Use (more) crop residues or by-products

The size of the effect depends on the carbon footprint (CF) of the replaced feed ingredients versus the CF of the by-product and inclusion rate. For example, high CO2 emissions arise from drying wet by-products. Besides the effect on the carbon footprint of feed, emissions from enteric fermentation and manure may change due to changes in feed ration composition and quality. Changes in the feed ration can also lead to lower productions levels, hence less reduction in GHG emission per unit of product.

Avoid ingredients associated with land use change

The size of the effect depends on the carbon footprint (CF) of the replaced feed ingredients versus the CF of the by-product and inclusion rate. Besides the effect on the carbon footprint of feed, emissions from enteric fermentation and manure may change in case of changes in feed ration composition and quality. Changes in the feed ration can also lead to lower productions levels, hence less reduction in GHG emission per unit of product.

Avoid ingredients with high processing or transport emissions

Other Effects

Effects on yield and cost-effectiveness

	Yield		Labor	Costs and revenues
	Animals	Crops	Time	Capital investment	Operational Costs	Revenues
Replace feed ingredients by by-products	●-o	o	●-o	●-o	●-o	●–●
Buy concentrate feed with low carbon footprint	o	o	●-o	●-o	●-o	●–●

Legend (thresholds differ per indictor and can be found in the tooltip)

● – Small favorable effect	o – No effect	? – Effect unknown
●● – Medium favorable effect	● – Unfavourable effect
●●● – Large favorable effect	● – ● -Variable effect (depending on farm characteristics or way/level of implementation)

Effects on other sustainability aspects

	Risks of trade-offs	Potential synergies
Replace feed ingredients by by-products		Ammonia emission, Land use or occupation, Public health
Buy concentrate feed with low carbon footprint		Ammonia emission

*Literature references*	Use (more) crop residues or by-products
Lindberg et al., 2021	Byproduct-based concentrates in Swedish dairy cow diets – evaluation of environmental impact and feed costs
March et al., 2021	Effect of Nutritional Variation and LCA Methodology on the Carbon Footprint of Milk Production From Holstein Friesian Dairy Cows

*Literature references*	Avoid ingredients associated with land use change
O’Brien et al., 2012	A life cycle assessment of seasonal grass-based and confinement dairy farms

*Literature references*	Avoid ingredients with high processing or transport emissions
De Vries et al., 2020	Effects of feeding and manure management interventions on technical and environmental performance of Indonesian dairy farms: Results of a pilot study in Lembang Sub-District, West Java