Placeholder Image

Subtitles section Play video

  • Scientists agree the major driver behind the rise in global greenhouse gas emissions is

  • human activity. How does farming fit it and,what is the contribution of animal agriculture

  • and how are these values calculated?

  • The consuming public is more and more interested in where their food comes from, what’s the

  • carbon footprint. What’s the carbon footprint, or the what’s

  • the environmental footprint, of a gallon of milk, or a pound of beef, or a pound of chicken meat?

  • My name is David Schmidt and I’m an agricultural engineer at the University of Minnesota and

  • Regional Coordinator for the national project, Animal Agriculture in a Changing Climate.

  • There is a significant amount of miscommunication about the role of agriculture

  • in climate change. Some say that animal agriculture is the largest contributor to greenhouse gas

  • emissions while others deny any contribution from animals. The answer lies somewhere in

  • between. The objective of this video is to provide you with a solid foundation of how

  • emission estimates are calculated and the real contributions of animal agriculture to

  • US and global greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions.

  • Carbon is all around us. It is the fourth most abundant chemical element in the universe,

  • behind hydrogen, helium and oxygen. The biggest reservoir of carbon is stored

  • in rocks- approximately 66,000 gigatons with one gigaton is equal to 1 trillion kilograms.

  • The second biggest reservoir is the deep ocean, and the third largest reservoir is in fossil

  • fuels. The atmosphere and the surface ocean are the smallest carbon reservoirs but possibly

  • the most important. Carbon is moving between these reservoirs constantly because of a variety

  • of chemical and biological processes. This is known as the carbon cycle.

  • The total amount of carbon that cycles in and out of the atmosphere naturally each year

  • is about 210 gigatons. The arrows and yellow numbers indicate this movement, or cycling

  • of carbon. Plants and oceans are referred to as net carbonsinksbecause they

  • absorb more carbon from the atmosphere than they emit. These carbon emissions occur in

  • the form of plant respiration and chemical exchanges with the ocean.

  • The red numbers indicate the human influence in the cycle, also known asanthropogenic

  • emissions.” They can be mostly be attributed to the burning of fossil fuels and changes

  • in land use. Human activities contribute nine gigatons of carbon emissions annually. About

  • two gigatons of that carbon gets taken up or absorbed by the ocean. Three gigatons of

  • that carbon gets absorbed by plants through photosynthesis and taken up in plant soil

  • system. All this movement results in an annual net increase of about four gigatons of carbon

  • going into the atmosphere each year.

  • As you can see in this diagram, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was relatively

  • stable for hundreds of thousands of years, at an average of around 230 parts per million.

  • Then about 100 years ago, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere began climbing to where

  • it is right now, about 400 parts per million.

  • This animated diagram more dramatically illustrates the rise in carbon dioxide levels in the earth’s

  • atmosphere in more recent years, since 1979. The numbers on the left and right indicate

  • the CO2 concentration in parts per million. Again this indicates the current CO2 level

  • reaching up to and even beyond 400 parts per million.

  • While we do not intend to focus on all of the greenhouse gases in this lesson, it is

  • important to note that carbon dioxide is not the only greenhouse gas. The most common greenhouse

  • gas is water vapor, followed by carbon dioxide , methane , nitrous oxide and fluorinated

  • gases. Excluding water vapor, the combined sources of carbon dioxide, primarily from

  • fossil fuel use and land use change, make up about 77% of the global greenhouse gases.

  • Because these other gases trap different amounts of energy per molecule of gas, scientists

  • have normalized the data into something called Carbon Dioxide Equivalents, or CO2 equivalents.

  • Thisequivalentrefers to the equivalent heating potential of the gas. This is also

  • known as radiative forcing or global warming potential. For instance, a single molecule

  • of methane will trap approximately 25 times the amount of energy as will a single molecule

  • of carbon dioxide. So methane has a CO2 equivalent of 25. Nitrous Oxide has a CO2 equivalent

  • of 298. This use of CO2 equivalents allows us to evaluate the impact of the gases on

  • the environment - not just the amount of these gasses in the atmosphere.

  • Anthropogenic greenhouse gases are emitted by many sources and from every country. Together

  • these nations contribute a world total of 45 thousand million metric tons of CO2 Equivalents.

  • This graph shows percentages of greenhouse gas emissions by country in 2012. The United

  • States is currently the second highest emitter of these gases, contributing about 15% of

  • the world total. The highest emitting country is China. However, this same information can

  • be evaluated based on emissions per capita. This breakdown shows the US at about 19 tons

  • CO2e per year per person vs China at 7.5 tons CO2e per year per person.

  • Taking a closer look at the sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States alone by

  • economic sector, we see that agriculture contributes 9 percent of total emissions in

  • the US. Total emissions in the US add up to approximately 6,673 million metric tons of

  • CO2 Equivalents. Agriculture’s 9% represents about 515 Million Metric Tons of that amount.

  • Looking at the agricultural sector itself, we can see that agricultural soil management

  • is the biggest source, it accounts for about 50% of total agricultural emissions. This

  • is followed by enteric fermentation at about 32% and manure management at 15%.

  • Now looking at the type of gases emitted, about 55% of the agricultural emissions are

  • from nitrous oxide, which is produced naturally through the the microbial process of nitrification

  • and denitrification of mineral nitrogen in the soil. The remaining 45% is from enteric

  • methane or from methane formed during the microbial breakdown of manure. Note that these

  • emissions are only the direct emissions of greenhouse gases occurring on the farm. Other

  • emissions that would occur off farm - like emissions from fertilizer production or electricity

  • used on the farm are not included in these numbers.

  • We can also look more closely at emissions by animal species. In this chart you can

  • see the comparisons between beef cattle, dairy cattle, swine, poultry and all other livestock.

  • These differences are primarily a function of total animal numbers and the contribution

  • of enteric fermentation. Again these are direct emissions for animal production and do not

  • include emissions from the production of things like animal feed.

  • Overall if you look at all animals in the united states for examplethe beef sector

  • would have the greatest impact on carbon footprint of this nation but that’s only because there

  • are so much more beef animals than dairy animals. We have 90 million beef animals and 9 million

  • dairy animals, so 10 times more beef animals.

  • However, a better way to think about greenhouse gas emissions is in terms of emissions per

  • unit of production. We can look at kilograms of CO2 equivalents per kilogram of product

  • produced or product consumed. This evaluation includes not only direct emissions from the

  • farm, but also the emissions that occur after the products leave the farm. We will discuss

  • this further a little later in the video.This graph compares the greenhouse gas emissions

  • of several products on per kilogram basis. Of all the products, lamb is the highest emitter

  • per kilogram of product consumed, and beef is the second highest emitter at 27 kilograms

  • of CO2 equivalents per kilogram of beef consumed. Dairy is much lower in emissions, with 1.9

  • kilograms of CO2 equivalents per kilogram of milk consumed.

  • Before getting further into attributing emissions to different sectors of animal agriculture

  • or to different sources on the farm, well look at the system used to measure and calculate

  • these emissions. There is a way to quantify greenhouse gases.

  • This quantification method is called LCA, life cycle assessment. It has been done for

  • many years and it has been done by many different groups using different methodologies.

  • The Life Cycle Assessment, or LCA, is an accounting method that tracks all of the greenhouse gas

  • emissions produced by a given process, product or system. Often this is called a ‘cradle

  • to graveanalysis, because it encompasses all of the emissions in the life cycle of

  • the process, product or system being analyzed. This includes anything from the extraction

  • of raw materials to the final disposal of the end product.

  • Animal scientists, engineers and others can further describe the scope and mission of

  • the LCA as it relates to animal agriculture.

  • Basically, the life cycle assessment looks at the entire life cycle associated with a

  • product. Let’s say if McDonalds or Walmart or some other chain were to ask me what’s

  • the carbon footprint or what’s the environmental footprint of a gallon of milk or a pound of

  • beef or a pound of chicken meat produced by your company.

  • Most producers would have no ideabut a life cycle assessment allows you to do just

  • that.

  • It allows you to look at the entire life cycle impact of that product. For example, the carbon

  • footprint of a gallon of milk includes not just enteric gases that come out the front

  • end of the cow or methane or other gases that come off the manure, it includes everything

  • the herbicides and other chemicals applied to crops, the crops themselves, the soils

  • where the crops are grown, the animals, whether it is enteric gases or manure gases, It includes

  • the cooling of the product, the transport of product and so on. Everything from cradle

  • to grave of this product. The true life cycle of this product.

  • Life Cycle Assessment is a systematic approach for primarily accounting for environmental

  • impacts. It is a systems scale analysis of any product or service really. In the dairy

  • industry. What it means is to divide the system into supply chain stages, typically. In each

  • of those stages we would have what we call unit processes that have material and energy

  • flows, inputs and outputs from other unit processes as well as, inputs or outputs from

  • nature. So emission to the soil, water, or air. And the process of LCA looks from cradle

  • to grave.

  • Dr. Thoma’s analysis in 2013 of greenhouse gas emissions from the production of milk

  • in the United States looked at the entire life cycle of the milk supply chain, starting

  • with the production of fertilizer to grow feed for cows through the consumption of milk

  • and disposal of milk packaging.

  • So if we are talking about just the dairy farm so that would be what we might consider

  • a gate to gate analysis and we would be interested in what happens just on the farmthat

  • would not be considered a full life cycle assessment. So, when we did the carbon footprint

  • for milk, we literally had to account for the coal, the transportation of the coal,

  • the construction of the power plant, the losses in the transmission lines to run the refrigeration

  • units at the retail. So all of that is accounted for.

  • This table from Thoma’s LCA shows the breakdown of greenhouse gas emissions across the milk

  • production supply chain. The colors represent the four different types of gas emitted by

  • each stage in the cycle, from feeding the cows, enteric fermentation, manure management

  • ... all the way through the consumption of milk and disposal of packaging. The pie chart

  • further illustrates the percentage of each activity’s contribution to milk’s carbon

  • footprint.

  • Thoma’s analysis found that the CO2 equivalents produced by each kilogram of milk consumed

  • ranged from 1.77 to 2.4. This is about 17.6 pounds of CO2 equivalents per gallon of milk

  • consumed. 72 percent of those emissions occurred before

  • the milk left the farm gate. So from the extraction of coal, say, for the

  • electricity that may be used anywhere in the supply chain all the way to the emissions

  • associated with wastewater treatment for wasted milk that goes down the drain or the plastic

  • container that ends up in the landfill and may generate methane. So all of those emissions

  • across the entire supply chain are, we attempted to account fortally them up then say

  • this is the impact.

  • Thoma applied the same system to an analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from pork production.

  • This study took into account all of the activities in the pork supply chain that contribute to

  • emissions, from electricity and fuel to manure and waste, across all stages of production,

  • from the sow barn to the consumption of the pork products produced.

  • The LCA showed CO2 equivalents at an average of 8.8 to 11.6 kilograms of CO2 equivalents

  • per kilogram of pork, from production to consumption. This can also be calculated as 2.2 to 2.9

  • pounds of CO2 equivalents per 4 ounce serving of pork. Approximately 60% of the emissions

  • occurred before the product left the farm gate.