Comparative life cycle environmental impacts of three beef production strategies in the Upper Midwestern United States
Comparative life cycle environmental impacts of three beef production strategies in the Upper Midwestern United States
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.agsy.2010.03.009
复制
发表时间：
2010-07-01
影响因子：
6.6
通讯作者：
Rasmussen, Rebecca
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pelletier, Nathan;Pirog, Rich;Rasmussen, Rebecca
我们使用符合ISO标准的生命周期评估（LCA）来比较与美国中西部地区目前采用的三种牛肉生产策略模型相关的累积能源使用、生态足迹、温室气体排放和富营养化排放。具体来说，我们研究了小牛的系统：直接断奶到饲养场;断奶到州外的小麦牧场（背景），然后在饲养场完成;或完全在管理的牧场和干草上完成。每公斤活重的牛肉生产的影响是最高的牧场成品牛肉的所有影响类别和最低的饲养场成品牛肉，假设平衡条件下，在土壤有机碳通量的系统。敏感性分析表明，在土壤有机碳固存潜力为正的条件下，牧场系统的净温室气体排放量有可能大幅减少。研究还发现，牧草利用率对以牧场为基础的牛肉生产的影响程度影响不大。资源利用效率的三项措施，并表明，牛肉生产，无论是饲养场或牧场为基础，产生较低的食用资源回报的材料/能源投资相对于其他食品生产策略。(C)2010爱思唯尔有限公司保留所有权利。
We used ISO-compliant life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare the cumulative energy use, ecological footprint, greenhouse gas emissions and eutrophying emissions associated with models of three beef production strategies as currently practiced in the Upper Midwestern United States. Specifically we examined systems where calves were either: weaned directly to feedlots; weaned to out-of-state wheat pastures (backgrounded) then finished in feedlots; or finished wholly on managed pasture and hay. Impacts per live-weight kg of beef produced were highest for pasture-finished beef for all impact categories and lowest for feedlot-finished beef, assuming equilibrium conditions in soil organic carbon fluxes across systems. A sensitivity analysis indicated the possibility of substantial reductions in net greenhouse gas emissions for pasture systems under conditions of positive soil organic carbon sequestration potential. Forage utilization rates were also found to have a modest influence on impact levels in pasture-based beef production. Three measures of resource use efficiency were applied and indicated that beef production, whether feedlot or pasture-based, generates lower edible resource returns on material/energy investment relative to other food production strategies. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.