Greenhouse gas emissions along livestock supply chains and options for mitigation
GAA, 4th MSP meetingOttawa, 18 October 2013
Pierre Gerber, Senior Policy Officer, FAO-AGA
1
FAO-AGA’s work on GHG emissions in the livestock sector
• Goal: identify low emission pathways for the livestock sector
• Specific objectives: ▫ Produce disaggregated assessments of global GHG
emissions and related mitigation potential▫ Carry out economic analyses of mitigation costs and
benefits▫ Engage in multi-stakeholder initiatives on methods
and practice change
2
Preparation team
• Jeroen Dijkman •Benjamin Henderson•Alexander Hristov (PSU)•Michael MacLeod (SRUC)•Harinder Makkar•Anne Mottet•Carolyn Opio•Henning Steinfeld•Theun Vellinga (WUR)• ...
4
Global Livestock Environment Assessment Model – GLEAM: main features
• Life Cycle Assessment based modelling• Cradle to retail, all major sources of emissions included• Computes emissions at local level (cells on a map)• Can generate averages and ranges at different scales• Developed at FAO, in collaboration with other partners• Allows for scenario analysis
• Now used for the quantification of GHG emissions; will be expanded to other livestock-environment interactions (e.g. land use, nutrients, water)
5
Where are the emissions?
6
7
Total calculated emissions: 7.1 Gt CO2-eq, 14.5% of anthropogenic emissions
GHG emissions from global livestock supply chains
Grass and other
roughages44%
Swill1%
Crop residues
26%
By-prod-ucts**
8%
Grains9%
Second grade crops
2%
Other edible*9%
* Cassava, beans and soybeans** Bran, oilseed meals, pulp, molasses and wet distiller grains
Global feed ration
Estimated global emission intensities (Ei)
kg CO2-eq per kg protein
50% of prod
80% of Prod.
Average
9
Beef
Cattle
milk
Smal
l rum
inan
t mea
t
Smal
l rum
inan
t milk
Pork
Chick
en m
eat
Chick
en e
ggs
-
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
250.00
300.00
350.00
400.00
450.00
500.00
GHG emissions are losses
• CH4 emissions are energy losses▫ Total enteric methane emissions : equivalent to 144 Mt oil equivalent per
year▫ Total manure methane emissions: equivalent to 29 Mt oil equivalent per
year
• N2O losses are N losses from manure and fertilizers
▫ Manure N2O emissions (direct and indirect) from manure application on crops and application on pasture: 3.2 Mt of N
• CO2 emissions are related to fossil fuel use and organic matter
losses ▫ Energy use efficiency can be improved in many systems▫ Soil organic matter is key to land productivity
There is a strong link between GHG emission intensity and natural resource use efficiency
10
What do we know about mitigation options?
11
Mitigation potential (i)
Approach:
1. Statistical analysis of emission intensity gaps
Distribution of intensive broiler supply chains according to their emission intensity in temperate zones of East and Southeast Asia
13
< 10 10-15 15-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-100 >100 -
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
kg CO2-eq.kg meat protein-1
Num
ber o
f pix
els (
spati
al u
nits
)
Modeled emission intensity gap
20 to 30% mitigation effect if producers in a given region, farming system and agro-ecological zone would apply the production practices of the 10th to 25th quantiles with lowest emission intensity.
Mitigation potential (iii)
Approach:
1. Statistical analysis of emission intensity gaps
2. Modeling of potential soil C sequestration in collaboration with Colorado State University
Results - potential soil C sequestration
• Maximum technical soil C sequestration potential for grassland is estimated to be approx. 0.4 GtCO2-eq per year over a 20 year period - adjustment of grazing pressure (offtake rate).
• Additional 0.2 GtCO2-eq per year over a 20 year period - sowing legumes in some grasslands.
• Around half of the grasslands are under-utilized and half are over utilized.
• Optimal management increases absolute levels of forage offtake in most areas (overall, reduction in the level of offtake occurs in only 25% of the grassland area).
Mitigation potential (iii)
Approach:
1. Statistical analysis of emission intensity gaps
2. Modeling of potential soil C sequestration in collaboration with Colorado State University
3. Case studies in selected regions/farming systems
Case studies: mitigation packages
Mixed dairy- Feed quality- Animal health & husbandry
Commercial pigs- Manure management- Energy efficiency- Feed quality, - Animal health &
husbandry
Specialized beef- Grazing management- Animal health
Small ruminants- Feed quality- Animal health & husbandry- Grazing management
Mixed dairy OECD- Fat supplementation- Anaerobic digestion- Energy efficiency
Case studies: mitigation potential (emission intensities – constant output)
Mixed dairy-120 Mt CO2-eq
Commercial pigs-52 to -71 Mt CO2
Specialized beef-190 to -310 Mt CO2
Small ruminants-8 Mt to -12 Mt CO2
Mixed dairy OECD-54 to -66 Mt CO2
18-29%
28-36%
38%27-41%
14-17%
• Production increases by 7 to 40 percent in all case studies, except OECD• Overwhelming effects of feed, health and energy generation/efficiency• Grazing management : C sequestration and productivity gains
What are the main strategies for the reduction of emission intensities?
• Ruminants▫ animal level: feed digestibility and balancing, health,
genetics▫ herd level: maintenance to production ratio in animal
cohorts▫ production unit level: grazing management▫ supply chain level: energy use efficiency, waste
minimization and recycling
• Monogastrics▫ animal level: feed balancing, health, genetics▫ production unit level: source low Ei feed and energy▫ supply chain level: energy use efficiency, waste
minimization and recycling
19
Key policy areas for action
• Education, extension and agricultural support services.
• Incentives, access to capital and risk management.
• Research and development. ▫ refine existing technologies, and technical itineraries▫ supply new mitigation technologies/practices.
• National policies, including Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs).
• International agreements.
20
Emissions intensity vs net emissions
Estimated emission intensity reduction potential (30%) lower than expected production growth (70%)
• conservative estimate of mitigation potential• emission intensity gains will have effects on
production levels and costs• interventions on demand side may reduce
production growth rates
1. The livestock sector plays an important role in climate change. GHG emissions are estimated at 7.1 GtCO2-eq per year, about 14.5 percent of all human-induced emissions.
2. The sector’s emissions could be brought down by about 30 percent just through the wider use of existing best practices and technologies.
3. Substantial emission reductions can be achieved across all species, systems and regions.
4. Strong correlation between mitigation and resource use efficiency: possible environmental co-benefits .
5. Strong correlation between mitigation and productivity gains, especially among ruminant systems operating at low productivity.
6. Implementation will require education, awareness raising and incentives for technology transfer.
Main findings
QVID TVM
• Support practice change (GAA) ▫Test some of the options and related institutional
frameworks on the ground ▫Support development of livestock NAMAs
• Investigate the economics of mitigation• Improve, update GLEAM to reduce uncertainty
and measure progress (LEAP, GRA, CIRAD, WUR)
• Progressively include more environmental categories in GLEAM (nutrients, land, biodiversity, water)
23