Rotz C A, Coiner C U, Soder K J
USDA/Agricultural Research Service, Pasture Systems and Watershed Management Research Unit, Building 3702, Curtin Road, University Park, PA 16802, USA.
J Dairy Sci. 2003 Dec;86(12):4167-77. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)74032-6.
Automatic milking systems (AMS) offer relief from the demanding routine of milking. Although many AMS are in use in Europe and a few are used in the United States, the potential benefit for American farms is uncertain. A farm-simulation model was used to determine the long-term, whole-farm effect of implementing AMS on farm sizes of 30 to 270 cows. Highest farm net return to management and unpaid factors was when AMS were used at maximal milking capacity. Adding stalls to increase milking frequency and possibly increase production generally did not improve net return. Compared with new traditional milking systems, the greatest potential economic benefit was a single-stall AMS on a farm size of 60 cows at a moderate milk production level (8600 kg/cow). On other farm sizes using single-stall type robotic units, losses in annual net return of 0 dollars to 300 dollars/cow were projected, with the greatest losses on larger farms and at high milk production (10,900 kg/cow). Systems with one robot serving multiple stalls provided a greater net return than single-stall systems, and this net return was competitive with traditional parlors for 50- to 130-cow farm sizes. The potential benefit of AMS was improved by 100 dollars/cow per year if the AMS increased production an additional 5%. A 20% reduction in initial equipment cost or doubling milking labor cost also improved annual net return of an AMS by up to 100 dollars/cow. Annual net return was reduced by 110 dollars/cow, though, if the economic life of the AMS was reduced by 3 yr for a more rapid depreciation than that normally used with traditional milking systems. Thus, under current assumptions, the economic return for an AMS was similar to that of new parlor systems on smaller farms when the milking capacity of the AMS was well matched to herd size and milk production level.
自动挤奶系统(AMS)可缓解繁重的挤奶日常工作。尽管欧洲有许多自动挤奶系统在使用,美国也有少数在使用,但美国农场采用该系统的潜在益处尚不确定。利用一个农场模拟模型来确定在30至270头奶牛规模的农场实施自动挤奶系统的长期、全农场效应。当自动挤奶系统以最大挤奶能力运行时,农场管理和未付要素的净回报最高。增加牛舍以提高挤奶频率并可能增加产量通常并不会提高净回报。与新型传统挤奶系统相比,最大的潜在经济效益是在中等牛奶产量水平(8600千克/头)、奶牛规模为60头的农场采用单牛舍自动挤奶系统。对于其他使用单牛舍型机器人单元的农场规模,预计每头奶牛每年的净回报损失为0美元至300美元,在较大规模农场和高牛奶产量(10900千克/头)时损失最大。一个机器人服务多个牛舍的系统比单牛舍系统提供更高的净回报,并且对于50至130头奶牛规模的农场,这种净回报与传统挤奶厅具有竞争力。如果自动挤奶系统使产量再额外提高5%,则其潜在效益可提高至每年每头奶牛100美元。初始设备成本降低20%或挤奶劳动力成本翻倍,也可使自动挤奶系统的年净回报提高多达每头奶牛100美元。不过,如果自动挤奶系统的经济寿命比传统挤奶系统通常采用的折旧速度快3年而缩短,那么年净回报将减少每头奶牛110美元。因此,在当前假设下,当自动挤奶系统的挤奶能力与牛群规模和牛奶产量水平良好匹配时,小型农场采用自动挤奶系统的经济回报与新型挤奶厅系统相似。