Méité René, Bayer Lukas, Martin Michael, Amon Barbara, Uthes Sandra
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Eberswalder Straße 84, Müncheberg, Germany.
Albrecht Daniel Thaer-Institute of Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Department of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt University Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Heliyon. 2024 Apr 13;10(9):e29389. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29389. eCollection 2024 May 15.
Intensive dairy farming, particularly enteric fermentation and manure management, is a major contributor to negative impacts on the local and global environment. A wide range of abatement measures has been proposed to reduce livestock-related emissions, yet the individual and combined effects of these innovations are often unknown. In this study, we performed an attributional life cycle assessment of three innovative measures modeled in two synthetic German dairy farm systems: Feeding of the seaweed , installing an in-house cow toilet system, and performing on-field slurry acidification. These measures were modeled both individually and in combination to account for single and cumulative effects and compared to a reference scenario under current practices. Our results showed that feeding high levels of and the combination of all three measures were most effective at reducing global warming potential (20-30 %), while only the latter mitigated eutrophication (6-9%) and acidification potential (14-17 %). The cow toilet required additional adapted manure management (separated storage and injection of urine) to effectively reduce eutrophication (8-10 %) and acidification potential (19-23 %) and to decrease global warming potential (3-4%) and abiotic depletion (4-5%). Slurry acidification slightly affected all considered environmental impact categories. All three measures involved trade-offs, either between LCA impact categories (global warming potential vs. abiotic depletion), the location of impacts (off- vs. on-farm), or the emission reduction in individual gases (ammonia vs. nitrous oxide). Measure combinations could compensate for the observed trade-offs. Our study highlights the potential of novel abatement measures but also shows the interdependencies of measures in different stages. This calls for a revisiting of current priorities in funding and legislation, which often focus on single objectives and measures (e.g. ammonia reduction) toward the preferential use of measures that are effective without driving trade-offs or improving resource efficiency.
集约化奶牛养殖，尤其是肠道发酵和粪便管理，是对当地和全球环境产生负面影响的主要因素。人们已经提出了一系列减排措施来减少与牲畜相关的排放，但这些创新措施的单独和综合效果往往未知。在本研究中，我们对德国两个合成奶牛养殖系统中模拟的三种创新措施进行了归因生命周期评估：投喂海藻、安装场内奶牛厕所系统以及进行田间粪肥酸化。对这些措施分别和组合进行了模拟，以考虑单一和累积影响，并与当前做法下的参考情景进行比较。我们的结果表明，高剂量投喂[此处原文缺失具体物质]以及所有三种措施的组合在减少全球变暖潜势方面最为有效（降低20 - 30%），而只有后者减轻了富营养化（降低6 - 9%）和酸化潜势（降低14 - 17%）。奶牛厕所需要额外的适应性粪便管理（尿液的单独储存和注入）才能有效减少富营养化（降低8 - 10%）和酸化潜势（降低19 - 23%），并降低全球变暖潜势（降低3 - 4%）和非生物资源耗竭（降低4 - 5%）。粪肥酸化对所有考虑的环境影响类别影响较小。所有这三种措施都涉及权衡，要么在生命周期评估影响类别之间（全球变暖潜势与非生物资源耗竭），影响的位置（农场外与农场内），要么在单个气体的减排方面（氨与氧化亚氮）。措施组合可以弥补观察到的权衡。我们的研究突出了新型减排措施的潜力，但也显示了不同阶段措施之间的相互依存关系。这就要求重新审视当前资金和立法中的优先事项，这些优先事项通常侧重于单一目标和措施（如减少氨排放），而应优先使用在不产生权衡或提高资源效率的情况下有效的措施。
