Prof Phil Garnsworthy Nottingham University Impact of nutrition on - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Prof Phil Garnsworthy

Nottingham University

Impact of nutrition on carbon emissions Phil Garnsworthy

University of Nottingham

Environmental Impacts

• The UK is committed to reduce

greenhouse gas emissions by 80% of 1990 values before 2050

• UK agricultural GHG emissions:

–Methane (GWP 25)

• Enteric fermentation, manure

–Nitrous oxide (GWP 296)

• Fertilizer, manure

EU livestock Greenhouse Gases

Mton CO2 equivalent

Enteric fermentation (CH4)

148

Manure handling (CH4)

52

Manure handling (N2O)

33

Pasture manure (N2O)

26

Total

260

CE Delft, 2008

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from UK Agriculture

Total: 54.64 Mt CO2e Total: 43.22 Mt CO2e

2007

1990

Ruminant Livestock

73.1%

Pigs and Poultry 6.9%

Arable

19.0%

Other 1.0%

Pigs and Poultry 8.1% Arable 19.1%

Other 0.46%

Ruminant Livestock 72.4%

Source: AEA (2009) and Dairy Co (2009)

Gill, 2012

Proportional contribution of livestock species in UK to production & GHGs

Species Contribution to production Contribution to GHG emissions Poultry 0.48 0.26 Pigs 0.21 0.16 Cattle 0.22 0.27 Sheep 0.1 0.21

Gill, 2012

UK Livestock Population

% Change 1990 to 2010 Dairy Cows

• 36

Beef Cows +6 Sheep

• 29

Pigs

• 41

Poultry +28

DEFRA statistics

Output per Head

% Change 1990 to 2010 Milk yield per cow + 42 Prime beef carcase weight + 21 Lamb carcase weight + 7 Pig carcase weight +20

DEFRA statistics

IPCC Methane inventory (kg/head/year)

Enteric Manure Dairy cattle* 100+ 44 Other cattle 48 20 Sheep 8 0.28 Pigs 1.5 10 Poultry N/A 0.117 * Based on 4,200 kg milk/yr. Actual figure used is calculated from NE intake as 6% of GE

Strategies to reduce GHG

• Individual animal

– Improve LWG or yield (↓ maintenance, time) – Improve FCE (↓ CFP of feeds, ↓ excretion) – Change diet (↓ CFP, methane and excretion)

• System

– Reduce animal wastage – Better fertility and health – Longevity

Carbon footprint of feeds

(g CO2e/kg DM)

• Crop

– Fertilizer (CO2, N2O) – Pesticides – Cultivation – Storage losses

• Processing
• Transport
• Land use (C release versus sequestration)

Vellinga et al.

Carbon footprint

(g CO2e/kg DM)

CFP LUC Sum Grazing 329 69 398 Grass silage 304 78 382 Maize silage 163 90 252 Wheat 424 165 589 Sugar beet pulp 322 322 Soya bean meal 633 437 1070 Rapeseed meal 534 166 700

Vellinga et al.

The Nottingham Feed Conference 25-26 June 2013

• Liam Sinclair, Harper Adams
• Nigel Kendall, Nottingham
• Dave Roberts, SRUC
• Kevin Sinclair, Nottingham
• John Mee, Ireland
• Pekka Huhtanen, Sweden
• John Allen, Kite
• Theun Vellinga, Wageningen
• Judith Nelson, AIC
• Imke Mulder, Rowett Institute
• Martin Nyachoti, Canada
• Derek Armstrong, BPEX
• Ilias Kyriazakis, Newcastle
• Jos Houdijk, SRUC
• Julian Wiseman, Nottingham

www.nottingham.ac.uk/feedconf

Feed DM 18 kg N 490 g Milk Yield 30 kg N 150 g Urine/Faeces N 340 g CH4 500 L (69%) Daily Input & Output for an Average Cow

Grass

(cellulose)

Pyruvate Propionate Acetate H2 Pyruvate

Cereals

(starch)

Methane

Archaea Archaea

CO2

Origin of Methane

10 20 30 40 50 60 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 Methane (t/yr) Milk yield (l/cow/yr)

250 cows 100 cows

Methane and Milk Yield

1 million litres

6.5% GE Diet adjusted

Garnsworthy (2004)

• Rowett feed factors

– ME determination includes CH4 measurement

• Animal equation

CH4 (MJ/d) = 1.36 + 1.21DMI – 0.825DMconc + 12.8NDF

(Yates et al., 2000)

• Total daily Methane production is related to

Dry Matter Intake Proportion of concentrates in diet Fibre content of diet Positive Positive Negative

Predicted Methane Emissions

Effect of low and high methane diets on CH4 42 cows, 14 days per diet, crossover design

Methane Diet Low High sed P . Dry matter intake (kg/d) 23.6 20.3 0.31 <0.001 Milk yield (kg/d) 32.7 32.1 0.28 0.034 Methane emission rate (g/d) 373 395 8.2 0.042 (g/kg DMI) 15.8 19.5 0.58 <0.001

Diets: Low = commercial TMR (maize, grass & whole-crop silages; SBP, rape, soya, fat, M&V) High = Low + double grass silage (13% -> 30%) + peas (2kg/d)

Diet and Nitrogen Excretion

(Broderick, 2002) 3 levels of dietary CP 3 levels of dietary NDF (starch) 9 diets, 9 cows per diet

CP Levels

15.1% CP 16.7% CP 18.4% CP P DMI, kg/d 21.1 22.3 22.6 0.03 Milk, kg/d 32.8 34.6 34.4 0.48 Fat, kg/d 1.15 1.24 1.20 0.33 Protein, kg/d 0.98 1.03 1.02 0.46 Milk Urea-N, mg/dL 9.2 12.4 16.0 < 0.01 Milk N/N Intake 0.31 0.28 0.25 < 0.01 Urinary N, g/d 119 169 227 < 0.01 Faecal N, g/d 231 264 278 0.04

NDF (starch) Levels

36% NDF 32% NDF 28% NDF P DMI, kg/d 21.7 22.1 22.1 0.84 BW gain, kg/d 0.39 0.47 0.71 0.02 Milk, kg/d 31.4 33.8 36.5 <0.01 Fat, kg/d 1.20 1.24 1.15 0.48 Protein, kg/d 0.92 1.01 1.10 <0.01 Milk Urea-N, mg/dL 13.3

12.7 11.5 <0.01 Milk N/N Intake 0.26 0.27 0.30 < 0.01 Urinary N, g/d 182 175 158 0.10 Faecal N, g/d 253 259 262 0.64

Effect of Diet on Milk Protein Yield

Protein yield, kg/d

15.1 16.7 18.4 15.1 16.7 18.4 15.1 16.7 18.4

Dietary Crude Protein, %

0.80

• ----36% NDF-----
• ----32% NDF-----
• ----28% NDF-----

a a a b c d cd b

0.90 1.00 1.10

cd

Human-Edible Proportion of Feeds

Human-Edible Proportion Grazed pasture, silage, hay zero Cereal and pulse grains 0.8 Cereal co-products 0.2 Soyabeans and meal 0.8 Other oilseed meals 0.2 Other by-products 0.2 Minerals and vitamins zero

Wilkinson (2010)

Total Energy Human Edible Total Protein Human Edible

Pig meat

0.28 0.43 0.16 0.29

Poultry meat

0.24 0.27 0.31 0.36

Eggs

0.15 0.26 0.23 0.41

Beef – Feedlot

0.10 0.21 0.11 0.29

Beef – Grass/Cereal

0.06 0.40 0.06 0.55

Lamb

0.02 0.43 0.03 0.63

Milk

0.24 2.37 0.20 1.64

Feed Conversion Efficiency

• f UK Livestock Systems

Wilkinson (2010)

Compare Three Least-cost Diets

kg/d

40L GS 40L GSMS 40L MS Grass silage 47 28 Maize silage 23 61 Wheat 1 2.8 Barley 3.4 Rape meal 1.5 2.3 Soya meal 4 4 1.5 Fat 0.5 0.4 0.3 Mins & Vits 0.2 0.2 0.2 Cost (£/d) 3.44 3.37 3.16

Compare Three Least-cost Diets

40L GS 40L GSMS 40L MS ME (MJ/d) 268 268 268 MP (g/d) 2338 2325 2324 CP (g/d) 4781 4104 3401 CP (g/kg DM) 224 185 150 Starch (g/kg DM) 43 160 257 ERDP - MCP ratio 2.07 1.49 1.00 Faecal N (g) 153 152 164 Urine N (g) 424 317 193 N excretion (g) 577 469 357 N Efficiency (%) 25 30 37 CFP feed (g eCO2/L) 273 257 229

• 19%
• 38%

Replacement numbers 1984-2007

500 1 000 1 500 2 000 2 500 3 000 3 500 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Number of Animals (000) 20 25 30 35 Replacement rate (%) Heifers in calf Dairy cows Replacement rate Defra Statistics

3 lactations 4 lactations

Lifetime Milk & Methane Output

Same milk from 80% of cows Lactations

3 4

Milk (t) 22.7 28.9 +27% Methane (GJ) 39.1 44.2 +13% Methane (MJ/l) 1.72 1.53

• 13%

Control diet High insulin diet High genetic merit Low genetic merit 50% 80% 60% 100%

Proportion of cows that ovulated within 50 days of calving

Gong, Lee, Garnsworthy, and Webb (2002) Reproduction, 123, 419-427.

Pregnancy rate at 120 days with diets designed to improve cycling (High Starch) or oocytes (High Fat)

27 27 27 60 29 29 36 69 20 30 40 50 60 70 Neither Cycling Oocytes Both Pregnant at 120 days (%) % of Total % of Served

Fat /Starch Starch Fat Starch/Fat

Garnsworthy et al. (2009) Reproduction 137, 759-768

Conclusions

• Production efficiency (number of animals) is the

main driver of total emissions and excretions

• Feed intake is the main determinant of GHG per

animal

• Feed efficiency affects product per unit pollution
• Methane and nitrogen can be manipulated by

nutrition – both directly and indirectly