The sustainability and 'carbon footprints' of conventional and alternative beef production systems

2017 ◽  
pp. 363-389
Author(s):  
Jude L. Capper ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Production Systems ◽  
Beef Production ◽  
Carbon Footprints

Carbon footprinting of lamb and beef production systems: insights from an empirical analysis of farms in Wales, UK

2009 ◽  
Vol 147 (6) ◽  
pp. 707-719 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. EDWARDS-JONES ◽  
K. PLASSMANN ◽  
I. M. HARRIS
Keyword(s):  
Production Systems ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Live Weight ◽  
Climate Change Impacts ◽  
Organic Soils ◽  
Beef Production ◽  
System Boundary ◽  
Carbon Footprints ◽  
Carbon Footprinting

SUMMARYCarbon footprinting is an increasingly important method of communicating the climate change impacts of food production to stakeholders. Few studies utilize empirical data collected from farms to calculate the carbon footprints of lamb and beef. Data from two farms in Wales, UK, were employed to undertake such an analysis for two system boundaries.Within a system boundary that considers the embodied greenhouse gases (GHGs) in inputs and on-farm emissions, producing 1 kg of lamb releases 1·3–4·4 kg CO2 eq/kg live weight (case study farm 1) and 1·5–4·7 kg CO2 eq/kg live weight (case study farm 2). The production of beef releases 1·5–5·3 and 1·4–4·4 kg CO2 eq/kg live weight.Within a wider system boundary that also includes GHG emissions from animals and farm soils, lamb released 8·1–31·7 and 20·3–143·5 kg CO2 eq/kg live weight on the two case study farms, and beef released 9·7–38·1 and 18·8–132·6 kg CO2 eq/kg live weight. The difference in emissions for this system boundary relates to nitrous oxides emitted from the organic soils on case study farm 2.These values overlap with nearly all other studies of GHG emissions from lamb and beef production. No direct comparisons between studies are possible due to substantial differences in the methodological approaches adopted.

Effects of extending the grazing season in beef production systems

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 ◽  
pp. 116-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
B.J. O’Neill ◽  
M.J. Drennan ◽  
P.J. Caffrey
Keyword(s):  
Production Systems ◽  
Rural Environment ◽  
Environment Protection ◽  
Beef Production ◽  
Grazing Season ◽  
Protection Scheme ◽  
Grass Silage ◽  
Feed Costs ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Eu Support

The cost of grazed grass is less than half that of grass silage (O’Kiely, 1994) and incomes from beef production are low and largely dependent on EU support schemes. Thus the income from beef production could be incresed by reducing feed costs through increasing the proportion of grazed grass in the diet and optimising the use of the various support schemes. The objective of this two-year study was to examine the effects on the performance of yearling cattle of turnout to pasture three weeks earlier than normal. This was examined within two suckler beef production systems. One was a standard system similar to that outlined by Drennan (1993) and the second was compatible with the Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS).

Life cycle environmental consequences of grass-fed and dairy beef production systems in the Northeastern United States

2017 ◽  
Vol 142 ◽  
pp. 1619-1628 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole E. Tichenor ◽  
Christian J. Peters ◽  
Gregory A. Norris ◽  
Greg Thoma ◽  
Timothy S. Griffin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Beef Production ◽  
Northeastern United States ◽  
Environmental Consequences

Bioeconomic evaluation of embryo transfer in beef production systems: III. Embryo lines for producing bulls

1992 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 1091-1097 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Ruvuna ◽  
J. F. Taylor ◽  
J. P. Walter ◽  
J. W. Turner ◽  
R. M. Thallman
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Beef Production

scholarly journals 68 Assessing the Performance of Multiple Grass-fed Beef Production Systems in California

2020 ◽  
Vol 98 (Supplement_4) ◽  
pp. 46-47
Author(s):  
Sarah C Klopatek ◽  
Toni Duarte ◽  
Crystal Yang ◽  
James W Oltjen
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Model ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Carcass Quality ◽  
Animal Performance ◽  
Beef Production ◽  
Marbling Score ◽  
Final Body Weight ◽  
Whole Systems

Abstract With demand for grass-fed beef continuing to increase, there is an immediate need to determine animal performance and product quality from varying grass-fed systems. Therefore, using a whole systems approach, we investigated the performance and carcass quality of multiple grass-fed beef systems in California. The treatments included: 1) steers stocked on pasture, then feedyard finished for 140 days (CON); 2) steers grass-fed for 20 months (20GF); 3) steers grass-fed for 20 months with a 45-day grain finish (GR45); and 4) steers grass-fed for 25 months (25GF). The data were analyzed using a mixed model procedure in R. Final body weight (FBW) varied significantly between treatments (P < 0.05) with the CON cattle finishing at 626 kg and GF20 finishing with the lowest FBW of 478 kg. There were no significant differences in FBW between GF45 and GF25 treatments (P > 0.05), with FBW equaling 551 kg and 570 kg, respectively. Dressing percentage (DP) differed significantly between all treatments (P < 0.05), with CON DP at 61.8%, followed by GR45 at 57.5%, GF25 at 53.4%, and GF20 at 50.3%. Marbling scores and quality grades were significantly higher for CON compared to all other treatments (P < 0.05), with a marbling score of 421; 14% of CON animals graded select and 85% graded choice or upper choice. Cattle in the GR20 had the lowest marbling score of 285 (P < 0.05); 59% of the GR20 cattle graded select and 41% graded standard. There was no difference in marbling when comparing the GF25 and GR45 (P > 0.5). In addition, carcasses graded similarly between the two treatments with GF25 grading 13% standard 82% select, and 6% choice, GR45 graded 85% select and 15% choice. The findings from this study indicate that varying CA grass-fed beef production systems results in significant differences in both animal performance and meat quality.

scholarly journals Futuristic Applications for Profitable Beef Production Systems

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Serap Göncü ◽  
Özgül Anitaş ◽  
Gökhan Gökçe
Keyword(s):  
Production Systems ◽  
Beef Production

Bioeconomic evaluation of embryo transfer in beef production systems: II. Economic evaluation of steer production

1992 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 1084-1090 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Ruvuna ◽  
J. F. Taylor ◽  
J. P. Walter ◽  
J. W. Turner ◽  
R. M. Thallman
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Beef Production
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document