Dataset Information

Modeling the effects of steroid implant use on the environmental and economic sustainability of Brazilian beef production.

ABSTRACT: Brazilian beef systems contribute 14.9% of global beef production, therefore given climate change concerns, there is a clear need to reduce environmental impacts while maintaining economic viability. This study evaluated the hypothesis that steroid implant use in Brazilian beef cattle would reduce resource use, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and economic costs of production, thereby improving environmental and economic sustainability. A deterministic model based on beef cattle population demographics, nutrition and performance was used to quantify resource inputs and GHG emissions per 1.0 × 10⁶ kg of hot carcass weight (HCW) beef. System boundaries extended from cropping input manufacture to cattle arriving at the slaughterhouse. Beef systems were modeled using herd population dynamics, feed and performance data sourced from producers in four Brazilian states, with additional data from global databases. Implants were used in calves, growing and finishing cattle at low (LI), medium (MI), and high (HI) levels of performance enhancement, compared to nonimplanted (NI) controls. Feed use results were used in combination with producer-derived input costs to assess the economic impacts of implant use, including production costs and returns on investment. Improved FCE, ADG, and carcass weights conferred by implant use reduced the number of cattle and the time taken to produce 1.0 × 10⁶ kg HCW beef. Compared to NI controls, the quantities of feed, land, water and fossil fuels required to produce 1.0 × 10⁶ kg HCW beef was reduced in implanted cattle, with reductions proportional to the performance-enhancing effect of the implant (HI > MI > LI). Implant use reduced GHG emissions per 1.0 × 10⁶ kg HCW beef by 9.4% (LI), 12.6% (MI), or 15.8% (HI). Scaling up the MI effects to represent all eligible Brazilian cattle being implanted, revealed avoided GHG emissions equivalent to the annual exhaust emissions of 62.0 × 10⁶ cars. Economic impacts of implant use reflected the environmental results, resulting in a greater margin for the producers within each system (cow-calf through to finishing). The 6.13% increase in kg of HCW beef produced generates a cost reduction of 3.76% and an increase in the return on invested capital of 4.14% on average. Implants offer the opportunity for Brazilian beef producers to demonstrate their dedication to improving environmental and economic sustainability through improved productivity, although care must be taken to avoid negative trade-offs.

SUBMITTER: Capper JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8494015 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Achieving safely managed sanitation and resource recovery in areas that are rural, geographically challenged, or experiencing rapidly increasing population density may not be feasible with centralized facilities due to space requirements, site-specific concerns, and high costs of sewer installation. Nonsewered sanitation (NSS) systems have the potential to provide safely managed sanitation and achieve strict wastewater treatment standards. One such NSS treatment technology is the NEWgenerator, which includes an anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR), nutrient recovery via ion exchange, and electrochlorination. The system has been shown to achieve robust treatment of real waste for over 100 users, but the technology's relative life cycle sustainability remains unclear. This study characterizes the financial viability and life cycle environmental impacts of the NEWgenerator and prioritizes opportunities to advance system sustainability through targeted improvements and deployment. The costs and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the NEWgenerator (general case) leveraging grid electricity were 0.139 [0.113-0.168] USD cap-1 day-1 and 79.7 [55.0-112.3] kg CO2-equiv cap-1 year-1, respectively. A transition to photovoltaic-generated electricity would increase costs to 0.145 [0.118-0.181] USD cap-1 day-1 but decrease GHG emissions to 56.1 [33.8-86.2] kg CO2-equiv cap-1 year-1. The deployment location analysis demonstrated reduced median costs for deployment in China (-38%), India (-53%), Senegal (-31%), South Africa (-31%), and Uganda (-35%), but at comparable or increased GHG emissions (-2 to +16%). Targeted improvements revealed the relative change in median cost and GHG emissions to be -21 and -3% if loading is doubled (i.e., doubled users per unit), -30 and -12% with additional sludge drying, and +9 and -25% with the addition of a membrane contactor, respectively, with limited benefits (0-5% reductions) from an alternative photovoltaic battery, low-cost housing, or improved frontend operation. This research demonstrates that the NEWgenerator is a low-cost, low-emission NSS treatment technology with the potential for resource recovery to increase access to safe sanitation.

Project description:Between increasing public concerns over climate change and heightened interest of niche market beef on social media, the demand for grass-fed beef has increased considerably. However, the demand increase for grass-fed beef has raised many producers' and consumers' concerns regarding product quality, economic viability, and environmental impacts that have thus far gone unanswered. Therefore, using a holistic approach, we investigated the performance, carcass quality, financial outcomes, and environmental impacts of four grass-fed and grain-fed beef systems currently being performed by ranchers in California. The treatments included 1) steers stocked on pasture and feedyard finished for 128 d (CON); 2) steers grass-fed for 20 mo (GF20); 3) steers grass-fed for 20 mo with a 45-d grain finish (GR45); and 4) steers grass-fed for 25 mo (GF25). The data were analyzed using a mixed model procedure in R with differences between treatments determined by Tukey HSD. Using carcass and performance data from these systems, a weaning-to-harvest life cycle assessment was developed in the Scalable, Process-based, Agronomically Responsive Cropping Systems model framework, to determine global warming potential (GWP), consumable water use, energy, smog, and land occupation footprints. Final body weight varied significantly between treatments (P < 0.001) with the CON cattle finishing at 632 kg, followed by GF25 at 570 kg, GR45 at 551 kg, and GF20 478 kg. Dressing percentage differed significantly between all treatments (P < 0.001). The DP was 61.8% for CON followed by GR45 at 57.5%, GF25 at 53.4%, and GF20 had the lowest DP of 50.3%. Marbling scores were significantly greater for CON compared to all other treatments (P < 0.001) with CON marbling score averaging 421 (low-choice ≥ 400). Breakeven costs with harvesting and marketing for the CON, GF20, GR45, and GF25 were $6.01, $8.98, $8.02, and $8.33 per kg hot carcass weight (HCW), respectively. The GWP for the CON, GF20, GR45, and GF25 were 4.79, 6.74, 6.65, and 8.31 CO2e/kg HCW, respectively. Water consumptive use for CON, GF20, GR45, and GF25 were 933, 465, 678, and 1,250 L/kg HCW, respectively. Energy use for CON, GF20, GR45, and GF25 were 18.7, 7.65, 13.8, and 8.85 MJ/kg HCW, respectively. Our results indicated that grass-fed beef systems differ in both animal performance and carcass quality resulting in environmental and economic sustainability trade-offs with no system having absolute superiority.

Project description:The planetary boundaries (PBs) represent a well-known concept, which helps identify whether production and consumption systems are environmentally sustainable in absolute terms, namely compared to the Earth's ecological limits and carrying capacity. In this study, the impacts of production and consumption of the European Union in 2010 were assessed by means of life cycle assessment (LCA)-based indicators and compared with the PBs. Five different perspectives were adopted for assessing the impacts: a production perspective (EU Domestic Footprint) and four distinct consumption perspectives, resulting from alternative modelling approaches including both top-down (input-output LCA) and bottom-up (process-based LCA). Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) results were assessed against LCIA-based PBs, which adapted the PBs framework to the LCIA indicators and metrics of the Environmental Footprint method (EF). Global environmental impacts transgressed several LCIA-based PBs. When assessing the overall environmental impacts of EU consumption compared to the global LCIA-based PBs, impacts of EU consumption related to climate change, particulate matter, land use and mineral resources were close or already transgressed the global boundaries. The EU, with less than 10% of the world population, was close to transgress the global ecological limits. Moreover, when downscaling the global PBs and comparing the impacts per capita for an average EU citizen and a global one, the LCIA-PBs were significantly transgressed in many impact categories. The results are affected by uncertainty mainly due to: (a) the intrinsic uncertainties of the different LCA modelling approaches and indicators; (b) the uncertainties in estimating LCIA-based PBs, due to the difficulties in identifying limits for the Earth's processes and referring them to LCIA metrics. The results may anyway be used to define benchmarks and policy targets to ensure that consumption and production in Europe remains within safe ecological boundaries, as well as to understand the magnitude of the effort needed to reduce the impacts.

Dataset Information

Modeling the effects of steroid implant use on the environmental and economic sustainability of Brazilian beef production.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets