emissions include the genetic selection of animals producing fewer emissions and
having higher production efficiency (genetic approach), as well as management
approaches, e.g. practices to reduce non-voluntary culling and diseases and
improvements in nutrition [4]. In this paper, choice of breed as well as the use of
feed additives are analysed.
The World Bank sees investing in more advanced technologies as an answer to
the environmental problems caused by agriculture [6]. In a sustainability evaluation
of 17 cleantech measures in agriculture, the two cleantech options analysed in this
paper—solar electricity and the use of frequency converters—were rated among the
five best approaches [7]. A joint research project of the University of Cape Town
and the Zurich University of Applied Sciences was carried out, aimed at identifying
environmental hotspots in the life cycle of South African agri-food products in
order to determine the key intervention points for mitigating their environmental
impacts. This paper specifically describes four clean technologies and their potential
to reduce the environmental impact of South Africa’s milk by applying life cycle
assessment (LCA).
2 Methods
Data collection for the LCA of milk and maize were part of this research project:
data on maize cultivation were collected from the major maize production corporations in South Africa (GWK AGRI, Grain SA). Manufacturing data, including
fertiliser and pesticide use, diesel consumption, production area and yield are
average values from the Grain SA planning models of three different regions
(Eastern Highveld; North West and Central; Northern Free State) of maize production in South Africa from 2006 to 2013 [8]. The modelling is based on different
methods of production (rainfed and irrigated) and three different maize varieties:
genetically modified (GM)-insect tolerant trait (RR, only rainfed); GM-genetically
modified herbicide tolerant trait and GM-free (Bt, only irrigated) and GM-free.
Both multi-nutrient fertilisers (NPK-fertilisers) and cattle manure are applied.
Data for the milk model was collected in 2014 from five dairy farms in the
province of KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) [9], one of the three main milk production areas
South Africa [3].
Allocation between beef and milk was conducted according to the approach
recommended by the International Dairy Federation (IDF) that reflects the underlying use of energy from fodder by the dairy animals and the physiological feed
requirements of the animal to produce milk and meat [10]. To distribute the beef’s
environmental impact between calves and cull dairy cows, economic allocation was
performed.
Based on the results of these LCAs, four different measures to reduce the
environmental impact of raw milk were considered: choice of suitable breed:
comparison of Ayrshire and Holstein cows (A); reduction of enteric emissions with
feed-additives: feeding 3NOP to lactating cows (B) and producing maize feed with
116
R. Keller et al.
having higher production efficiency (genetic approach), as well as management
approaches, e.g. practices to reduce non-voluntary culling and diseases and
improvements in nutrition [4]. In this paper, choice of breed as well as the use of
feed additives are analysed.
The World Bank sees investing in more advanced technologies as an answer to
the environmental problems caused by agriculture [6]. In a sustainability evaluation
of 17 cleantech measures in agriculture, the two cleantech options analysed in this
paper—solar electricity and the use of frequency converters—were rated among the
five best approaches [7]. A joint research project of the University of Cape Town
and the Zurich University of Applied Sciences was carried out, aimed at identifying
environmental hotspots in the life cycle of South African agri-food products in
order to determine the key intervention points for mitigating their environmental
impacts. This paper specifically describes four clean technologies and their potential
to reduce the environmental impact of South Africa’s milk by applying life cycle
assessment (LCA).
2 Methods
Data collection for the LCA of milk and maize were part of this research project:
data on maize cultivation were collected from the major maize production corporations in South Africa (GWK AGRI, Grain SA). Manufacturing data, including
fertiliser and pesticide use, diesel consumption, production area and yield are
average values from the Grain SA planning models of three different regions
(Eastern Highveld; North West and Central; Northern Free State) of maize production in South Africa from 2006 to 2013 [8]. The modelling is based on different
methods of production (rainfed and irrigated) and three different maize varieties:
genetically modified (GM)-insect tolerant trait (RR, only rainfed); GM-genetically
modified herbicide tolerant trait and GM-free (Bt, only irrigated) and GM-free.
Both multi-nutrient fertilisers (NPK-fertilisers) and cattle manure are applied.
Data for the milk model was collected in 2014 from five dairy farms in the
province of KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) [9], one of the three main milk production areas
South Africa [3].
Allocation between beef and milk was conducted according to the approach
recommended by the International Dairy Federation (IDF) that reflects the underlying use of energy from fodder by the dairy animals and the physiological feed
requirements of the animal to produce milk and meat [10]. To distribute the beef’s
environmental impact between calves and cull dairy cows, economic allocation was
performed.
Based on the results of these LCAs, four different measures to reduce the
environmental impact of raw milk were considered: choice of suitable breed:
comparison of Ayrshire and Holstein cows (A); reduction of enteric emissions with
feed-additives: feeding 3NOP to lactating cows (B) and producing maize feed with
116
R. Keller et al.