Arto Kalevi Huuskonen, Manni Katariina, Pekka Huhtanen

Modelling effects of different milk production intensities on methane production and nitrogen excretion when targeted amounts of milk and beef are produced

Introduction

Modelling effects of different milk production intensities on methane production and nitrogen excretion when targeted amounts of milk and beef are produced. Model impacts of milk production intensity on methane (CH4) and nitrogen (N) emissions from Finnish cattle. Discover how higher intensity reduces CH4 and optimizes N output.

Abstract

The objective of the study was to model the effects of different milk production intensities on methane (CH4) production and nitrogen (N) excretion of cattle in Finnish milk and beef production when the targeted amount of milk and beef is produced. Beef production strategies at current annual milk production in Finland (2 200 million kg) were optimised by Excel Solver for each combination of milk yield (8 000, 9 000, 10 000, 11 000, and 12 000 kg year-1) and beef production (60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, and 100 million kg year-1). Increased milk production intensity decreased total CH4 production at each beef production level. In addition, at the lower levels of beef production than currently (85 million kg) total manure N output decreased with increased intensity of milk production but at current or higher beef production levels the effects of milk yield were small. The current strategy of producing milk and beef with high milk production intensity seems to be effective in terms of CH4 production and N emissions.

Review

This modelling study addresses a highly pertinent issue in modern agriculture: balancing productivity with environmental sustainability, specifically concerning methane (CH4) emissions and nitrogen (N) excretion in livestock systems. The authors present a comprehensive scenario analysis for Finnish milk and beef production, utilizing an Excel Solver to optimize beef production strategies under various milk production intensities and targeted beef output levels, while maintaining a fixed total milk production. This approach is commendable for its systematic exploration of complex interactions within a combined dairy and beef system, providing valuable insights into how management decisions around intensity can influence key environmental indicators at a regional scale. The methodology's strength lies in its ability to simulate and compare multiple scenarios, offering a strategic planning tool for policymakers and industry stakeholders. The findings reveal clear and significant relationships between production intensity and environmental impact. Notably, increased milk production intensity consistently led to a decrease in total CH4 production across all simulated beef production levels. This suggests that strategies promoting higher individual animal milk yields can be an effective means of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions from the dairy sector. The impact on nitrogen excretion, however, was more nuanced; while N output decreased with increased milk intensity at lower beef production targets, this effect was negligible at current or higher beef production levels. This finding highlights the intricate balance required when optimizing for multiple environmental outcomes and underscores the need for a holistic approach to livestock system management. The authors' conclusion that Finland's current strategy of high milk production intensity appears effective in mitigating both CH4 and N emissions is a significant takeaway with direct policy relevance. While the study provides robust insights into the modelled system, its findings are inherently constrained by its nature as a modelling exercise, focusing on Finnish conditions. The abstract does not elaborate on the specific biological models, feed inputs, or animal genetics assumed, which could influence the generalizability of the results to other regions or farming systems. Future research could enhance the utility of this work by incorporating economic analyses to understand the cost-effectiveness of different production intensities or by expanding the model to include other environmental externalities like land use change or water footprint. Furthermore, validating these model outputs with empirical data from different production systems would strengthen the confidence in such recommendations. Nevertheless, this paper makes a substantial contribution to the understanding of sustainable livestock production, offering actionable insights for reducing the environmental footprint of integrated milk and beef systems.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.