The sensitivity of comparative milk footprints from dairy\nfarm systems implementing conventional and legume-based animal diets to choice\nof allocation method was accessed by analysing and comparing carbon footprints\ngenerated through the use of Feedprint NL and AgRe Calc using both mass and\neconomic allocation methods, different dairy cow diets and different genetic\nmerits. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
It was found that mass and economic allocation methods,\ndifferent dairy cow diets and different genetic merits can create very varied\nfootprints. Table 7.1 to 7.4 show the averages for each of the cow groups. It\ncan be seen in these tables that across all of the groups mass allocation\ngenerated a higher footprint then economic allocation. And it can be seen that\nthe select cows had higher milk yield then the control cows and in turn a lower\nMilk EF (kg CO2<\/sub>-eq\/L).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1.1\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 By product diet averages<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/td>
\n Economic BPC Average\n <\/td>
\n Mass BPC Average\n <\/td>
\n Economic BPS Average\n <\/td>
\n Mass BPS Average\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n System kg CO2-eq\n <\/td>
\n 508989.3\n <\/td>
\n 2085834\n <\/td>
\n 568506.5\n <\/td>
\n 2331630.25\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Milk prod (L)\n <\/td>
\n 433420.5\n <\/td>
\n 433420.5\n <\/td>
\n 545373.5\n <\/td>
\n 545373.5\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Milk EF (kg CO2<\/sub>-eq\/L)\n <\/td>
\n 1.18\n <\/td>
\n 4.83\n <\/td>
\n 1.04\n <\/td>
\n 4.28\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
*BPC = By product diet control, BPS = By product diet select<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1.2\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 High forge diet averages<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/td>
\n Economic HFC\n Average\n <\/td>
\n Mass HFC Average\n <\/td>
\n Economic HFS\n Average\n <\/td>
\n Mass HFS Average\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n System kg\n CO2-eq\n <\/td>
\n 529911.6\n <\/td>
\n 758624\n <\/td>
\n 504,980\n <\/td>
\n 654251.4\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Milk prod (L)\n <\/td>
\n 405650.4\n <\/td>
\n 405650.4\n <\/td>
\n 433,361\n <\/td>
\n 433361\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Milk EF (kg\n CO2<\/sub>-eq\/L)\n <\/td>
\n 1.31\n <\/td>
\n 1.87\n <\/td>
\n 1.17\n <\/td>
\n 1.52\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
*HFC = High forge\ndiet control, HFS = High forge diet\nselect<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1.4\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Home grown diet averages<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/td>
\n Economic HGC\n Average\n <\/td>
\n Mass HFC\n Average\n <\/td>
\n Economic HGS\n Average\n <\/td>
\n Mass HGS\n Average\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n System kg\n CO2-eq\n <\/td>
\n 430,483\n <\/td>
\n 840,371\n <\/td>
\n 474,597\n <\/td>
\n 910,055\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Milk prod (L)\n <\/td>
\n 356,441\n <\/td>
\n 356,441\n <\/td>
\n 424,024\n <\/td>
\n 424,024\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Milk EF (kg\n CO2<\/sub>-eq\/L)\n <\/td>
\n 1.21\n <\/td>
\n 2.36\n <\/td>
\n 1.13\n <\/td>
\n 2.18\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
*HGC = Home grown\ndiet control, HGS = Home grown diet\nselect <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The bar chart in Figure 7.1 shows all the cow groups\ntogether and their average EF per litre of milk (kg CO2<\/sub>-eq\/L). It\ncan be seen that across all of the groups mass allocation generated a higher\nfootprint then economic allocation. And it can be seen that the select cows had\nhigher milk yield then the control cows and in turn a lower Milk EF (kg CO2<\/sub>-eq\/L).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Figure 7.1 Emission factor per litre of milk for each of the cow groups <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
The box plot in Figure 7.2 shows all the cow groups together and their average EF per litre of milk (kg CO2<\/sub>-eq\/L). It can be seen that across all of the groups mass allocation generated a higher footprint then economic allocation. And it can be seen that the select cows had higher milk yield then the control cows and in turn a lower Milk EF (kg CO2<\/sub>-eq\/L). This also shows the averages for each of the cow groups. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Figure 7.2 Box plot of the emission factor per litre of milk for each of the cow groups <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
It can be concluded that the use of mass and economic allocation\nmethods, the different dairy cow diets and the different genetic merits can have\nsubstantial variance on footprints for dairy farms. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.plantagbiosciences.org\/people\/niamh-barry\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/70\/2019\/08\/image-1.png\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.plantagbiosciences.org\/people\/niamh-barry\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/70\/2019\/08\/image.png\")