Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P < 0.05). Between the organic and the conventional system (SCF and HOF), no significant differences (P > 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg COeq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (-1.93 vs -0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!