Life cycle assessment of swine production in Brazil: a comparison of four manure management systems

被引:117
作者
Cherubini, Edivan [1 ]
Zanghelini, Guilherme Marcelo [1 ]
Freitas Alvarenga, Rodrigo Augusto [2 ]
Franco, Davide [1 ]
Soares, Sebastiao Roberto [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fed Santa Catarina, Dep Eng Sanitaria & Ambiental, BR-88040970 Florianopolis, SC, Brazil
[2] Univ Estado Santa Catarina UDESC, Ctr Ciencias Agrovet, BR-88520000 Lages, Brazil
关键词
Life cycle assessment; LCA; Swine production; Manure management systems; Uncertainty analysis; ENVIRONMENTAL-IMPACT; PORK PRODUCTION; PIG PRODUCTION; EMISSIONS; SLURRY; TECHNOLOGIES; STORAGE; REDUCE; CROP;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.035
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Population growth and the consequent increase in food demand will certainly intensify the threat to the environment. Brazil, the fourth largest producer and exporter of swine meat, has an important role to ensure the fulfillment of the goals of food security and climate change mitigation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the environmental impact of swine production in Brazil based on life cycle assessment, comparing four manure management systems: liquid manure storage in slurry tanks; the biodigestor by flare; the biodigestor for energy purposes; and composting. Additionally, we performed a Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate the uncertainty due to different emissions factors to estimate nitrogen-related emissions from the manure-handling stage. The functional unit considered was 1000 kg of swine carcass in the equalization chamber for cutting or further distribution. The results indicated an environmental profile of swine production in Brazil of 3503.29 kg of CO2 eq. for climate change, 76.13 kg of SO2 eq. for terrestrial acidification, 2.15 kg of P eq. for freshwater eutrophication, 12.33 kg of N eq. for marine eutrophication, 21,521.12 MJ for cumulative energy demand, 1.63 kg of 1.4-DB eq. for terrestrial ecotoxicity, 1706.26 BDP for biodiversity damage potential and 14.99 m(2) for natural land transformation. Feed production had a significant contribution with a range of 17.6-99.5% for all environmental impact categories. Deforestation represented 9.5 and 31.3% of the total impacts for cumulative energy demand and climate change, respectively. Therefore, avoiding the use of grain from deforested areas can significantly decrease the impacts for these impact categories. Regarding the uncertainty analysis, we observed greater variations for terrestrial acidification in slurry tanks, biodigestor by flare and for energy purposes, while for the case of composting, major uncertainties were observed for climate change. For manure management systems, efforts should be made to reduce the emissions of methane in the storage and ammonia in the field application. In this sense, the comparative life cycle assessment indicated that the biodigestor for energy purposes had the best environmental performance for almost all the environmental impacts, mainly due to the biogas capture and the potential of energy saves. Nevertheless, if the goal is to decrease the impacts for terrestrial acidification and marine eutrophication, the slurry tanks is the most preferable scenario compared to all alternative options. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:68 / 77
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Life cycle assessment of Italian and Spanish bovine leather production systems
    Notarnicola, Bruno
    Puig, Rita
    Raggi, Andrea
    Fullana, Pere
    Tassielli, Giuseppe
    De Camillis, Camillo
    Rius, Antoni
    [J]. AFINIDAD, 2011, 68 (553) : 167 - 180
  • [22] Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from rice production systems in Brazil: A comparison between minimal tillage and organic farming
    Nunes, Flavia Aparecida
    Seferin, Marcus
    Maciel, Vinicius Goncalves
    Flores, Simone Hickmann
    Zachia Ayub, Marco Antonio
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2016, 139 : 799 - 809
  • [23] Life cycle assessment of natural and mixed recycled aggregate production in Brazil
    Rosado, Lais Peixoto
    Vitale, Pierluca
    Penteado, Carmenlucia Santos G.
    Arena, Umberto
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2017, 151 : 634 - 642
  • [24] Life Cycle Assessment of a Modern Northern Great Plains U.S. Swine Production Facility
    Stone, James J.
    Dollarhide, Christopher R.
    Jinka, Ramith
    Thaler, Robert C.
    Hostetler, Chris E.
    Clay, David E.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE, 2010, 27 (12) : 1009 - 1018
  • [25] Environmental assessment of energy production from anaerobic digestion of pig manure at medium-scale using life cycle assessment
    Ramirez-Islas, Martha E.
    Patricia Guereca, Leonor
    Sosa-Rodriguez, Fabiola S.
    Cobos-Peralta, Mario A.
    [J]. WASTE MANAGEMENT, 2020, 102 : 85 - 96
  • [26] CO2 gasification of dairy and swine manure: A life cycle assessment approach
    Fernandez-Lopez, M.
    Lopez-Gonzalez, D.
    Puig-Gamero, M.
    Valverde, J. L.
    Sanchez-Silva, L.
    [J]. RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2016, 95 : 552 - 560
  • [27] In the quest for sustainable management of liquid fraction of manure - Insights from a life cycle assessment
    Ravi, Rahul
    Beyers, Miriam
    Vingerhoets, Ruben
    Brienza, Claudio
    Luo, Hongzhen
    Bruun, Sander
    Meers, Erik
    [J]. SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION, 2023, 43 : 251 - 263
  • [28] Milk production Life Cycle Assessment: A comparison between estimated and measured emission inventory for manure handling
    Baldini, Cecilia
    Bava, Luciana
    Zucali, Maddalena
    Guarino, Marcella
    [J]. SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2018, 625 : 209 - 219
  • [29] Coupling life cycle assessment with scenario analysis for sustainable management of Disperse blue 60
    Yang, Kexuan
    Lv, Bihong
    Shen, Huazhen
    Jing, Guohua
    Zhou, Zuoming
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2020, 27 (20) : 25197 - 25208
  • [30] Environmental Assessment of Pig Manure Treatment Systems through Life Cycle Assessment: A Mini-Review
    Ferreira, Jose
    Santos, Lenise
    Ferreira, Miguel
    Ferreira, Antonio
    Domingos, Idalina
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2024, 16 (09)