Page 12 - National Poultry Newspaper

Figure 1. Greenhouse gas emissions per kilogram of cage, cage-free and free range eggs, reported as Scope 1 and 2, Scope 3 and Scope 3 including land use and direct land use change.
Table 1. Selected environmental impacts per kilogram of cage, cage-free and free range eggs.
Table 2. Emission reduction pathways.
Poultry farming is high- ly efficient and produces high-quality food prod- ucts with a relatively low environmental footprint but, along with every sec- tor, there is an imperative to reduce impacts over time.
This life cycle assess- ment was conducted in accordance with the in- ternational standard and assessed greenhouse gas emissions using the IPCC AR5 global warming po- tentials of 28 for methane and 265 for nitrous oxide, as applied in the National Greenhouse Accounts.
Emissions from land use and direct land use change – a type of Scope 3 emis- sion and reported sepa- rately – reflect soil carbon losses associated with the production of soybean meal in South America, particularly Argentina, a staple plant protein in meat chicken feed.
Based on these crite- ria, options were either screened ‘in’ or ‘out’.
Pathways to reduce carbon footprint in poultry farming
CLIMATE change ac- tion is a global priority for governments, busi- ness, lenders and indus- tries.
Pathways to emission re- duction and net zero were then modelled for differ- ent production systems using the baseline emis- sions and viable emission reduction strategies. Methods
sequence of the activi- ties of the company but occur from sources not owned or controlled by the company – some ex- amples of Scope 3 activi- ties are extraction and production of purchased materials, transportation of purchased fuels and use of sold products and services.
consideration of econom- ic feasibility, likelihood of productivity benefits, availability, compatibil- ity with other mitigation strategies, research, de- velopment and engineer- ing requirements and any other considerations such as disbenefits or caveats around the strategy.
To understand and man- age the Australian egg industry’s environmental credentials, a life cycle as- sessment was conducted to baseline greenhouse gas – including land use and direct land use change.
Inventory data were col- lected from seven major producers operating in six states, covering cage, cage-free and free range production.
A total of 18 technol- ogies and strategies were screened, of which seven were suitable for integrat- ing into emission reduc- tion pathways.
Primary data were col- lected from producers in all major production re- gions and impacts were reported per kilogram of table eggs for cage, cage- free and free range pro- duction.
GHG emissions per kilogram of eggs are pre- sented graphically – see Figure 1 – broken down into Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 emission sources.
Fossil energy consump- tion per kilogram of chicken meat is reported separately, as it is both an environmental perfor- mance metric of signifi- cance and a key driver of the carbon footprint of chicken meat.
The difference between the number of strategies screened and those found to be prospective reflects that, while each strategy could theoretically reduce emissions, those screened out either resulted in a negligible reduction or were cost-prohibitive and required further research to be viable.
Page 12 – National Poultry Newspaper, August 2022
www.poultrynews.com.au
With the federal and state governments and major customers having set net zero and emission reduction targets, the in- dustry is under increas- ing pressure to implement new strategies and adopt technologies which reduce environmental impacts.
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol 2015 defines the three scopes of emissions:
A review was completed of a wide range of po- tential mitigation options that could be suitable for the industry based on the emission profile of eggs.
In some cases, mitiga- tion strategies targeted the same emission source – for example, solar and anaerobic digestion both replaced grid electric- ity – meaning these tech- nologies were competi- tors and were generally not suitable to implement concurrently on the model farm.
This study reviewed a comprehensive list of po- tential emission reduc- tion strategies and tech- nologies, identifying those which were technically and generally economi- cally viable.
• Scope 1 – Direct GHG emissions occur from sources that are owned or controlled by the compa- ny, as an example, emis- sions from manure and emissions associated with fossil energy, excluding purchased electricity
Screening was then performed by identify- ing the emission source to be reduced – on-farm energy use, as an exam- ple – the mitigation strat- egy – solar, for example – the mitigation potential, adoption rate based on an assessment of feasibility and including a subjective
• Scope 2 – Accounts for GHG emissions from the generation of purchased electricity consumed by the company
Strategies deemed pro- spective for the industry were incorporated into emission reduction path-
•Scope 3 – Are a con-
* continued P13
GRIND YOUR OWN LITTER WITH THE MIGHTY GIANT
• Hydraulic tilt tub
• Single operator friendly with remote control
• 25FT swivel conveyor
• Grind a straw bale to 20mm in a minute or less • Built in the US with all parts available and in
stock in Australia.
“There is no machine like it on the market. It will grind bales as fast as you can load them!”
Contact Tony Byron 0425 425 485 or tbonetone@hotmail.com
www.valtonfeedingsolutions.com.au