Environmental impacts of Australian pork in 2020 and 2022 determined using lifecycle assessments

1Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Context. The Australian pork industry is highly efficient, with a history of ongoing productivity and environmental improvement. The introduction of economy-wide environmental targets require delivering and tracking performance improvement. Aims. This study determined carbon footprint (greenhouse gas [GHG] and land use [LU] and direct land use change [dLUC] emissions, reported as kg CO2-e), fossil energy (MJ), freshwater consumption (L), water stress (L H2O-e), land occupation (m2) and eutrophication potential (nitrogen and phosphorus) for Australian pork for 2020 and 2022. Variability between housing, manure management systems, and regions were identified, and systems analysed to determine new options for low-impact pork. Methods. In the largest Australian study of its kind, data for ~70% of pigs produced were collected using a stratified design. Using attributional life cycle assessment, impacts were reported per kilogram of liveweight (LW), post-processed, retail, and boneless, fat-corrected pork. Results are presented as industry averages ± 2 × s.d. Key results. Key results were 3.0 ± 0.1 and 3.0 ± 0.1 kg CO2-e GHG, 0.4 ± 0.07 and 0.3 ± 0.03 kg CO2-e LU and dLUC, 12.9 ± 0.5 and 13.4 ± 0.5 MJ, 93.8 ± 9.6 and 52.5 ± 3.6 L, 68.4 ± 6.7 and 43.2 ± 3.3 L H2O-e, and 12.0 ± 0.9 and 12.7 ± 0.9 m2/kg LW in 2020 and 2022, respectively. Due to industry growth, total emissions were higher in 2022. Eutrophication potential for Australian pork (2.2 × 10–4 ± 3.0 × 10–5 kg phosphorus and 8.7 × 10–3 ± 3.5 × 10–4 kg nitrogen/kg LW), reported for the first time, was low compared with grazing systems and European piggeries. Conclusions. Industry has demonstrated long-term performance improvement, though the rate slowed between 2020 and 2022. Ongoing interventions are required to return to trend. Covered pond, deep litter, and outdoor systems produce lower carbon footprint pork and can provide other environmental benefits from renewable energy, and reduced fossil energy demand. Implications. There is potential to further reduce environmental impacts through practice change. If industry is to meet formal targets, investment and proactive policy settings are required to overcome barriers to adoption of existing technology and support the techno-economic case for novel strategies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Copley, M. A., McGahan, E. J., McCormack, K., & Wiedemann, S. G. (2024). Environmental impacts of Australian pork in 2020 and 2022 determined using lifecycle assessments. Animal Production Science, 64(8). https://doi.org/10.1071/AN23352

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free