Environmental efficiencies & sustainable animal productions Ph LECOMTE

Transcription

1 GLOBAL AGENDA OF ACTION IN SUPPORT OF SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT CONSULTATION ON FOCUS AREA NUMBER 1: CLOSING THE EFFICIENCY GAP IN NATURAL RESOURCE USE 2-4 April, FAO HQ-Rome, Italy Environmental efficiencies & sustainable animal productions Ph LECOMTE D. Berre, T Hiep, E Tillard, J Vayssieres, M Vigne

2 Stakes, Postulates, Challenges More food production, less producing impact Efficiency vs Efficacy a major shift efficacy : maximising goals without really specifying the means. efficiency : being effective in making efficient use of resources - natural, human, informational, material, financial, etc.: ecoefficiency, sustainable efficiency Performance diversities Large Diversity of systems // landscapes Comparative "value(s)«of ecoefficiency very diverse Inside LFS / landscapes a large diversity of efficiency exist How to exploit diversity and progress

3 PC 2 PC 2 Diet efficiencies 0.50 CELL Cc HEM for CELL for. UFL four MAT four STARCH Cc Kg DM for UFL Cc Kg DM Cc HEM Cc PROT Cc G3 Groups 1 RE 1 VN 2 RE 2 VN 3 VN 4 VN -0.5 PC G4 G2 G1 Hiep et al., 2006 PC 1

4 Diet efficiencies N excr/lit. Milk Milk4% Milk/DM int. Groupes G1 G2 G3 G4 Diet classes RE (n=44), % VN (n=70), % Diets Hémic+, Forage Prot.+, Mj+ Cell+ Mj- Hémic+ Supplement Prot.+ Starch+ Cell+ Starch+ N excr./n int. N total excr. CH4/lit. Milk Milk/DM suppl. CH4 total CH4/kg DM int. G1 G2 G3 G4 DM intake total, kg DM/d Suppl., kg DM/d Forages C4 type, % Animal prod. Efficiencies Milk 4% fat, kg/d Milk/DM intake Milk/DM Suppl Around mean efficiencies variation coeff. extend % Large progress margins inside groups Environmental Efficiencies CH4, litre/d CH4/kg DM intake, litre/d CH4/ Milk, litre/d N total excreted, g/d N excrété/n intake, dl N excr./milk, g/kg

5 Life cycle analysis(lca) 31 dairy farms in tropical landscapes Farm scale efficiencies DIRECT Energies & Emissions (Fuel, Electricity, Gaz, ) INPUTS Fertilizers, concentrates fuel, water, : plastics, Machinery Housing Coeff. NR Energies MJ/unité Coeff. GHG eqco2 FARM PRODUCTS Litre, kg, Gross Energy INDIRECT Energies & Emissions (Extraction, Manufacturing, Transport,)

6 Fuel Eq / 100 l Milk Farm scale efficiencies t eq CO² µ Landscapes CAFR GREG HtStJO OUEST PALM EQF eq tco2/1000l A large variability around means Not a landscape attribute

7 Rev / Kg milk eq tco2/1000l milk Fuel eq. / 100 l milk Ecological intensification kg Milk / kg Suppl purchased 2.5 A way toward multiefficiency progress Not only a matter of feeding Importance of daily management practices : Health, reproduction, mortality, culling

8 Additional functions on the farm BIOGAS production : Hyp. : m3 de lisier/an kwh electricity kw heat (to valorise?) Energy efficiency= 0,65 PHOTOVOLTAIC production : Hyp. : 200 m² de capteurs / roofs => kwh electricity Energy efficiency= 0,59 Combination: EE = 0,84 vs 0.39

9 Environmental and economic efficiency Toward new markets? Improvements Gain (EQF/100L) Gain ( ) GHG avoided t eqco2 Pot. Payments (en ) Conc. Use efficiency 8, CC manufacturing & transport Animal CH Substitute Min./Org. Fertiliser 1, Fert. manufact. & transport Pasture CO2 sequestration 28? 672? Biogas production Photovolt. production Manure GHG avoided emission GHG for electricity avoided GHG for electricity avoided TOTAL 9,

10 Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) : non-parametric frontier model Adressing diversity of efficiencies OUTPUTS (milk, meat, GHG, nitrogen ) Production frontier Efficient firm Inefficient firm Classical «efficacy» logic Projection on the frontier Projection direction INPUTS (land, labor, forage, feeds ) Efficiency of firms assessed by mathematical formulation of a production technology characterized by inputs and outputs Allows integration of undesirable outputs (GHG, Nitrogen excess, ) Directional distance function characterize path of inefficiency reduction

11 Good outputs Directions in inefficiency reduction Efficiency can be considered / different projection direction on the frontier Good outputs Bad outputs Inputs level fixed Bad outputs Farmer s view : optimize milk production, Society s view : reduce pollution Bad outputs level fixed Good outputs Inputs Dairy coop. view : increase inputs to reach the optimal amount of good production

12 Dataset for Data Envelopment Analysis 4 inputs, 1 good output and 2 undesirable outputs are considered : Input (x) / Output (y) Units Mean Standard deviation Min Max y Milk production (MP) : Tons of milk y g b1 Nitrogen surplus (NS) : Kg of nitrogen b2 Greenhouse gases (GHG) : y Tons of gas (eq. CO 2 ) x Livestock unit (LU) : Livestock unit x 1 2 Feed charges (FC) : Tons of dry matter x 3 Total labor (L) : Total labor (h) x 4 land endowment (LE) : Surface (Ha) 22,2 16,0 3 72

13 Eco-efficiency assessment Progress margin can be assessed according to diff t point of view Milk production Emissions, Surpluses Inputs GHG NS Feed charges Herd Labor Collective 25,65% 31,19% 31,98% 34,63% Society -22,79% -24,12% Farmers 13,04% A potential milk production raise of 25.65% is possible if farmers accept to increase their inputs by more than 30%. If inefficiency reduction only focus on pollution reduction, GHG and nitrogen surpluses can be reduced by 22.79% and % respectively Farmers can increase their milk production by %, given their current inputs and pollution levels

14 Kg eq. CO 2 /L Compared GHG levels Observed level Optimal level optimal level with reallocation FAO (region min) PLANETE (mini) PLANETE (maxi) PLANETE(mean) Collective Farmers Society Efficiency improvement allow a significant reduction of GHG, below the mean value in France With resources reallocation, GHG level is even more reduced, and may become lower than minimal emission rate identified by the FAO

15 Exploring beyond the frontiers the domain of possible efficiencies whole-farm dynamic model Promising approach to measure potential inefficiency reduction in different context by generating large datasets and identifying the optimal amount of production (and pollution) for given levels of inputs

16 Global analytic scheme - P1 + - Simulations Input_1 Input_2 Input_3 Output_1 Output_2 Output_ P2 n Pn + Improve efficiency determinant

17 Conclusions Efficiency shift, a real challenge for the future Complexity in adressing multiple goals efficiency Still a lot to do to observe compare reconsider experiment Scaling the efficiencies Marginal cost of efficiencies improvements Sum of small efficiency increase vs a unique integrated effcicient model Multi, (eco) efficiency value chaining

18 Tank