Explore

Advertise on Engormix

The Road to Net Zero Livestock Production

Published: May 2, 2025
By: E. Kebreab 1 / 1 Department of Animal Science, University of California, Davis, CA.
Summary

Livestock production plays a vital role in ensuring global food security by providing essential nutrients. However, it also contributes to greenhouse gas emissions, with the main sources being feed production, enteric emissions (related to digestion), manure storage and application, and the energy used for various farm activities. To substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions within these categories, various mitigation strategies can be implemented.

In feed production, adopting sustainable practices such as no-till farming, cover cropping, and improved nitrogen application methods can lead to significant emissions reductions. There are several options for reducing enteric methane emissions, including the use of inhibitors like 3NOP and bromoform-containing macroalgae, as well as rumen modifiers like tannins, nitrate, and certain essential oils.

Concerning manure management, employing anaerobic digesters and alternative manure treatment techniques can substantially reduce emissions. Additionally, implementing strategies like sameday incorporation of manure can help minimize nitrogen emissions into the air. Finally, transitioning to renewable energy sources for farm activities such as cooling, heating, and heavy machinery operation can further contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the livestock production sector.

While implementing all the mentioned strategies will result in a substantial reduction, it's important to note that complete elimination of emissions may not be achievable. Therefore, the journey towards achieving net-zero emissions in livestock production is not only essential for mitigating the impact of this industry on the environment but also for ensuring a sustainable and resilient global food system.

Keywords: livestock, net-zero, greenhouse gases

Introduction

The global agricultural sector, including associated land-use changes, was responsible for emitting 10.6 gigatons (Gt) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), contributing considerably to the overall 53 Gt CO2e of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (FAO, 2023). In the United States, the agriculture sector contributed 0.59 Gt CO2e in 2022, representing 9.36% of the nation's GHG emissions. This marked a 7.7% increase from 1990 levels but a 2% decrease from the previous year (EPA, 2024). Methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), as the primary non-CO2 GHGs, were responsible for 58.4% and 52.1% of global emissions, respectively, with enteric fermentation and manure management being significant contributors to global anthropogenic CH4 emissions (IPCC, 2021).
The rapid rise in atmospheric CHlevels, primarily attributed to the agriculture and waste sectors, alongside the fossil fuel sector, underscores the urgent need for robust mitigation measures (Jackson et al., 2020). As the world moves towards net-zero GHG emissions across all sectors, significant reductions in agricultural emissions, particularly non-CO2 GHGs, are imperative. However, achieving complete elimination of some agricultural emissions remains challenging (IPCC, 2023).
Numerous national and international commitments have been made to achieve net-zero emissions or substantial emission reduction in the various sectors within agriculture. For example, 155 governments worldwide have supported global efforts to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 2030 from 2020 levels (www.globalmethanepledge.org). In the U.S., the dairy and beef industries have set ambitious targets for GHG neutrality, aiming for GHG neutrality by 2050 and climate neutrality by 2040, respectively (Innovation Center for U.S. Dairy, 2022; U.S. Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, 2022). Similarly, Dairy Farmers of Canada have committed to reaching net-zero GHG emissions by 2050. Multinational companies with interest in agriculture have also made various commitments to achieve net-zero by 2050 or earlier. This study primarily focuses on pathways to achieve net-zero emissions in livestock production, using dairy as an example.

Understanding Climate Neutrality or Net-Zero Emissions

The term "climate neutral" is increasingly used, but its lack of a universally agreed-upon definition leads to various interpretations. Generally, it is associated with achieving net-zero GHG emissions (FAO, 2023). The IPCC (2021) specifically defines ‘carbon neutrality’ in terms of CO2, defining it as a state where human-caused CO2 emissions are equally counteracted by human-driven COremoval efforts. For encompassing all types of GHGs beyond CO2, the term "GHG neutrality" is used by the IPCC (2021). Climate neutrality may extend beyond GHGs to balance other climate influencers like aerosols or albedo changes (FAO, 2023). Because not all GHG have similar impacts on climate, a global warming potential (GWP) is assigned to each gas relative to CO2 to provide a common currency in quantifying emissions.
The term ‘climate neutral’ has also been used to describe a system that makes either no net contribution to changes in radiative forcing (Ridoutt, 2021) or no net contribution to additional temperature increases (Costa et al. 2021). This perspective emphasizes managing emissions to stabilize the climate, significantly altering the perceived impact of short-lived gases such as CH4. When CHemissions decrease gradually, their contribution to warming remains stable over time, as quantified using metrics such as GWP*. However, assessing climate neutrality requires considerations beyond physical science, including economic, social, and political factors (FAO, 2023). Different interpretations have various implications for emission reduction efforts, especially concerning short-lived gases. Consequently, without clear definitions, claims and targets of climate neutrality or net-zero emissions can be misunderstood and misinterpreted, leading to ineffective mitigation efforts. For this study, ‘net zero emissions’ refers to achieving net zero GHG emissions using the GWP 100 factor in line with the Paris Agreement.

Pathways to Achieving Net Zero Emissions

Livestock production systems are highly diverse, meaning there is no singular pathway to achieve net-zero emissions. For instance, in low- and middle-income countries, the focus should be on reducing emissions intensity, which involves increasing productivity to lower the emission profile per unit of product. By enhancing productivity and adopting better animal husbandry practices, the California dairy industry has successfully reduced GHG intensity by almost half, aiming to go below 1 kg of CO2 eq per kg of energy-corrected milk (Naranjo et al., 2020). This study delves into pathways to achieve net zero in high-income intensive production systems, focussing on carbon intensive activities within the livestock industry, including feed production, enteric methane emissions, manure management and fossil fuel use.
Optimizing diet and associated feed production. Matching feed resources with the nutritional requirements of animals helps minimize the GHG burden of livestock products. While many farmers rely on national recommendations or nutritionists to optimize diets, there is still room for improvement. Specialty feed ingredients, such as IntelliBond®, can maximize nutrient utilization by the animal, while others, like proteases, enhance protein digestibility. Lowering the crude protein content in dairy cow diets from approximately 17% to 14% has been identified as a method to decrease the GHG intensity of dairy operations in the United States (Veltman et al., 2021).
Moreover, utilizing byproducts can further lower the overall GHG emissions of livestock products. For example, grape pomace, the residual material left after making wine, can serve as a feed supplement for ruminants. Studies have shown that feeding grape pomace not only improves milk yield but also reduces CHemissions by up to 20% and enhances milk quality (Moate et al., 2014). In California, feeding dairy cattle with up to 15% grape pomace has replicated these results, with the added benefit of replacing ingredients with potentially higher GHG emissions.
Livestock consume one third of global cereal production and uses about 40% of global arable land (Mottet et al., 2017). Therefore, practices that reduce emissions per kilogram of crop production also contribute to lowering livestock's share of emissions. These practices include no-till farming, organic amendments, cover crops, crop rotation, and improved nutrient management. Most of the GHGs affected by changes in feed production are N2O and CO2.
Enteric methane emissions. Over the last 5 to 10 years, there have been considerable advancements in technologies to reduce enteric methane emissions. FAO (2023) has identified over 30 practices that help reduce CHemissions, ranging in effectiveness from < 10% to over 90%. Various feed additives are currently in development and hold promise to effectively mitigate emissions. Canada recently approved a feed additive, 3-NOP, that has been shown to consistently reduce emissions by about 30% in dairy cattle (Kebreab et al., 2023). Recent long-term study showed that supplementation with 3-NOP resulted in significant reductions in CHemissions (21%-27%) and increased milk yield by up to 6.5%, with its efficacy influenced by diet composition and lactation stage (van Gastelen et al., 2024). Algae containing bromoform have also shown reductions of 50 to 80% in dairy cattle, with one product already receiving generally regarded as safe (GRAS) certification. Other potential solutions include vaccines and microbial engineering to substantially reduce enteric CHemissions.
Manure methane emissions.There are several common manure management practices that can reduce CHemissions. Anaerobic digestion techniques are the most effective, converting carbon substrates to biogas, which can then be burned or converted to electricity or liquefied gas (EPA, 2024). Other technologies with considerable impact include daily spreading, pasture-based management, composting, solid storage, manure drying practices, semi-permeable covers, natural or induced crusts, decreased manure storage time, compost bedded pack barns, and solid separation of manure solids prior to entry into a wet/anaerobic environment. The effectiveness of these technologies varies but can range from 10 to over 90%. Through the use of anaerobic digesters, California is expected to reduce manure CHemissions by 4.2 Mt CO2e with further 0.6 to 1.1 Mt CO2e reduction achievable using alternative manure management practices (Kebreab et al., 2022).
Fossil fuel use. Reducing fossil fuel use is also essential. Implementing more energy-efficient solutions for milk processing activities, such as milking and cooling, can result in lower energy usage and subsequent decreases in GHG emissions. These improvements may include enhancements in refrigeration systems, lighting, heating, and various other processing procedures.
Soil carbon sequestration. There are various estimates of carbon uptake capacity in agricultural land by improved management. Estimates suggest that improved management practices could sequester between 2-3 Gt C per year in the top 1m of global agricultural soils, representing 20- 35% of global anthropogenic GHG emissions (Minasny et al., 2017). However, challenges remain, with some suggesting that the actual sequestration potential globally will be in the order of 0.4 to 1.1 Gt C annually (de Vries 2018), because the area where optimized practices can be applied is often overestimated. Nevertheless, even at the lower estimate, soil carbon sequestration can effectively offset emissions, especially considering that some emissions are unavoidable and need to be balanced out. Continued efforts and advancements in these pathways are essential for the livestock sector to achieve net-zero emissions, ensuring environmental sustainability and food security for future generations.

Conclusions

Achieving net-zero emissions in livestock production is a complex but crucial endeavor for mitigating climate change and ensuring the sustainability of our global food system. Through a multifaceted approach that includes optimizing diets, adopting innovative technologies, improving manure management practices, reducing fossil fuel usage, and enhancing soil carbon sequestration, significant progress can be made towards this goal. However, it's essential to recognize that complete elimination of emissions may not be feasible, and thus, a combination of emission reduction strategies and carbon removal techniques will be necessary. Collaboration among stakeholders, ongoing research, and a steadfast commitment to sustainable practices will be paramount in realizing a future where livestock production not only minimizes its environmental impact but also continues to support human nutrition and livelihoods worldwide.
    
Presented at the 2024 Animal Nutrition Conference of Canada. For information on the next edition, click here.

Costa, C., M. Wironen, K. Racette and E. Wollenberg. 2021. Global Warming Potential* (GWP*): Understanding the implications for mitigating methane emissions in agriculture. Wageningen, Kingdom of the Netherlands, CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). https://hdl.handle.net/10568/114632.

de Vries, W. 2018. Letter to the editor, Soil carbon 4 per mille: A good initiative but let's manage not only the soil but also the expectations. Geoderma, 309 111–112.

EPA. 2024. Draft Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2022. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 430-D-24-001. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/draftinventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions10 and-sinks-1990-2022.

FAO. 2023. Methane emissions in livestock and rice systems – Sources, quantification, mitigation and metrics. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc7607en. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125260

Innovation Center for U.S. Dairy. 2022. U.S. Dairy Net Zero Initiative. https://www.usdairy.com/sustainability/environmental-sustainability (Accessed March 5, 2024).

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2021. Climate Change 2021 – The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2023. Climate Change Synthesis Report. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_LongerReport.pdf (Accessed March 5, 2024).

Jackson, R.B., M. Saunois, P. Bousque, J. G. Canadell, B. Poulter, A. R. Stavert, P. Bergamaschi, Y. Niwa, A. Segers, and A. Tsuruta. 2020. Increasing anthropogenic methane emissions arise equally from agricultural and fossil fuel sources. Environ. Res. Lett. 15 071002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab9ed2.

Kebreab, E., A. Bannink, E.M. Pressman, N. Walker, A. Karagiannis, S. van Gastelen, and J. Dijkstra. 2023. A meta-analysis of effects of 3-nitrooxypropanol on methane production, yield, and intensity in dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 106 927 – 936. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2022-22211.

Kebreab, E., F. Mitloehner and D.A. Sumner. 2022. Meeting the call: How California is pioneering a pathway to significant dairy sector methane reduction. University of California, Davis.

Minasny, B., B.P. Malone, A.B. McBratney, D.A. Angers, D. Arrouays, A. Chambers, V. Chaplot, Z.S. Chen, K. Cheng, B.S. Das, D.J. Field, A. Gimona, C.B. Hedley, S.Y. Hong, B. Mandal, B.P. Marchant, M. Martin, B.G. McConkey, V.L. Mulder, S. O'Rourke, A.C. Richer-de-Forges, I. Odeh, J. Padarian, K. Paustian, G. Pan, L. Poggio, I. Savin, V. Stolbovoy, U. Stockmann, Y. Sulaeman, C.-C. Tsui, T.-G. Vågen, B. van Wesemael, L. Winowiecki. 2017. Soil carbon 4 per mille. Geoderma 292 59–86.

Moate, P.J., S.R.O. Williams, V.A. Torok, M.C. Hannah, B.E. Ribaux, M.H. Tavendale, R.J. Eckard, J.L. Jacobs, M.J. Auldist, W.J. Wales. 2014. Grape marc reduces methane emissions when fed to dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 97 5073-5087. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2013-7588.

Mottet, A., C. de Haan, A. Falcucci, G. Tempio, C. Opio, P. Gerber. 2017. Livestock: On our plates or eating at our table? A new analysis of the feed/food debate. Global Food Security, 14, 1- 8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.01.001.

Naranjo, A., A. Johnson, H. Rossow and E. Kebreab. 2020. Greenhouse gas, water, and land footprint per unit of production of the California dairy industry over 50 years. J. Dairy Sci. 103 3760 -3773. DOI:10.3168/jds.2019-16576.

Ridoutt, B. 2021. Climate neutral livestock production – A radiative forcing based climate footprint approach. J. Cleaner Prod. 291 125260.

U.S. Roundtable for Sustainable Beef. 2022. Air & Greenhouse gas emissions https://www.usrsb.org/goals#gasEmissions (Accessed March 5, 2024).

van Gastelen, S., E.E.A. Burgers, J. Dijkstra, R. de Mol, W. Muizelaar, N. Walker and A. Bannink. 2024. Long-term effects of 3-nitrooxypropanol on methane emission and milk production characteristics in Holstein Friesian dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci., in press.

Content from the event:
Related topics:
Authors:
Ermias Kebreab
UC Davis - University of California
UC Davis - University of California
Recommend
Comment
Share
Home
Recommend
Comment
Share
Bob J. Brill
Brilliant Alternatives
4 de mayo de 2025
Thanks for the detailed information regarding the many factors that humans should be concerned about in the production of animal products. Your enumeration of possible improvements in the reduction of the harmful elements is a great way to get some action.
My contribution to that effort was the development of software to minimize the cost of the Feeds. The use of Linear programming in the Feed Formulation software was the tool that was needed. This allowed users with the proper data to produce a better feed based upon all of the costs for the ingredients.
Your article is strongly recommending that users develop or find the costs of the many factors like GHp, GHG, and more. Once the numeric values of the factors per each ingredient is known or assumed, a person generating will know the amount of the factor is in each ton of feed and/or one could actually formulate with limits on that particular Factor. Knowing the "number" for each feed is the beginning of users to make decisions as to how much of that factor they can afford and/or how much of that factor is acceptable.
Recommend
Reply
Profile picture
Would you like to discuss another topic? Create a new post to engage with experts in the community.
Featured users in Dairy Cattle
Jim Quigley
Jim Quigley
Cargill
Technical Lead - Calf & Heifer at Cargill
United States
Pietro Celi
Pietro Celi
dsm-Firmenich
dsm-Firmenich
United States
Todd Bilby, Ph.D.
Todd Bilby, Ph.D.
MSD - Merck Animal Health
Dairy Technical Services Manager
United States
Steve Elliott
Steve Elliott
Alltech
Director Global de la División de Manejo de Minerales
United States
Fernando Toscano
Fernando Toscano
Provimi Argentina
Provimi Argentina
Provimi
United States