Presentation given at the Greenhouse Gas in Animal Agriculture (GGAA) conference at 24 June 2013

1. Reduction of GHG emissions by
reduced livestock production resulting
from dietary changes in the EU
Jan Peter Lesschen, Henk Westhoek,
Susanne Wagner and Trudy Rood
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

2. Introduction
 Nitrogen and resource use
efficiency is generally low in
livestock production systems
 Need to increase global food
production and lower
environmental impact
 Technical mitigation measures
alone are not sufficient
 Change in diets effective
option to reduce emissions
N rehgiH
ycneiciffe
N in feed
Poultry (meat)
Higher N
efficiency
N rehgiH
ycneiciffe
Hi
eff
Poultry (eggs)
%02 -01
N regraL
tnirptoof %01 -2
doof gk rep
Pork (meat)
l a eV
fe e B
Higher N
efficiency
% 0 2 - 01
l a eV
N regraL
tn
Veal irptoof
Cattle (milk)
d o o f g k re p
fe
10-20% eB
% 01 - 2
Veal
Beef
Veal
0
20
Larger N
2-10%per kgfootprint
2-10% footprint
food
10-20%
per kg food
Larger N
Beef
Cattle (beef)
10-20%
40
60
80
Feed N recovery efficiency in edible weight (% )
Beef
100
La
fo
2-10%
per
Sutton et al. (2011), ENA report
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

3. Protein consumption will increase
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

4. Intake of protein in EU-27
70% more protein than recommended
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

5. Intake saturated fats in EU-27
40% more
saturated fat
than
recommended
maximum
80% of saturated fats
are of animal origin
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

6. GHG emissions from livestock
10% of total GHG emissions in EU
Source: Lesschen et al., 2011
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

7. Objective and approach
Objective: Assess GHG impact of reduced
consumption of livestock products in EU-27
Approach:
 6 alternative diets (25 and 50% reduction of pork
and poultry, dairy and beef and combined)
 Similar reduction in livestock production assumed
 Define changes in feed demand / feed basket
 Assess changes in land use
 Assess environmental impact
(MITTERA-Europe)
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

8. MITERRA-Europe

A model for integrated assessment of N, C and P
emissions from agriculture in EU-27 at Member State
and regional levels (NUTS-2)


Developed for the European Commission


Scenario, measure and policy analysis
Simple and transparent model; uniform approach for
EU-27
Outputs: N and P balances, emissions of N2O, NH3, NOX,
CH4, CO2, N leaching and runoff, changes in SOC stocks
Velthof et al., 2009. J. Env. Qual. 38: 402–417
Lesschen et al., 2011. Animal Feed Sci. Tech. 166-167: 16-28
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

9. Assumptions
 Changes in food consumption lead to proportional changes in
food production  reduction in livestock production, increase
in certain crops to replace animal products
 Use of domestic by-products shall not be reduced
 For protein mainly reduction of oil meal imports (soybean)
 No reduction of extensive and natural grasslands
 Two scenarios for land use change:
1. high commodity prices: conversion of temporary and intensive
grassland into arable land; export of surplus cereals
2. environment policy setting: extensification intensive grassland;
conversion of excess arable land into perennial energy crops
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

10. Land use: two scenarios
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

11. Per capita protein and fat intake EU-27
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

12. Reduction demand feed commodities
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

13. Results: GHG emissions EU-27
High Prices scenario
Greening scenario
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

14. Additional effects of 50% reduction
 75% reduction in soy meal use / import
 EU cereal export might increase from 20 to 200 million
tons
 Environmental benefits, EU NH3 emissions reduced by
40% and nitrate leaching by 30%
Health benefits
 Intake of saturated fat 38% lower - on the level of WHO
recommended maximum dietary intake
 Intake of red meat close to maximum amount as advised
by the World Cancer Research Fund
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

15. Discussion

Simplification reduction in consumption is followed by
reduction in production


Substantial uncertainties (e.g. allocation of feed)

Consumption seems difficult to change, however, historically
large shifts  opportunities


Currently, few/no policies are aiming at consumption
Impact on farmers, but also opportunities
Reduction possible in various ways
● Frequency (shift to alternatives)
● Portion size, hybrid products
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

16. Conclusions
 A 50% reduction in the livestock component of EU diets,
with corresponding changes in agriculture, would have
substantial environmental and health benefits
 The calculated impact on GHG emissions is larger than
estimated mitigation potentials from technical measures
 While further analysis is needed, it is clear that food
choices matter, both for our health and our environment
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013

17. Thank you
Janpeter.Lesschen@wur.nl
GGAA, Dublin, 24 June 2013