Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Mitigation potential and costs of enteric methane emissions from Indian bovine sector
|Issue Date: ||2020-03-02 11:43:00 (UTC+8)|
|Abstract: ||The purpose of this study is to find alternative rations to help the Indian cattle and buffalo sector reduce enteric methane emissions. We suggested a practical and low-cost method, in which the composition of rations used in 2010 was adjusted to attain emissions reductions. In this research, we analyzed enteric emissions and feed costs. We used the GLEAM-i model to calculate enteric emissions, which is based on the IPCC Tier 2 approach. The GHG calculations with the GLEAM-i model are detailed and comprehensive. Enteric emissions are associated with energy requirements. The energy requirements of cattle and buffalo are based on their live weight, gender, and function (to produce milk or meat or to provide labor). We identified 16 groups of bovines according to their different energy requirements. For each group, we imposed six scenarios of alternative rations that aimed to reduce enteric emissions. Among the six scenarios, the proportion of feed materials of higher digestibility is increased, thus replacing those of lower digestibility. Combining the mitigation potential and feed costs of the alternative rations, Scenario 6 presents the best choice, followed by Scenarios 5, 4, 3, 2, and then 1. Scenario 6 could attain a 1.5% reduction of enteric emissions (8.7 million t -eq/year) and a 13% reduction in the feed costs ($3,828 USD/year) from the 2010 benchmark. In the short term, Scenario 6 would be the best choice for India to cut enteric emissions without adding significant financial burden. The relatively more costly Scenarios 1–5 could be feasible when India achieves better economic viability.|
|Reference: ||1.Eggleston, H.S., Buenidia, L., Miwa, K., Nagara, T., & Tanabe, K. (eds). (2006). "IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Invertories, Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry and other Land Use." IPCC, Kanagawa: IGES.|
2.FAO. (2017). "Global Livestock Environmental Assessment Model Version 2.0." Rome: FAO.
3.FAOSTAT. (2019). FAO Statistical Database. Accessed 2019.
4.FAOSTAT. (2020). FAO Statistical Database. Accessed 2020.
5.GHG Platform India. (2017). "Trend analysis of GHG emissions in India from 2005 to 2013." Retrieved July 31, 2019, from http://www.ghgplatform-india.org/Images/Publications/GHG%20Trend%20Analysis%20Report_2005-13.pdf
6.IPCC. (2014). "Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report," working groups I, II and III. Geneva: IPCC.
7.Martin, C., Morgavi, D.P., & Doreau, M. (2009). "Methane mitigation in ruminants: from microbe to the farm scale." Animal, 4:3, pp 351–365.
8.Morgavi, D.P., Foragn, E., Martin, C., & Newbold, C.J. (2010). "Microbial ecosystem and methaneogenesis in ruminants." Animal 4:7, pp 1024–1036.
9.MoSPI. (2018). "Press note on national accounts statistics back-series 2004–05 to 2011-12." Retrieved July 29, 2019, from http://www.mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/press_release/Press-Note-28Nov2018.pdf
10.Oliver, J.G.J., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Muntean, M., & Peters, J.A.H.W. (2016). ''Trends in global emissions: 2016 report.'' Ispra: JRC.
11.O'Mara, F.P., Fitzergald, J.J., Murphy, J.J., & Rath, M. (1998). "The effect on milk production of replacing grass silage with maize silage in the diet of dairy cows." Livestock Production Science 55, 79–87.
12.Opio, C., Gerber, P., Mottet, A., Tempio, G., MacLeod, M., Vellinga, T., & Henderson, B. (2013). "Greenhouse gas emissions from ruminant supply chains – A global life cycle." Rome: FAO.
13.Patra, A.K. (2014). "Trends and projected estimates of GHG emissions from Indian livestock in comparisons with GHG emissions from world and developing countries." Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 27, No.4: 592–599.
14.Raghavendra, H.N. (2007). "An ayalysis of meat consumption pattern and its retailing: a case of Dharwad district." University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad.
15.Seetharam, A., Riley, K.W., & Harinarayana, G. (eds). (1986). "Small millets in global agriculture," IDRC. New Delhi: Pauls Press.
16.Sere, C. & Steinfeld, H. (1996). "World livestock production systems: current status, issues and trends." Rome: FAO.
17.Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., Castel, V., Rosales, M. & de Haan, C. (2006). "Livestock's long shadow." Rome: FAO.
18.USDA. (2016). "From where the buffalo roam: India's beef exports." Retrieved April 8, 2019, from https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/37672/59707_ldpm-264-01.pdf
19.USDA. (2018). "Livestock and poultry: world markets and trade." Retrieved April 8, 2019, from https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/73666448x/mg74qq69r/j6731729p/livestock_poultry.pdf
20.WTTC. (2017). "How does travel & toursim compare to other sector?" Retrieved July 21, 2019, from https://www.wttc.org/-/media/files/reports/benchmark-reports/country-reports-2017/india.pdf
|Source URI: ||http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106266010|
|Data Type: ||thesis|
|Appears in Collections:||[應用經濟與社會發展英語碩士學位學程 (IMES) ] 學位論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.