Evaluation of Energy Consumption and the Greenhouse Gas Emissions on Dairy Cattle Farms in Adana Province of Türkiye

Öz

This study quantifies greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with direct energy (electricity + diesel) use and water consumption in dairy cattle farms in Adana, Türkiye. A stratified random sample of 25 farms across 15 districts was surveyed. The functional unit is 1 kg of fat- and protein-corrected milk (FPCM). Direct energy covers electricity and diesel used for milking and milk cooling, cleaning of milking and storage equipment, feed preparation and distribution, manure handling, ventilation, lighting, and routine cleaning. Water use includes equipment, facility and shelter cleaning, and animal drinking water. Environmental sustainability indicators and carbon footprints were computed accordingly. For 1 kg FPCM, electricity accounts for 5.71% of total direct energy consumption, while diesel accounts for 94.29%. In GHG terms, 8.97% of emissions arise from electricity and 91.03% from diesel. The dairy sector’s carbon footprint is 1.61 kg CO₂-eq per kg FPCM, comprising 0.82 kg CO₂-eq from direct energy and 0.80 kg CO₂-eq from water consumption. On a per-animal basis, the annual carbon footprint per lactating cow totals 1,639.36 kg CO₂-eq cow⁻¹ yr⁻¹, consisting of 354.51 kg CO₂-eq from direct energy and 1,284.85 kg CO₂-eq from water use. These results highlight diesel’s dominance in energy use and GHG emissions, and the substantial contribution of water-related processes, underscoring priority areas for efficiency improvements and mitigation interventions in Adana’s dairy operations.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cow milk
• Energy use
• GHG emission
• Carbon footprint

Adana İlindeki Süt Sığırı İşletmelerinde Enerji Tüketimi ve Sera Gazı Emisyonlarının Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Bu çalışma, Adana, Türkiye'deki süt sığırcılığı çiftliklerinde doğrudan enerji (elektrik + dizel) kullanımı ve su tüketimi ile ilişkili sera gazı (GHG) emisyonlarını ölçmektedir. 25 ilçedeki 15 çiftlikten oluşan tabakalı rastgele bir örneklem araştırıldı. Fonksiyonel birim 1 kg yağ ve protein düzeltmeli süttür (FPCM). Doğrudan enerji, sağım ve süt soğutma, sağım ve depolama ekipmanlarının temizliği, yem hazırlama ve dağıtımı, gübre işleme, havalandırma, aydınlatma ve rutin temizlik için kullanılan elektrik ve dizeli kapsar. Su kullanımı, ekipman, tesis ve barınak temizliği ve hayvan içme suyunu içerir. Çevresel sürdürülebilirlik göstergeleri ve karbon ayak izleri buna göre hesaplanmıştır. 1 kg FPCM için elektrik, toplam doğrudan enerji tüketiminin %5,71'ini, dizel ise %94,29'unu oluşturmaktadır. Sera gazı açısından emisyonların %8,97'si elektrikten, %91,03'ü dizelden kaynaklanmaktadır. Süt ürünleri sektörünün karbon ayak izi, doğrudan enerjiden kaynaklanan 0,82 kg CO₂-eşdeğeri ve su tüketiminden kaynaklanan 0,80 kg CO₂-eşdeğerinden olmak üzere kg FPCM başına 1,61 kg CO₂-eşdeğerdir. Hayvan bazında, emziren başına yıllık karbon ayak izi, doğrudan enerjiden 354,51 kg CO₂-eşdeğeri ve su kullanımından kaynaklanan 1.284,85 kg CO₂-eşdeğeri olmak üzere toplam 1.639,36 kg CO₂-eşdeğeri⁻¹ yıl⁻¹'dir. Bu sonuçlar, dizelin enerji kullanımı ve sera gazı emisyonlarındaki hakimiyetini ve suyla ilgili süreçlerin önemli katkısını vurgulayarak, Adana'nın süt ürünleri operasyonlarında verimlilik iyileştirmeleri ve azaltım müdahaleleri için öncelikli alanların altını çizmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Enerji kullanımı
• sera gazı emisyonu
• Karbon ayak izi
• süt

Kaynakça

1. AHTBWMD (2019) Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board-World Milk Deliveries 2019. Available online: https://dairy.ahdb.org.uk/non_umbraco/download.aspx?media=26233 (accessed on 1 August 2023).
2. Arsenault, N., Tyedmers, P., ve Fredeen, A., 2009. Comparing the environmental impacts of pasture based and confinement-based dairy systems in Nova Scotia (Canada) using life cycle assessment. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 7(1), 19-41.
3. Bruinsma J. Alexandratos N (2020). World Agriculture towards 2030/2050: The 2012 Revision. Available online:http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/ap106e/ap106e.pdf (accessed on 9 March 2023).
4. Cederberg, C., ve Mattsson, B., 2000. Life cycle assessment of milk production—a comparison of conventional and organic farming. Journal of cleaner production, 8(1), 49-60.
5. Cederberg, C.; Flysjo, A., 2004. Life cycle inventory of 23 dairy farms in South-Western Sweden. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b930/2a75bd2a17e4398ca3c880927b7924d66911.pdf?_ga=2.2269 58749.1090255613.1575905885-2041938671.1575905885 [Son Erişim Tarihi: 08.11.2023].
6. Curabaz, A. 2009. Adana İlinde Büyükbaş Süt Hayvancılık İşletmelerinin İncelenmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Zootekni Anabilim Dalı, Adana.
7. Dalkiliç, B. (2024). Çukurova Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Araştırma ve Uygulama Çiftliğinde İnek Sütü Üretiminde Doğrudan Enerji Kullanımı ve İlgili Sera Gazı Salımlarının Belirlenmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Tarım Makinaları ve Teknolojileri Mühendisliği Anabilim Dalı, Adana.
8. DEFRA (2022) Greenhouse gas reporting: Conversion factors. Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs (Defra).

9. FAO (2018) Agricultural Outlook 2018-2027 Dairy and Dairy Products 2018. Available online: http://www.agrioutlook.org/commodities/Agricultural-Outlook-2018-Dairy.pdf (accessed on 8 March 2023).
10. Frorip, J., Kokin, E., Praks, J., Poikalainen, V., Ruus, A., Veermäe, I., ... ve Ahokas, J., 2012. Energy consumption in animal production-case farm study. Agron. Res, 10(1), 39-48.
11. Haas, G., Wetterich, F., ve Köpke, U., 2001. Comparing intensive, extensified and organic grassland farming in southern Germany by process life cycle assessment. Agriculture, ecosystems ve environment, 83(1-2), 43-53.
12. IDF (2009) International Dairy Federation. Environmental/Ecological Impact of the Dairy sector: Literature Review on a Dairy Products for an Inventory of Key Issues, List of Environmental Initiatives and Influence on the Dairy Sector; Bulletin of International Dairy Federation: Belgium, p. 436.
13. IDF (2010) International Dairy Federation. A Common Carbon Footprint Approach for Dairy, The IDF Guide to Standard Lifecycle Assessment Methodology for the Dairy Sector; Bulletin of International Dairy Federation: Belgium, p. 445.
14. IE (2009) Institut de l’Elevage. Les Consommations D’energie en Bâtiment D’elelevage Laitier; Reperes de Consommations et Pistes D’economies; Collection: Synthese, Janvier.
15. IPCC (1996) Climate Change, 1995. The Science of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group I to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Houghton., J.T., et al. (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 572 pp.
16. IPCC (2006) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Volume 2 Energy”, Japan.
17. Jäkel K. (2003) Analyse der Elektroenergieanwendungund Einsparpotentialeam Beispielsächsischer Milchviehanlagen. Forschungsbericht Agrartechnik; Mertin-Luther-Universitat: Halle, Germany, p. 414.
18. Kraatz, S. (2012). Energy intensity in livestock operations–Modeling of dairy farming systems in Germany. Agricultural Systems, 110, 90-106.
19. Ludington D, Johnson E (2003) Dairy Farm Energy Audit Summary Report. Energy Research and Development Authority: Albany, NY, USA.
20. Meul, M., Nevens, F., Reheul, D., ve Hofman, G., 2007. Energy use efficiency of specialised dairy, arable and pig farms in Flanders. Agriculture, Ecosystems ve Environment, 119(1-2), 135 144.
21. MNER (2023) T.R. Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, Ankara, Türkiye, https://enerji.gov.tr/evced-cevre-ve-iklim-elektrik-uretim-tuketim-emisyon-faktorleri, (accessed on 23 September 2023).
22. Murgia L. Todde G, Caria M, Pazzona A (2013) A partial life cycle assessment approach to evaluate the energy intensity and related greenhouse gas emission in dairy farms. J Agric Eng 44:e37. https://doi.org/10.4081/jae.2013.279.
23. O’Brien, D., Shalloo, L., Patton, J., Buckley, F., Grainger, C., ve Wallace, M., 2012. A life cycle assessment of seasonal grass-based and confinement dairy farms. Agricultural Systems, 107, 33-46.
24. Ogino, A., Ishida, M., Ishikawa, T., Ikeguchi, A., Waki, M., Yokoyama, H., ... ve Hirooka, H., 2008. Environmental impacts of a Japanese dairy farming system using whole‐crop rice silage as evaluated by life cycle assessment. Animal Science Journal, 79(6), 727-736.
25. Özer B, Ikikat Tumer E (2021) Süt Sığırcılığı İşletmelerinin Yapısal Özellikleri. Cukurova J. Agric Food Sci 36(2):187-200, doi: 10.36846/CJAFS.2021.47.
26. Pagani, M., Vittuari, M., Johnson, T. G., ve De Menna, F., 2016. An assessment of the energy footprint of dairy farms in Missouri and Emilia-Romagna. Agricultural systems, 145, 116 126.
27. Pulina, G., Francesconi, A. H. D., Mele, M., Ronchi, B., Stefanon, B., Sturaro, E., Trevisi, E. 2011. Sfamare un mondo di nove miliardi di persone: le sfide per una zootecnia sostenibile. Italian Journal of Agronomy, 6, 39-44.
28. Refsgaard, K., Halberg, N., ve Kristensen, E. S., 1998. Energy utilization in crop and dairy production in organic and conventional livestock production systems. Agricultural systems, 57(4), 599-630.
29. Rossi P, Gastaldo A (2012) Consumi energetici in allevamenti bovini da latte. Inf Agrar 3:45–47.
30. Sefeedpari, P., Rafiee, S., Akram, A., ve Komleh, S. H. P., 2014. Modeling output energy based on fossil fuels and electricity energy consumption on dairy farms of Iran: Application of adaptive neural-fuzzy inference system technique. Computers and electronics in agriculture, 109, 80-85.
31. Shine P, Upton J, Sefeedpari P, Murphy MD (2020) Energy consumption on dairy farms: A review of monitoring, prediction modelling, and analyses. Energies 13:1288. doi:10.3390/en13051288.
32. Sjaunja LO, Baevre L, Junkkarinen L, Pedersen JJ Setälä A (1990) Nordic proposal for an energy corrected milk (ECM) formula. In Proceedings of the 27th Session International Committee for Recording and Productivity of Milk Animals, Paris, France.
33. Thomassen, M. A., van Calker, K. J., Smits, M. C., Iepema, G. L., ve de Boer, I. J., 2008. Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands. Agricultural systems, 96(1-3), 95-107.
34. Todde G, Murgia L, Caria M, Pazzona A (2018) A Comprehensive Energy Analysis and Related Carbon Footprint of Dairy Farms, Part 1: Direct Energy Requirements. Energies 11(2): 451. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11020451.
35. TURKSTAT (2020) Turkish Statistic Foundation, Animal Production Statistics. Ankara, Turkey.
36. Upton, J., Humphreys, J., Koerkamp, P. G., French, P., Dillon, P., ve De Boer, I. J., 2013. Energy demand on dairy farms in Ireland. Journal of dairy science, 96(10), 6489-6498.
37. Van der Werf, H. M., Kanyarushoki, C., ve Corson, M. S., 2009. An operational method for the evaluation of resource use and environmental impacts of dairy farms by life cycle assessment. Journal of environmental management, 90(11), 3643-3652.
38. Yamane T (1967) Elementary Sampling Theory. N.J., USA. Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs.