News 
 State News 
 Livestock 
 Cattle 
 Report backs green credentials of feedlot beef 

Report backs green credentials of feedlot beef

03 Feb, 2010 03:00 AM
The Australian Lot Feeders Association has welcomed University of NSW research that demonstrates the positive environment aspects of beef cattle feedlot production.

ALFA president Jim Cudmore says the report addresses what he describes as "the widespread misconception" that beef cattle feedlots are resource and energy intensive and hence are worse for the environment than organic or grass fed beef production.

"The report using a life cycle impact assessment concluded that beef from feedlot cattle had 50 per cent and 38pc lower methane emissions per kilogram of hot standard carcass weight compared with organic and grass fed beef production respectively," Mr Cudmore said.

"Compared with grass fed beef production, this outcome is achieved because the superior nutrition and digestibility of feedlot rations means that cattle slaughter weights can be achieved at a younger age.

"The message is clear: by improving the efficiency of beef production (through increasing the proportion of feed energy that is converted to beef) lower methane emissions per unit of product are then obtained.

"Notably, this goal can be achieved by both grain and grass fed production systems."

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Locking cattle in a pen and carting artificially grown feed to them is an environmentally sound thing to do compared to cattle grazing relatively naturally in a paddock! Surely only a feedlotter would believe this. Lets look at the big picture. The science of growing grass tells us that the biting effect of grazing animals is a vital part of maintaining a healthy pasture with healthy microbial activity and a healthy root system. This pasture happens to sequester a great deal of carbon and produce healthy beef at the same time. Not a bad system at all. Good luck trying to sequester carbon on a hard bare feedlot floor. So called scientists who refuse to tell the 'whole' story about 'net' emissions should have their funding cut.
Posted by Carbon Positive Grazing, 4/02/2010 7:02:50 AM, on Queensland Country Life
So just how far back did this LCA (life cycle analysis) start? At clearing the paddock using machinery, planting the grain, using machinery, pesticide and weedicide mangement and irrigation all using machinery, harvesting/threshing/winnowing using machinery, storing/drying and transporting using machinery, then crushing, steam rolling and adding antacid agents to the grain to improve digestibility and reduce the grain fermentation effect of acidosis that destroys gut mucosal epithelia and predicates increased susceptibilty to community sickness thereby requiring antibiotic additives ...How can that be a lesser footprint than opening the paddock gate???? Or did your LCA just start at the feed bin
Posted by deb Newell, 4/02/2010 7:29:40 AM, on Queensland Country Life
What about the welfare of the animals, is that taken into account ??
Posted by Get Real, 8/02/2010 1:11:50 PM, on Queensland Country Life

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.

Most popular articles

ELDERS NEWS MREC SJ



Queensland Country Life







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...