Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jan 11;54(1):44.
doi: 10.1007/s11250-022-03045-6.

The environmental performance of different pork production scenarios: a life cycle assessment study

M R Villavicencio-Gutiérrez  1 , N A Rogers-Montoya  2 , R Martínez-Campos  1 , G Gómez-Tenorio  3 , F E Martínez-Castañeda  4
Affiliations

The environmental performance of different pork production scenarios: a life cycle assessment study

M R Villavicencio-Gutiérrez et al. Trop Anim Health Prod. .

Abstract

In order to evaluate the environmental performance generated by a "semi-technified" pig farm, as well as the comparison of different pig production scenarios, pig feed and animal production subsystems were evaluated considering both: (a) origin of feed ingredients and (b) variations in pig weight. Life cycle assessment methodology was used to evaluate the environmental performance, establishing 1 market pig as the functional unit (FU). Three ingredient origin distances (400, 950, and 1800 km) and three slaughter weights (110, 100, and 90 kg) were considered for the simulation analysis and comparison. The feed production subsystem was the main generator of environmental impacts, mainly caused by the cultivation of sorghum and the production of fat. The origin of the inputs represented the main increase in environmental impact for the feed production subsystem, mainly in the Fossil Depletion category, with a fivefold increase by acquiring inputs from 900 km and a ninefold increase at a distance of 1800 km. Producing lighter pigs resulted in the best environmental alternative, given the resultant 11% reduction in environmental impact.

Keywords: Environmental profile; Feed ingredient origin; Pig weight; ReCiPe (midpoint approach).

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. ADEME. (2016). French Environment and Energy Management Agency, Agribalyse program V1.3.
    1. Alba, Y., Barrera, E., Sarduy, A. Pérez, M., Hermida, O., Dewlf, J., 2019. Life cycle assessment for Cuban pig production: case study in Sancti Spiritus. Journal of Cleaner Production. 219, 99-109. - DOI
    1. Anestis, V., Papanastasiou, D., Bartzanas, T., Giannenas, I., Skoufos, I., Kittas, C, 2020. Effect of a dietary modification for fattening pigs on the environmental performance of commercial pig production in Greece. Sustainable Production and Consumption. 22, 162-176. - DOI
    1. ASERCA Apoyos y Servicios a la Comercialización Agropecuaria. 1996. Una visión de la porcicultura en México. Claridades Agropecuarias. 34. 40 p
    1. Bava, L., Zucali, M., Sandricci, A., Tamburini, A, 2017. Environmental impact of the typical heavy pig production in Italy. Journal of Cleaner Production. 140, 685-691. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources