Using Feed Additives to Lower Methane Emissions Produced by Dairy Cows and Cattle

Summary

The panel explores the use of methane-reducing feed additives like 3 and bromoform in dairy cattle, with insights from pilot studies in Europe and the growing support for these initiatives. Key issues include the effectiveness of these products, public perception, and the challenges of ensuring widespread adoption. The discussion highlights the need for carefully designed studies to gather reliable data on the additives' impact on cow health, production, and emissions. A proposed study aims to evaluate the combined effects of methane inhibitors and alternative feeds, while also assessing stakeholder perceptions in California's agricultural community.

Takeaways

• 😀 A large-scale pilot study on methane inhibitors was conducted in the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, and Sweden, with varying success and government support for future phases.
• 😀 The sustainability program at Arla Foods in Denmark and Sweden uses a points-based incentive system for farmers, emphasizing feed efficiency, fertilization use, land use, protein use, and animal health.
• 😀 Despite positive momentum in some countries, there is still no official approval for methane inhibitors in the United States, though pilot studies are in progress.
• 😀 The effectiveness of feed additives like methane inhibitors has been evaluated in pilot studies, but further research and large-scale trials are needed to refine methods and learn more.
• 😀 Public perceptions of methane mitigation products vary by region, with Sweden showing half of producers supporting these products and the UK seeing much lower approval rates among farmers.
• 😀 Financial incentives are a major factor in the adoption of methane mitigation technologies, but regulatory requirements, supplier contracts, and standard accreditations also play key roles.
• 😀 Producers prefer independent research (universities and colleges) over government agencies for verifying the efficacy of feed additives, signaling concerns over bias and trust.
• 😀 California's CDFA is conducting focus groups to gauge local industry sentiment and concerns, especially regarding the impact on the livestock sector.
• 😀 Key questions remain unanswered about the long-term effects of feeding methane inhibitors, including the potential impact on feed quality, animal health, and overall productivity.
• 😀 The upcoming study on methane inhibitors and probiotics in California will focus on measuring methane emissions, manure properties, and consumer perceptions, with a team of specialists leading the research.

Q & A

What are the two key feed additives mentioned in the panel discussion?

The two key feed additives discussed are 3NOP (3-nitrooxypropanol) and bromoform.

Which countries have already approved the use of 3NOP?

Countries that have already approved 3NOP include the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, and Sweden.

What was the scope of the pilot study conducted in the Netherlands in 2022?

The pilot study in the Netherlands involved feeding 200,000 cows on 158 farms for six months, primarily testing the effectiveness of 3NOP.

What was the role of Arla Foods in the pilot study conducted in Denmark, and what did the company learn?

Arla Foods conducted a large pilot study in Denmark involving 13,000 cows, though they did not specify what they learned from the study. However, they are ready to move on to the next phase, with the Danish government supporting this with 75 million euros.

How does Arla’s sustainability program in the United States incentivize farmers?

Arla's sustainability program in the U.S. operates on a points-based system, where each point represents a financial incentive of 14 cents. Farmers can accumulate up to 18 points, which translates to a potential economic reward per 100 weight of milk.

What is the goal of the proposed study described in the transcript?

The goal of the proposed study is to evaluate the impact of methane inhibitors fed simultaneously with alternative feeds on cows, and to measure the methane emissions from manure. It will also assess the perceptions of methane mitigation strategies among key stakeholders.

What are some of the key questions that need to be answered regarding the implementation of feed additives like 3NOP and bromoform?

Some key questions include the long-term implications of feeding these products, their effects on greenhouse gas emissions, product quality, reproduction, health, dietary interactions, and how the additives will perform in the specific diets fed in California.

What challenges were raised in the transcript regarding the adoption of feed additives like 3NOP and bromoform?

Challenges include uncertainties about public and industry perceptions, as well as the need for clear verification methods. Financial incentives and regulatory requirements are also highlighted as important factors for adoption.

What type of stakeholders were surveyed in the UK regarding the adoption of feed additives?

In the UK, three types of stakeholders were surveyed: farmers, organizations, and other individuals. Among farmers, only 25% supported the use of such feed additives.

Why is there a need for independent research and verification for feed additives like 3NOP?

There is a need for independent research and verification because many farmers prefer third-party evaluations over government agency verification. Independent research helps ensure credibility and trust in the efficacy of the feed additives.