Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing energy state and environmental impacts in ostrich and chicken production systems

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 05 October 2019

This article has been updated

Abstract

Energy state and environmental impacts of production systems are of main criteria to reach sustainability. In the present research, ostrich was compared with a broiler production system based on the criteria. The required data was gathered in Boukan Township, West Azerbaijan, Iran, by a questioner method. The total input energy in ostrich and broiler systems was calculated as 150,419.81 MJ (1 ton of bird year)−1 and 344,579.58 MJ (1 ton of bird year)−1, respectively. Diesel fuel and feed (41.39% and 36.95%, respectively) in broiler and electricity (45.87%) in the ostrich production system had the highest energy shares. Eleven impact categories were estimated by SimaPro software in the studied systems. Except for human toxicity, fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity, and terrestrial ecotoxicity, the amounts of other environmental impacts in the ostrich production system were lower than those of the poultry production system. The amount of global warming indicator for the production of 1 ton of broiler chicken was 17,400 kg CO2 eq year−1 that was equal to 4350 kg CO2 eq period−1. This value was obtained as 1.68 × 104 kg CO2 eq year−1 for the production of ostrich meat. In both production systems, feed was the main factor responsible for almost all studied environmental impacts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 05 October 2019

    The correct name of the 3<Superscript>rd</Superscript> Author is shown in this paper.

References

  • Al-Nasser A, Al-Khalaifa H, Holleman K, Al-Ghalaf W (2003) Ostrich production in the arid environment of Kuwait. J Arid Environ 54:219–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alrwis KN, Francis E (2003) Technical efficiency of broiler farms in the central region of Saudi Arabia: stochastic front approach. Res Bull 116:25–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Amid A, Mesri Gundoshmian T, Shagoli G, Rafiee S (2016) Energy use pattern and optimization of energy required for broiler production using data envelopment analysis. Inform Proc Agric 3:83–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous (2016) Annual Agricultural Statistics. Ministry of Jihad-e-Agriculture of Iran, Tehran. http://www.maj.ir. Accessed 25 May 2018

  • Atilgan A, Hayati K (2006) Cultural energy analysis on broilers reared in different capacity poultry houses. Ital J Anim Sci 5(4):393–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg MJ, Tymoczkyo LJ, Stryer L (2002) Biochemistry. 5th edn. New York.

  • Begum IA, Buysse J, Alam MJ, Vanhuylenbroeck G (2010) Technical, allocative and economic efficiency of commercial poultry farms in Bangladesh. World’s Poult Sci J 66:465e76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingham S (2006) The fibre-folate debate in colo-rectal cancer. Proc Nutr Soc 65(1):19–23

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Celik LO (2003) Effects of dietary supplemental L-carnitine and ascorbic acid on performance, carcass composition and plasma L-carnitine concentration of broiler chicks reared under different temperature. Arch Anim Nutr 57(1):27–38

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Costantino A, Fabrizio E, Biglia A, Cornale P, Battaglini L (2016) Energy use for climate control of animal houses: the state of the art in Europe. Energy Procedia 101:184–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chauhan NS, Mohapatra PKJ, Pandey KP (2006) Improving energy productivity in paddy production through benchmarking: an application of data envelopment analysis. Energy Convers Manag 47:1063–1085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • da Silva VP, Cherubini E, Soares SR (2012) Comparison of two production scenarios of chickens consumed in France. In: Corson, M.S., van der Werf, H.M.G. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th international conference on life cycle assessment in the agri-food sector (LCA Food 2012), 1–4 October 2012. INRA, Rennes, France, pp. 542–547. Saint Malo, France.

  • da Silva VP, van der Werf HM, Soares SR, Corson MS (2014) Environmental impacts of French and Brazilian broiler chicken production scenarios: an LCA approach. J Environ Manag 133:222–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dones R, Bauer C, Bolliger R, Burger B, Faist Emmenegger M, Frischknecht R, Heck T, Jungbluth N, Röder A, Tuchschmid M (2007) Life cycle inventories of energy systems: results for current systems in Switzerland and other UCTE countries. Paul Scherrer Institut Villigen, Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, Switzerland. Ecoinvent Report No. 5.

  • FAO (2003) Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations Rome (FAO), animal production and health paper.

  • Gavanji S, Larki B, Taraghian AH (2013) A review of application of ostrich oil in pharmacy and diseases treatment. JNASCI 2–11:650–654

    Google Scholar 

  • Gefen E, Ar A (2001) Gas exchange and energy metabolism of the ostrich (Struthio camelus) embryo. CBP, Part A: Molecular & Integrative Physiology 130:689–699

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzales-Garcia S, Gomez-Fernández Z, Cláudia Dias A, Feijoo G, Moreira MT, Arroja L (2014) Life cycle assessment of broiler chicken production: a Portuguese. J Clean Prod 74(1):125–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guinee JB (2004) Hand book on life cycle assessment. Operation guide to ISO standards. Kluwer Academic, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Haley MM (2001) Changing consumer demand for meat: the U.S example, 1970–2000. In: Regmi A (ed) Changing structure of global food consumption and trade. DIANE, Washington, DC, pp 41–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidari MD, Omid M, Akram A (2011) Energy efficiency and econometric analysis of broiler production farms. Energy 36:6536–6541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2006) Chapter 10: Emissions from livestock and manure management. IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use.

  • ISO (2000) ISO 14000. Environmental management. Serie 14000-Environmental Management. Geneva: ISO.

  • ISO (2010) ISO 14050. Environmental management—vocabulary.

  • Kheiralipour K, Payandeh Z, Khoshnevisan B (2017) Evaluation of environmental impacts in turkey production system in Iran. IJAS 7(3):507–512

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • King T, Osmond-McLeod M, Duffy L (2018) Nanotechnology in the food sector and potential applications for the poultry industry. Trends Food Sci Technol 72:62–73

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kitani O (1999) Energy and biomass engineering. In: CIGR handbook of agricultural engineering, Vol. V, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI, pp. 330.

  • Kittle AP (1993). Alternate daily cover materials and subtitle, the selection technique Rusmar. Incorporated West Chester, PA.

  • Kizilaslan H (2009) Input-output energy analysis of cherries production in Tokat Province of Turkey. Appl Energy 86:1354–1358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leinonen I, Williams AG, Kyriazakis I (2014) The effects of welfare-enhancing system changes on the environmental impacts of broiler and egg production. Poult Sci 93(2):256–266

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leinonen I, Williams AG, Wiseman J, Guy J, Kyriazakis I (2012) Predicting the environmental impacts of chicken systems in the United Kingdom through a life cycle assessment: broiler production systems. Poult Sci 91(1):8–25

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maysami MA (2013) Energy efficiency in dairy cattle farming and related feed production in Iran. Ph.D. thesis in agriculture. Faculty of Agriculture and Horticulture at Humboldt-University of Berlin.

  • Miles DM, Logan JW, Arora S, Jenkins JN (2016) On-farm resources and renewable energy in broiler chicken production: Brinson Farms Case Study. Int J Poult Sci 15(2):41–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Najafi Anari S, Khademolhoseini N, Jazayeri K, Mirzade K (2008) Assessing of energy efficiency on broiler farm in the Ahvaze zone. 5th National conference on agriculture machinery and mechanization. 26–27 August, Mashhad, Iran (in Persian).

  • Nicholson FA, Chambers BJ, Walker AW (2004) Ammonia emissions from broiler litter and laying hen manure management systems. Biosyst Eng 89(2):175–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen NI, Jqrgensen M, Bahrndorff S (2011) Greenhouse gas emission from the Danish broiler production estimated via LCA methodology. Knowl Cent Agric.

  • Ozkan B, Kuklu A, Akcaoz H (2004) An input-output energy analysis in greenhouse vegetable production: a case study for Antalya region of Turkey. Biomass Bioenergy 26(1–2):89–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payandeh Z, Kheiralipour K, Karimi M (2016) An evaluation of energy efficiency of broiler production farms using data envelopment analysis technique, case study: Isfahan Province. Iran J Biosyst Eng 47:577–585

    Google Scholar 

  • Payandeh Z, Kheiralipour K, Karimi M, Khoshnevisan B (2017) Applying data envelopment analysis method for environmental impact reduction in broiler production system. Energy 127:768–774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier N (2008) Environmental performance in the US broiler poultry sector: life cycle energy use and greenhouse gas, ozone depleting, acidifying and eutrophying emissions. Agric Syst 98:67–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sainz RD (2003) Livestock-environment initiative fossil fuels component: framework for calculation fossil fuel use in livestock systems. Available at: http://www.fao.org. Accessed 28 May 2018

  • Seidavi A, Zaker-Esteghamatim R, Scanes C (2019) Chicken processing: impact, co-products and potential. World’s Poultry Sci J 75(1):55–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton MA, Milford C, Dragosits U, Place DJ, Singles RJ, Smith RI, Pitcairn CIR, Fowler DHJ, ApSimon HM, Ross C, Hill R, Jarvis SC, Pain BF, Phillips CV, Harrison R, Moss D, Webb J, Espenhahn SE, Lee DS, Hornung M, Ullyett J, Bull KP, Emmett BA, Lowe J, Wyers GP (1998) Dispersion, deposition and impacts of atmospheric ammonia: quantifying local budgets and spatial variability. Environ Pollut 102(S1):349–361

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ramedani Z, Rafiee S, Heidari MD (2011) An investigation on energy consumption and sensitivity analysis of soybean production farms. Energy 36(11):6340–6344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner F, Althaus HJ, Künniger T, Richter K, Jungbluth N (2007) Life cycle inventories of wood as fuel and construction material. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, Switzerland. Final Report Ecoinvent Data No. 9, V2.0.

  • Zhu J, Jacobson LD, Schmidt DR, Nicolai R (2000) Daily variations in odor and gas emissions from animal facilities. Appl Eng Agric 16(2):153–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu DJ, Na JC, Kim SH, Kim JH, Kang GH, Kim HK, Seo OS, Lee JC (2008) Effects of dietary selenium sources on the growth performance and selenium retention of meat in broiler chickens. Proceedings XXIII World’s Poultry Congress, 29 June-4 July 2008, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Download references

Funding

This study received a financial support provided by Sonqor faculty of Agriculture, Razi University, Iran.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanization Engineering, Sonqor Faculty of Agriculture, Razi University, Sonqor, Iran

    Zeynab Ramedani, Loghman Alimohammadian, Parya Delpisheh & Zahra Abbasi

  2. Department of Biosystems Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ilam, Ilam, Iran

    Kamran Kheialipour

Authors
  1. Zeynab Ramedani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Loghman Alimohammadian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kamran Kheialipour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Parya Delpisheh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zahra Abbasi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Zeynab Ramedani or Kamran Kheialipour.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ramedani, Z., Alimohammadian, L., Kheialipour, K. et al. Comparing energy state and environmental impacts in ostrich and chicken production systems. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26, 28284–28293 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05972-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05972-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation