September was a busy month here at FCT, and in addition to our Annual Field Day, we also participated in the UK Dairy Day and the Agroforestry Show.
Our stand at the Dairy Day Show at the Telford International Centre allowed us to meet with farmers and dairy industry professionals from across the UK. A key topic of discussion for all stakeholders was the need to reduce carbon emissions throughout the dairy supply chain and the practices that can contribute to achieving the desired reductions. Also on the agenda was how the sustainable use of nutrients on farms can help farmers to build productivity whilst cutting input costs and lowering the potential losses to the wider environment.
The 2nd ever Agroforestry Show took place just inside the M25 this year, and FCT’s presence was highly relevant. Several visitors headed straight to our stand, either to say hello in real life, having used our website or carbon calculator, or to find out about the services we offer. Senior advisor Rob Purdew hosted a well-received session with David Oattes and Stuart Rogers, both farmers we already work with who have included trees in the functioning of their farm systems (beef and dairy, respectively). The discussion explored the impact of the inclusion of increased hedges and in-field trees on farm carbon sequestration and the surprisingly swift apparent increase in soil organic matter and, therefore, soil carbon in the vicinity of the new planting. Stuart Rogers and FCT project assistant Jemma Morgan also recorded an episode of Ffinlo Costain’s popular Farm Gate podcast on the wider impact of Agroforestry on Stuart’s dairy farm in Wiltshire. An encouraging increase in the number of UK tree nurseries was also present at the Show, proving that where there’s a desire to include resilience-building trees on any farm, there’s a sensibly local source to provide them. Many venues hosted a wide range of interesting and inspiring talks and discussions, with demonstrations and farm walks to engage visitors too. Overall, there is momentum building as the understanding of the importance of trees as a value-added element of a climate-resilient farm system becomes more widely understood. Look out for us when it comes to the third Agroforestry Show – we’ll definitely be there.
For people unable to make our Annual Field Day held in North Lincolnshire at the end of September, we have captured some of the take-home messages from the morning farm walk around the Pink Pig Farm, with our hosts, the Jackson family.
During the morning, we walked around the farm, pausing at four stations to hear from our farmers and FCT staff. Our four stations covered:
Plant Nutrition: Diagnostics and Low-Input Management
Integration of livestock into arable rotations
The importance of soil health
Regenerative farming ten years on
Integration of livestock into arable rotations
Anna Jackson, host farmer at The Pink Pig, and John McArthur, a beef farmer, discussed the challenges and opportunities of integrating livestock into arable systems. Both shared practical insights into how mixed farming can build resilience, improve soil health, and strengthen business performance. Key takeaways: Integration builds resilience — livestock can enhance soil health, manage weeds and diseases, and support system stability Low-input livestock systems reduce costs and simplify management Pulse crops offer dual benefits for arable and livestock systems, cutting carbon and improving nitrogen cycling Support mechanisms are still limited — longer-term policy and investment will be vital to accelerate change
Building a Low-Input Sheep System at The Pink Pig
Anna Jackson manages a flock of around 70 Romney–Lleyn sheep under the Pasture for Life scheme. Her approach is firmly low-input: no tailing, minimal interventions, and outdoor lambing. The flock is mob-grazed, moving every one to two days depending on conditions, and grazing wheat over winter. A recent fencing grant has enabled the integration of sheep into arable ground, supporting a whole-farm rotational system.
Anna’s sheep enterprise isn’t just about meat production — although quarter lamb boxes, sold through the on-site shop, sell out annually. “I know my customers and my margins,” Anna explains. “I can build those figures directly into the business plan each year.” The flock’s real value lies in what it contributes to the wider farm system: disease control, nutrient cycling, and soil health.
One striking example came when a wheat crop was hit by disease. “We grazed it hard — it didn’t look like a crop anymore,” says Anna. “But it came back clean and healthy. If I can manage the flock without buying inputs, it makes financial and agronomic sense.”
Rotation, Resilience, and the Role of Grass
The Pink Pig’s six-year rotation — two years of grass for seed, followed by oats, wheat, beans, and wheat — is designed for flexibility. “The grass adds organic matter and provides a rest period for the arable crops,” says Anna. “If a crop needs a break, the sheep can go back in. It’s a balancing act.”
Grass also helps manage blackgrass and other weeds. “If we see a problem field, it goes into grass for two years,” Anna notes. “Grazing sorts it. Soil health is our bigger challenge.”Although the arable enterprise remains the main profit driver, the sheep earn their place by improving crop performance and building resilience into the system. Anna is now exploring self-shedding breeds to further reduce labour demands. “The Romneys have been brilliant — easy lambing, low input. I love working with the flock, and I want to keep it that way: simple and stress-free.”
Integrating Cattle and Pulses: John McArthur’s Experience
Across in another part of the region, John McArthur runs a 500-acre mixed farm with a suckler herd of 40 cows and followers. He is keen to bring cattle into his arable rotation but acknowledges the practical challenges. “In the East of England, we need livestock in our arable systems to maintain soil health and nutrient cycling,” he says, “but making it work practically is difficult.”
John is also part of theNCS project developing low-emission protein feeds for livestock. The trials, now halfway through, have shown impressive results: soya use reduced by 70% in broiler rations, diet carbon footprints cut by 40%, and bird performance maintained. “We need to rebrand faba beans from a mid-level to a low-emission protein,” he suggests. “They have huge potential.”
Currently, only 2–3% of UK rotations include pulses, but John believes that must change. On his own farm, adding beans has improved nitrogen fixation, protein production, and soil structure — demonstrating the broader value of mixed farming.
Overcoming the Barriers to Integration
Both Anna and John acknowledged the financial and structural risks of integrating livestock into existing arable systems. Capital investments in fencing, water, and infrastructure can take years to pay off, and current Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) options offer limited support for mixed-system transition.
Anna’s wheat is sold to Wildfarmed, grown as an 11-way soft blend that earns a premium for low-input management — though weather remains a major variable. “It’s always a risk,” she says, “but layering livestock into the system builds resilience year on year.”
Learning from the Land
Establishing herbal leys on the Pink Pig’s sandy soils has been a process of trial and error. “Our first mix didn’t take at all,” Anna admits. “We’ve learned that shallow disturbance and tailored mixes work better, but some patches still struggle.” Grass, however, thrives, making it an essential tool for soil improvement and grazing flexibility.
Despite the challenges of a Pasture for Life system and a volatile climate, Anna remains committed: “This is my happy place — being with the sheep. They make sense agronomically, environmentally, and personally.”
The Importance of Soil Health
Healthy soil is the foundation of resilient, profitable farming. The second stop on the recent farm walk focused on this essential theme, featuring a soil pit demonstration and insights from Jonathan Hodgson, one of FCT’s 2025 Soil Farmers of the Year. Stefan Marks from the Farm Carbon Toolkit highlighted the value of regular soil assessments — digging holes, examining structure, and counting worms — as key indicators of soil health and system performance. Key Takeaways: Get to know your soils through regular assessments – dig holes to understand soil structure and soil life Diversity of cropping helps to improve soil health, including keeping soils covered and bringing grass into the rotation, bringing livestock in where possible The results are tangible with crops handling drought stress better than before as soil health improves Applying nitrogen “little and often” in line with plant requirements really pays dividends with lower overall use and yields maintained
A Journey Toward Regenerative Practice
Jonathan farms 280 hectares north of the Humber, on heavy clay soils with minimal stone. In 2019, he transitioned from traditional tillage to a strip-till system, initially to reduce establishment costs. “We could see that BPS was ending, and machinery costs were hard to justify,” he explains. “Knowing this led me to really understand soil. It’s been challenging, stressful at times — but completely worthwhile.”
Today, the benefits are clear. “Improving soil isn’t a quick fix,” says Jonathan. “But after a few years, we’re finally seeing the rewards.”
Building Diversity and Soil Structure
The farm’s rotation now includes wheat, oilseed rape, barley, flax, hemp, winter beans, and herbal leys. Grass is being reintroduced for fertility, structure, and weed control. Cover crops play a key role, providing living roots that trap nutrients and feed the soil biology.
“Cover crops are vital to our soil type,” Jonathan notes. “They can be tricky to establish in dry summers, but once they get going, they make a huge difference.” The farm’s early trials with catch crops — supported by Yorkshire Water — demonstrated how living roots improve soil health ahead of the next wheat crop.
Regular applications of gypsum (2 t/ha) have also helped to aerate soils and balance calcium–magnesium ratios. “We’re now seeing natural crumb structure developing, rather than the old blocky profile,” Jonathan reports. “Perseverance has paid off.”
Signs of Progress
The difference is tangible. “In the early days, I’d find only two or three worms per pit. Now there are twenty or more,” says Jonathan. “I keep a spade in the truck and dig holes everywhere — it’s the best way to understand the soil.”
Even in challenging conditions, performance has improved. “Our crops handle drought better than they used to,” he explains. “We’re using far less fuel since we stopped turning soil over. I’m happy to leave it undisturbed until it’s time to drill.”
Integrating Livestock and Companion Crops
Historically, the farm had its own flock of sheep, but it now hosts 300–400 sheep over winter from a neighbouring farmer. Grazing helps recycle nutrients and keeps cover crops in check.
Jonathan is also experimenting with companion cropping, pairing flax and hemp with oats or barley, and oats with beans. “It’s about finding combinations that are cost-effective and easy to harvest,” he says. An understorey of clover under winter beans is another experiment aimed at maintaining living roots through the year.
Reducing Inputs, Increasing Efficiency
The shift in soil management has led to a significant drop in input costs. “We’ve cut fungicide use dramatically without affecting yield or quality,” Jonathan explains. “We’ve stopped using PGRs on wheat altogether.”
Nitrogen is now applied ‘little and often’, with molasses added to support microbial activity. “The crops grow more naturally and evenly,” he says. “It’s about working with biology, not against it.”
Resilient Soils, Resilient Farms
Jonathan’s experience shows that improving soil health takes patience, observation, and persistence — but the benefits are clear: better structure, stronger crops, and lower costs. “The farm performs better now than it ever has,” he reflects. “It’s been a journey, but one that’s absolutely worth it.”
Regenerative Farming: Ten Years On
John Cherry farms 350 hectares of combinable crops alongside a herd of 120 Shorthorn beef cattle, having fully transitioned his farm to a regenerative system. He is also the co-founder of Groundswell, an initiative that brings farmers together to share ideas and learn from each other. Key Takeaways: Risk reduction– Through following regenerative farming systems, John Cherry has reduced exposure to risk Trying to mimic nature – Observing how nature works and using this is key to successful regenerative farming success Introducing cattle into the arable rotation – Provides manures , which reduce the need for phosporous and potash purchases and improve soil health
Inspiration and Early Steps
John’s regenerative journey was sparked by Frédéric Thomas, a pioneering French farmer who described no-till farming as “a doorway to a magic kingdom.” “The possibilities are endless,” John reflects. “Agroforestry, companion cropping — there are so many ways to mimic what Mother Nature does. I became obsessed with how to imitate nature while making a living sustainably.”
After university, John initially tried transitioning to organic farming but found the market limited. Conventional methods were easier, but he quickly noticed his soils deteriorating. Discovering no-till farmers opened a new perspective. Early trials on a couple of fields (2009–2011) using a tine drill delivered low costs and consistent yields, encouraging him to adopt regenerative practices farm-wide.
However, John quickly realised that direct drilling alone isn’t enough. “You have to get the rotation, crop diversity, and ground cover right. Bare soil feeds nothing — the life beneath our feet is the real engine of the system.”
Groundswell: Sharing Knowledge
John co-founded Groundswell to foster conversation around regenerative methods. “There wasn’t much discussion about how to do it or share new ideas,” he explains. “Once you adopt the principles of mimicking nature, you can make progress. It doesn’t work perfectly every year, but observing and learning from mistakes is key.”
Highs, Lows, and Resilience
Regenerative farming comes with challenges. “Things can go wrong,” John admits, “but resilience is crucial. In dry years, conventional farmers can lose heavily invested, coated seeds. We simply sow a bit of seed — if it fails, the cost is minimal. Lower risk is better risk.”
Even in difficult seasons, John reports yields comparable to others, but with significantly lower input costs. This low-exposure approach has been fundamental to the farm’s success.
Transforming the Soil
The impact on soil health has been dramatic:
Increased organic matter: From 1–2% to 5–6%
Improved soil structure and water retention, providing resilience during dry periods
Rich soil biology: Soils are full of life, with strong fungal networks.
Herbal leys are grazed by cattle, which further contributes to soil fertility. The farm produces compost from cattle bedding and woodchip, reducing reliance on external phosphorus and potassium inputs. “The fungi make nutrients available,” John explains. “I let the plants tell me the health of the system.”
Looking Forward
John emphasises the importance of observation, experimentation, and mimicking natural systems. “Our soils give back what we put in. It’s satisfying, low-risk, and profitable — and it works for the long term.”
Plant Nutrition Station: Diagnostics and Low-Input Management
Tim Parton (a plant biology-focused farmer since 2012) and Anthony Ellis reinforced the regenerative theme, focusing on precise diagnostics and the minimisation of chemical inputs to control disease. Key Takeaways: Dangers of applying nitrogen in large “dollops” – This is the biggest cause of plant disease, often leading to the need for follow on fungicide treatments Benefits of grazing crops over winter – Sheep grazing can reduce the need for fungicides Enhanced and balanced soil biology pays off – for arable crops equal ratios of bacteria to fungi is ideal
The Role of Diagnostics and Nitrogen
Nitrogen (N) Risk: Both farmers noted that excessive Nitrogen application, particularly in large ‘dollops,’ is the biggest cause of disease, often forcing the subsequent use of fungicides. Applying amino acids is used to save the plant energy needed for N uptake.
Sap Testing: Tim performs sap testing every 10 days (costing £26 per sample in bulk) to monitor plant nutrient status by comparing old and new leaves. The results directly inform his application of foliar feeds, which are preferred over granules in dry conditions.
Disease Management: Anthony’s trial confirmed that sheep grazing was the best fungicide, and combining this with diverse genetics and targeted nutrition achieved a 30% reduction in disease compared to a conventional agronomy plan.
Soil Biology and Input Strategies
Fungi-to-Bacteria Ratio: While many soils are bacteria-dominant, the goal is a balanced 1:1 fungi to bacteria ratio, as fungal networks are key for cereal crops and thrive without tillage. Trichoderma is noted as a strong, pest-eating fungus.
Composting: Tim makes his own compost, preferring Victorian composting (monitored with a microscope) over the Johnson Su method.
Nutrient Support: Increasing silicon levels helps strengthen cell walls and wax layers on leaves, proving effective against yellow rust. Fish hydrolysate and molasses are applied via the drill tank, and the farmers noted that Phosphorus (P) does not leach unless allowed to.
Observation: The system relies on observing nature—for example, docks suggest a Calcium shortage, and fungal soils attract brambles.
Cover Crops and Profit
Cover Crop Management: Tim likes mixes like Kings Super 10 (ideally seeking a 20-species mix). He manages competition for spring barley by rolling cover crops in cold weather or using a crimper roller in warmer conditions before drilling.
System Goal: The overarching principle is to farm regeneratively, maximizing profit without taking into account externalities (i.e., achieving a premium return) and restoring the soil.
Experimentation: what will work on my farm?
Tim emphasized the need to experiment and try new things, stating that he “tried everything in the garden first, and if it worked, I’d do it on the farm”. Anthony added that he would “try things on one field first” to minimise risks.
FCT’s Hannah Jones highlighted that a lot of agricultural science takes lots of replication across many field sites but that farmers need to decide what evidence they need of something working. For many, with a well-designed field trial, seeing the difference visually between the crop on their own farm can be enough to try something on a bigger scale.
If you would like to speak to us about how you can adapt these practices for your farm business please contact FCT on info@farmcarbontoolkit.org.uk or phone us on 07541 453413
The winner and runners-up of the 2025 Carbon Farmer of the Year competition were announced at the Farm Carbon Toolkit’s Annual Field Day in Lincolnshire.
Now in its third year, the annual Carbon Farmer of the Year competition is organised by the Farm Carbon Toolkit and generously sponsored by HSBC Agriculture UK. The competition aims to find farmers and growers who are engaged with, and passionate about, reducing their business’s climate impact through changing management practices to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
2025 Carbon Farmer of the Year Winner
The winner of this year’s Carbon Farmer of the Year Competition is Stuart & Helen Rogers from Longmoor Farm, North Dorset – a dairy farm supplying Waitrose.
Stuart & Helen Rogers, Longmoor Farm, North Dorset
2025 Carbon Farmer of the Year Runners-up
Runners-up from this year’s competition were Richard and Lyn Anthony from Bridgend, Wales, and Catherine and Malcolm Barrett (Tregooden Farm, Cornwall)
Richard and Lyn Anthony operate a diverse arable and forage system with integrated livestock, plus contracting. Catherine and Malcolm Barrett are mixed farmers and Duchy of Cornwall tenants who have built a resilient system through agroforestry, rotations and community connection.
Richard and Lyn Anthony, Bridgend, South Wales (Image credit: GWCT Wales)
Catherine and Malcolm Barrett, Cornwall.
Competition judges, Steve Dunkley (HSBC UK), Liz Bowles (CEO Farm Carbon Toolkit) and Joanne Sharpe (Farm Carbon Toolkit Non-exec director) were very impressed with the commitment and innovation shown by all the finalists in identifying sources of GHG emissions on their farms and developing strategies to both reduce emissions and increase the rate of carbon removal into soils and non-crop biomass.
Rob Purdew, Senior Farm Advisor at Farm Carbon Toolkit, says:
“Yet again, we have been blown away by the standard of entries to this year’s Carbon Farmer of the Year competition. Picking a winner has been extremely challenging, and all of the finalists are a huge credit to the agricultural sector in the UK. Each of them has risen to the challenge of producing top-quality food at a time of ever-increasing scrutiny into the environmental cost of producing that food, adopting a wide range of innovative practices to minimise the carbon impact of their operations. There will be an opportunity to see all of these farms up close and personal at free farm walks in the near future.”
Martin Hanson, HSBC Head of Agriculture, says:
“HSBC UK Agriculture is pleased to support the 2025 Carbon Farmer of the Year competition again. We’ve had three high-quality finalists from very different sectors, all hugely inspiring to others. As a business, we’re very keen to support the industry in transitioning towards net zero. While that will take many forms, we have the ambition to help farmers fund investment in the new practices and technologies needed to evolve. The Carbon Farmer of the Year competition is a great way of showcasing how farmers are already achieving these changes and encouraging others to follow their lead. “
About the Farm Carbon Toolkit and the Carbon Farmer of the Year competition
Farm Carbon Toolkit is an independent, farmer-led Community Interest Company, supporting farmers to measure, understand and act on their greenhouse gas emissions, while improving their business resilience for the future.
For over a decade, Farm Carbon Toolkit has delivered a range of practical projects, tools and services that have inspired real action on the ground. Organisations they work with include the Duchy of Cornwall, First Milk, Tesco, Yeo Valley and WWF. The Farm Carbon Calculator is a leading on-farm carbon audit tool, used by over 10,000 farmers in the UK and beyond.
The Carbon Farmer of the Year competition aims to recognise and champion farmers, sector organisations, and businesses who are leading the way in adopting farming practices and developing new technologies that are helping to reduce farm emissions while optimising output.
This competition allows for discussions on greenhouse gas emissions and sinks on farms to be framed in a very practical way to allow for maximum engagement with the issue. Farm Carbon Toolkit facilitates discussion and information sharing between farmers and other actors, which ultimately leads to changes in on-farm practice.
The long-term objective of this competition is to create a network of alumni who are changing their management practices to better manage emissions and carbon storage on farmland, and who will inspire others through activity, practical demonstrations, and advocacy for changing management practices.
As well as the award ceremony to announce the 2025 Soil Farmer of the Year winners at 7pm on Wednesday at Speakers Corner, FCT’s Hannah Jones and Becky Willson are involved in two workshops.
Weds 2nd July 1.15pm: Regenerative Stacking, The Study (Hannah Jones)
Thurs 3rd July 11am: Farming for the health of people and climate, Grass Tent (Becky Willson)
And, of course, we’ll have our usual stand E2 in the Pasture Field where we’ll be happy to chat all things soil and farm carbon related!
Improvements to the methodology of the Farm Carbon Calculator mean you can now better capture the detail of livestock management on your farm. More detail in accounting for livestock management practices means both improved accuracy of reporting and better evidencing of efforts to reduce emissions.
What’s changed?
Manure management options
Instead of selecting from just four options for livestock manure management, there are now 9 categories of manure storage with a variety of further amendments and actions associated that may reduce emissions on farm. Full details of the options and what these mean can be found on our Manure Storage Systems guide.
Diet type
Where you have the time and information available to provide detailed information about the type of diet your livestock consumes, it is now possible to use the Farm Carbon Calculator to gain a higher accuracy estimate of enteric methane emissions. This can have a particularly marked effect on the emissions resulting from e.g. a grass-fed vs compound-fed animal. The detailed methodology relies on dry-matter-intake (DMI) but if you don’t know this, we have a Guide to DMI to help you convert forage and “as-fed” weights to DMI.
If you don’t want to enter so much detail, the Farm Carbon Calculator will use the UK GHG inventory default assumptions for livestock diets and consumption.
How will the changes affect my report?
We know it’s important for year on year carbon reporting to maintain consistency. For this reason, legacy reports won’t be automatically transferred into the new livestock calculation.
If you decide to use the new calculation method, this will improve the accuracy of your results. For the majority of reports it will also reduce emissions because most of the previous defaults were based on the highest emitting options in each category. The new options are considered “mitigation measures” allowing for a reduction in the assumed emissions of greenhouse gases compared to a conventional manure management method or livestock ration.
At the end of this blog, we have summarised a few examples of how a report might look with the simplified and more detailed methodologies.
Do I need to do anything?
If you are creating a new report, you will automatically be shown the new calculation methodology but if you don’t have enough information to hand, you can fall back to the simpler method. For existing reports, there a number of options available: you can either manually update each livestock entry or “Migrate” all entries within a report. We have a full guide to switching to the new calculation method:
The main change for livestock farms will be that you need to enter any manure or slurry spreading (whether imported or produced by your own animals) under the Crops > Organic Fertility Sources section of the Calculator (as pictured below).
What if I exported manure or slurry?
You need to account for any storage of manure and slurry on your own farm. So if it remains on farm for 1 month, you need to select the appropriate option for that livestock entry.
You do not need to account for the manure or slurry storage once it has left your farm. You do not need to account for the spreading of that manure on somebody else’s land.
What if I want to keep my report the same?
To ensure your original report remains unchanged, we would recommend locking it. You can do this by selecting your report from your dashboard and then selecting the “Lock” report button at the top right hand of the screen:
You can copy your report. Copying a report leaves the original report with the legacy data in the livestock section, but updates the copy of the report transferring the livestock into the new calculation method. To copy, find your report in your dashboard under “My Reports” and then click the copy icon for that report:
You could then directly compare these reports to see how emissions estimates have changed. We have aligned the old animal waste management options with the new manure storage options to allow this transfer, but some assumptions on systems have been made and we would encourage you to check the manure storage options to see if there is an option more relevant for your system.
Why does the Calculator keep changing?
Sometimes the calculations underlying your report change because of an improved understanding of biological systems or a re-interpretation of the available evidence. In a developing field like agricultural carbon footprinting, working with other organisations to make sense of the available evidence and international guidance within the UK context can help us identify areas where calculations can be improved. This is why we continue to seek pre-competitive collaborations with other companies and research organisations (to find out more about our projects and harmonisation work).
The rest of this blog will dig into some comparisons of what might change for different types of livestock.
We have focussed on the management practices that result in the biggest change in emissions compared to the simpler (old) methodology. The comparisons here include only enteric methane emissions and manure methane and nitrous oxide emissions; the areas that now have more detail in accounting for livestock. These comparisons do not include emissions embedded in the production of feedstuffs or bedding since these have not changed as a result of the recent methodology update.
Comparison 1 – dairy cattle, grass-based
In this example, emissions from 100 head of dairy cattle in each category in a 100% grass-based outdoor system are compared using the old and new methodology. Being able to take their detailed manure management and diet type into account with the new methodology would reduce livestock-related emission by 23.5% for dairy cows in this system.
Comparison 2 – sheep outdoor year round
Here we have used 100 head of each category of sheep, assuming 80kg mature weight and 30kg lamb average weight. Being able to take their detailed manure management and diet type into account with the new methodology slightly increases livestock-related emissions for ewes by 11.3% for example. Sheep are the only category of livestock for which the new detailed methodology shows an increase in emissions but it will not be the case for all sheep enterprises. The difference is dependent on manure management and diet of the flock in question.
Comparison 3 – 100% grass-fed beef
In this example, emissions from 100 head of each beef cattle category in a 100% grass-based outdoor system are compared using the old and new methodology. Being able to take detailed manure management and diet type into account with the new methodology would reduce livestock-related emission by 15.3% for beef suckler cows and 7.2% for beef finishing steers in this system, all else being equal.
Comparison 4 – beef cattle with different types of manure management
The following is a comparison of the same 100 beef cattle (all with the same liveweight of 450kg and assumed diet) but with 100% of their manure managed under the available options. This demonstrates the difference in emissions (for beef cattle) from the different manure management options. The magnitude of difference in emissions and management options available varies between different livestock types.
Recent Comments