Carbon hoofprint: Cows supplemented with rbST reduce agriculture's environmental impact

Jun 30, 2008

Milk goes green: Cows that receive recombinant Bovine Somatotropin (rbST) make more milk, all the while easing natural resource pressure and substantially reducing environmental impact, according to a Cornell University study to be published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (June 30, 2008.)

Producing milk uses large quantities of land, energy and feed, but rbST – the first biotech product used on American farms — has been in agricultural use for nearly 15 years. Now it is found to reduce the carbon hoofprint by easing energy, land and nutritional inputs necessary to sustain milk production at levels sufficient to meet demand.

This research found that, compared to a non-supplemented population, giving rbST to one million cows would enable the same amount of milk to be produced using 157,000 fewer cows. The nutrient savings would be 491,000 metric tons of corn, 158,000 metric tons of soybeans, and total feedstuffs would be reduced by 2,300,000 metric tons. Producers could reduce cropland use by 219,000 hectares and reduce 2.3 million tons of soil erosion annually.

In 2007, there were 9.2 million cows in the United States. For every one million cows supplemented with rbST, the world would see an environmental saving of 824 million kilograms of carbon dioxide, 41 million kilograms of methane and 96,000 kilograms of nitrous oxide. For every one million cows supplemented with rbST, the reduction in the carbon footprint is equivalent to removing approximately 400,000 family cars from the road or planting 300 million trees.

"Supplementing cows with rbST on an industry-wide scale would improve sustainability and reduce the dairy industry's contribution to water acidification, algal growth, and global warming," says Judith L. Capper, Cornell post-doctoral researcher, and the lead author of "The Environmental Impact of Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin (rbST) Use in Dairy Production," PNAS.

Joining Capper on the paper: Dale E. Bauman, Cornell professor of animal science and the corresponding author; Euridice Castaneda-Gutierrez, former Cornell post-doctoral researcher; and Roger A. Cady, of Monsanto, St. Louis. Cornell funded the research.

"Sustainability is important in agricultural production, with an emphasis placed upon meeting human food requirements while mitigating environmental impact," said Bauman. "This study demonstrates that use of rbST markedly improves the efficiency of milk production, mitigates environmental impact including greenhouse gas emissions and reduces natural resource requirements such as fossil fuel, water and land use."

Source: Cornell University

Explore further: Study urges 15-year plan for low-carbon growth

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Recommended for you

Study urges 15-year plan for low-carbon growth

57 minutes ago

The world can save both financial and environmental costs by shifting toward a low-carbon economy over the next 15 years, a high-level panel said Tuesday ahead of a UN summit.

Specialized species critical for reefs

12 hours ago

One of Australia's leading coral reef ecologists fears that reef biodiversity may not provide the level of insurance for ecosystem survival that we once thought.

Projections for climate change in Vermont

18 hours ago

Here's your northern Vermont forecast for the rest of this century: Annual precipitation will increase by between a third and half an inch per decade, while average temperatures will rise some five degrees ...

User comments : 3

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Corvidae
3.5 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2008
So dairy farmers are going to decide to use smaller herds with more productive cows rather than keeping the same size herd to produce more milk?

And if you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you in Minneapolis.
tadowguy
1.3 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2008
Monsanto has given up on convincing consumers that rBST is safe for consumption (as more and more reject it), so now they claim it's green? What a crock. Cornell should be ashamed of this study.
albert
1 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2008
Definitely a propaganda piece for agri-business. I say 'NO!' to rbgh (rbst). Why do you think 60% of America is overweight? Make the cows fat with a hormone and the milk/meat is contaminated with it also. This article makes me want to puke.