An evaluation of carbon offset supplementation options for beef production systems on coastal speargrass in central Queensland, Australia

In 2014, the Australian Government implemented the Emissions Reduction Fund to offer incentives for businesses to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by following approved methods. Beef cattle businesses in northern Australia can participate by applying the 'reducing GHG emissions by feeding nitrates to beef cattle' methodology and the 'beef cattle herd management' methods. The nitrate (NO3) method requires that each baseline area must demonstrate a history of urea use. Projects earn Australian carbon credit units (ACCU) for reducing enteric methane emissions by substituting NO3 for urea at the same amount of fed nitrogen. NO3 must be fed in the form of a lick block because most operations do not have labour or equipment to manage daily supplementation. NO3 concentrations, after a 2-week adaptation period, must not exceed 50 g NO3/adult animal equivalent per day or 7 g NO3/kg dry matter intake per day to reduce the risk of NO3 toxicity. There is also a 'beef cattle herd management' method, approved in 2015, that covers activities that improve the herd emission intensity (emissions per unit of product sold) through change in the diet or management. The present study was conducted to compare the required ACCU or supplement prices for a 2% return on capital when feeding a low or high supplement concentration to breeding stock of either (1) urea, (2) three different forms of NO3 or (3) cottonseed meal (CSM), at N concentrations equivalent to 25 or 50 g urea/animal equivalent, to fasten steer entry to a feedlot (backgrounding), in a typical breeder herd on the coastal speargrass land types in central Queensland. Monte Carlo simulations were run using the software @risk, with probability functions used for (1) urea, NO3 and CSM prices, (2) GHG mitigation, (3) livestock prices and (4) carbon price. Increasing the weight of steers at a set turnoff month by feeding CSM was found to be the most cost-effective option, with or without including the offset income. The required ACCU prices for a 2% return on capital were an order of magnitude higher than were indicative carbon prices in 2015 for the three forms of NO3. The likely costs of participating in ERF projects would reduce the return on capital for all mitigation options. © CSIRO 2016.

The effect of earlier mating and improving fertility on greenhouse gas emissions intensity of beef production in northern Australian herds

Approximately 5% of Australian national greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are derived from the northern beef industry. Improving the reproductive performance of cows has been identified as a key target for increasing profitability, and this higher efficiency is also likely to reduce the GHG emissions intensity of beef production. The effects of strategies to increase the fertility of breeding herds and earlier joining of heifers as yearlings were studied on two properties at Longreach and Boulia in western Queensland. The beef production, GHG emissions, emissions intensity and profitability were investigated and compared with typical management in the two regions. Overall weaning rates achieved on the two properties were 79% and 74% compared with typical herd weaning rates of 58% in both regions. Herds with high reproductive performance had GHG emissions intensities (t CO2-e t–1 liveweight sold) 28% and 22% lower than the typical herds at Longreach and Boulia, with most of the benefit from higher weaning rates. Farm gross margin analysis showed that it was more profitable, by $62 000 at Longreach and $38 000 at Boulia, to utilise higher reproductive performance to increase the amount of liveweight sold with the same number of adult equivalents compared with reducing the number of adult equivalents to maintain the same level of liveweight sold and claiming a carbon credit for lower farm emissions. These gains achieved at two case study properties which had different rainfall, country types, and property sizes suggest similar improvements can be made on-farm across the Mitchell Grass Downs bioregion of northern Australia.

Down scaling to regional assessment of greenhouse gas emissions to enable consistency in accounting for emissions reduction projects and national inventory accounts for northern beef production in Australia

This paper explores the effect of using regional data for livestock attributes on estimation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the northern beef industry in Australia, compared with using state/territory-wide values, as currently used in Australia’s national GHG inventory report. Regional GHG emissions associated with beef production are reported for 21 defined agricultural statistical regions within state/territory jurisdictions. A management scenario for reduced emissions that could qualify as an Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) project was used to illustrate the effect of regional level model parameters on estimated abatement levels. Using regional parameters, instead of state level parameters, for liveweight (LW), LW gain and proportion of cows lactating and an expanded number of livestock classes, gives a 5.2% reduction in estimated emissions (range +12% to –34% across regions). Estimated GHG emissions intensity (emissions per kilogram of LW sold) varied across the regions by up to 2.5-fold, ranging from 10.5 kg CO2-e kg–1 LW sold for Darling Downs, Queensland, through to 25.8 kg CO2-e kg–1 LW sold for the Pindan and North Kimberley, Western Australia. This range was driven by differences in production efficiency, reproduction rate, growth rate and survival. This suggests that some regions in northern Australia are likely to have substantial opportunities for GHG abatement and higher livestock income. However, this must be coupled with the availability of management activities that can be implemented to improve production efficiency; wet season phosphorus (P) supplementation being one such practice. An ERF case study comparison showed that P supplementation of a typical-sized herd produced an estimated reduction of 622 t CO2-e year–1, or 7%, compared with a non-P supplemented herd. However, the different model parameters used by the National Inventory Report and ERF project means that there was an anomaly between the herd emissions for project cattle excised from the national accounts (13 479 t CO2-e year–1) and the baseline herd emissions estimated for the ERF project (8 896 t CO2-e year–1) before P supplementation was implemented. Regionalising livestock model parameters in both ERF projects and the national accounts offers the attraction of being able to more easily and accurately reflect emissions savings from this type of emissions reduction project in Australia’s national GHG accounts.

Implications of retaining woody regrowth for carbon sequestration for an extensive grazing beef business: a bio-economic modelling case study

A bio-economic modelling framework (GRASP-ENTERPRISE) was used to assess the implications of retaining woody regrowth for carbon sequestration on a case study beef grazing property in northern Australia. Five carbon farming scenarios, ranging from 0% to 100% of the property regrowth retained for carbon sequestration, were simulated over a 20-year period (1993–2012). Dedicating regrowth on the property for carbon sequestration reduced pasture (up to 40%) and herd productivity (up to 20%), and resulted in financial losses (up to 24% reduction in total gross margin). A net carbon income (income after grazing management expenses are removed) of $2–4 per t CO2-e was required to offset economic losses of retaining regrowth on a moderately productive (~8 ha adult equivalent–1) property where income was from the sale of weaners. A higher opportunity cost ($ t–1 CO2-e) of retaining woody regrowth is likely for feeder steer or finishing operations, with improved cattle prices, and where the substantial transaction and reporting costs are included. Although uncertainty remains around the price received for carbon farming activities, this study demonstrated that a conservatively stocked breeding operation can achieve positive production, environmental and economic outcomes, including net carbon stock. This study was based on a beef enterprise in central Queensland’s grazing lands, however, the approach and learnings are expected to be applicable across northern Australia where regrowth is present.

Rangeland profitability in the northern Gulf region of Queensland: understanding beef business complexity and the subsequent impact on land resource management and environmental outcomes

The farm-gate value of extensive beef production from the northern Gulf region of Queensland, Australia, is ~$150 million annually. Poor profitability and declining equity are common issues for most beef businesses in the region. The beef industry relies primarily on native pasture systems and studies continue to report a decline in the condition and productivity of important land types in the region. Governments and Natural Resource Management groups are investing significant resources to restore landscape health and productivity. Fundamental community expectations also include broader environmental outcomes such as reducing beef industry greenhouse gas emissions. Whole-of-business analysis results are presented from 18 extensive beef businesses (producers) to highlight the complex social and economic drivers of management decisions that impact on the natural resource and environment. Business analysis activities also focussed on improving enterprise performance. Profitability, herd performance and greenhouse emission benchmarks are documented and discussed.

Comparing fixed and flexible stocking as adaptations to inter-annual rainfall variability in the extensive beef industry of northern Australia

Many beef producers within the extensive cattle industry of northern Australia attempt to maintain a constant herd size from year-to-year (fixed stocking), whereas others adjust stock numbers to varying degrees annually in response to changes in forage supply. The effects of these strategies on pasture condition and cattle productivity cannot easily be assessed by grazing trials. Simulation studies, which include feedbacks of changes to pasture condition on cattle liveweight gain, can extend the results of grazing trials both spatially and temporally. They can compare a large number of strategies, over long periods of time, for a range of climate periods, at locations which differ markedly in climate. This simulation study compared the pasture condition and cattle productivity achieved by fixed stocking at the long-term carrying capacity with that of 55 flexible stocking strategies at 28 locations across Queensland and the Northern Territory. Flexible stocking strategies differed markedly in the degree they increased or decreased cattle stocking rates after good and poor pasture growing seasons, respectively. The 28 locations covered the full range in average annual rainfall and inter-annual rainfall variability experienced across northern Australia. Constrained flexibility, which limited increases in stocking rates after good growing seasons to 10% but decreased them by up to 20% after poor growing seasons, provides sustainable productivity gains for cattle producers in northern Australia. This strategy can improve pasture condition and increase cattle productivity relative to fixed stocking at the long-term carrying capacity, and its capacity to do this was greatest in the semiarid rangeland regions that contain the majority of beef cattle in northern Australia. More flexible stocking strategies, which also increased stocking rates after good growing seasons by only half as much as they decreased them after poor growing seasons, were equally sustainable and more productive than constrained flexibility, but are often impractical at property and industry scales. Strategies with the highest limits (e.g. 70%) for both annual increases and decreases in stocking rates could achieve higher cattle productivity, but this was at the expense of pasture condition and was not sustainable. Constrained flexible stocking, with a 10% limit for increases and a 20% limit for decreases in stocking rates annually, is a risk-averse adaptation to high and unpredictable rainfall variability for the extensive beef industry of northern Australia. © Australian Rangeland Society 2016.