The Role of Animal Agriculture in the Bioeconomy

1
The Role of Animal Agriculture in the Bioeconomy
Allen Trenkle Iowa State University
2
Historical Background of Biofuels

• Mid-80s
• Expansion of wet milling of corn producing
  high-fructose sugar
• Co-products mostly exported
• Established value of co-products as livestock
  feeds
• Cattle feeders wanted price related to price of
  corn
• Early-90s
• Interest in ethanol production from dry-grind
  plants
• Slow to develop in Iowa (Developed in MN, NE,
  SD)
• Established value of co-products as cattle feed
• Promoted integration of ethanol plants and
  cattle feeding
• First Iowa dry-grind plants coordinated with
  cattle production
• Late 2004 to present
• Rapid expansion of building ethanol plants
• Concentration of ownership of ethanol plants
• Co-products evolved as commodity feeds

3
Changes in Agriculture

• Animal power to tractors
• From growing fuel raised on farm to importing
  fuel
• 2. Crops Corn-Small grains-Meadow to less crop
  diversification
• Change to corn and soybeans
• Use of ag chemicals and external sources of
  energy
• Concentration of livestock into larger units
• All farms had livestock to few farms having
  livestock
• 3. Next change Production of biofuels
• Alter expectations of agriculture
• Alter cropping systems
• Alter investments in agriculture
• Role of livestock?
• The consequences of this change could be greater
  than
• past changes Is the livestock sector prepared?

4
Expectations of U. S. Agriculture

• Production of food Long-term mission
• High quality
• Safe
• Low cost
• 2. Production of biofuels New role
• Liquid fuels suitable for internal combustion
  engines
• Corn grain is predominant feedstock used for
  ethanol
• 3. Livestock production
• Expectations of society not clear
• Small vs. Large Location
• Source of capital
• Might begin moving off-shore

5
Use of Corn (2005-2006)
6
Ethanol Production in IowaDry-Grind Plants
aCould be feedlot (backgrounding, finish), beef
cows, dairy cows, replacement females. Based on
feeding 40 lbs wet DGS/d.
7
Influence of Biofuels on Livestock Production

• Competition for feedstock (starch cellulose)
• Impact on feed prices
• DGS has not helped to solve the problem
• Dry DGS is a commodity feed and can be moved
• Plants have dryers so wet DGS priced on dry
• Low energy value of dry DGS for monogastrics
• Develop corn designed for ethanol rather than
  feed
• High starch, lower protein, add amylase
• 2. Land values
• Cost of land
• Availability of land for grazing
• 3. Flow of nutrients
• Phosphorus (To some extent nitrogen)

8
Influence of Biofuels on Livestock Production

• 4. Effects of feeding DGS on animal health and
  performance
• Availability of amino acids
• Availability of energy
• Mycotoxins
• Antibiotics
• Sulfur (ruminants)
• High nitrogen intakes
• 5. Quality and safety of animal food products
• Effects of unsaturated oil
• 6. Competition for energy and water
• Natural gas also used by agriculture
• 3 to 6 gal water per gal ethanol livestock
• also use high volumes of water

9
Use of Biomass for Ethanol ProductionImplications
for Livestock Industries

• 1. No assurance more corn will be available for
  livestock
• Greater cost of producing ethanol from
  cellulose/hemicellulose
• Corn plants have been built Corn grain will
• continue to be used to produce ethanol
• Federal policy would have to direct change in use
• of corn grain
• Market forces will not cause a change
• 2. Supply of biomass
• Corn stover is current primary supply of biomass
  in Iowa
• Compete for a feed supply fed to cattle
• Develop perennial crop Switch grass
• Increase competition for use of land available
• for grazing or production of grain
• 3. No co-product is produced that has feed value
  for animals
• Maybe a protein fraction (Need energy to feed
  animals)

10
Possible Consequences of Biofuels

• 1. Livestock industries remain a competitor for
  feedstocks
• DGS remain a commodity
• Exacerbate the problems of agriculture
• October 12, 2007 A broad coalition of
  organizations representing
• animal agriculture urge congressional leaders to
  oppose
• increasing RFS for grain-based ethanol
• 2. Livestock industries coordinate with
  production of biofuels
• and address some of the issues being raised
• Food and fuel
• Net energy balance of producing biofuels
• Sustainability of biofuels production
• Economic
• Ecologic
• Rural economic development

11
Opportunities

• Pricing of DGS for livestock
• Establishing a price for livestock not simple
• Price relative to corn at a price beneficial to
  livestock
• and ethanol producers
• 2. Develop coordinated food and energy systems
• Produce food(s) and energy
• 3. Improve net energy balance of the coordinated
  system
• 4. Recycle nutrients
• Reduce energy inputs for agriculture production
• Reduce environmental impact of agriculture
• 5. Grow biofuels and livestock industries in Iowa

12
Integrated Livestock and Ethanol ProductionIowa

• Feed wet DGS
• Save energy for drying DGS
• Recycle water as wet DGS
• Benefits of Manure as Fertilizer
• Stop importing P K
• Reduce N imported
• Benefits of anaerobic digester
• Reduce use of natural gas
• Conserve manure nutrients
• Limitations
• Majority of feedlots not
• designed for this system
• Requires extensive
• coordination
• Anaerobic digesters not well
• developed

Corn Ethanol Fuel DGS
Feedlot Food CH4 Identified markets
Fertilizer Branded products
Manure Anaerobic Digester Future Use CO2
from ethanol digester Grow algae Synthetic
genomics synthetic cells
13
Beef Herd to Support Feedlots1000 Head Feedlot
Turned 2 x per Year
aCorrected for water intake from pasture.
14
Feeding Wet DGS Recycles WaterWet DGS (32 DM)

• Growing cattle fed 70 DGS, Feedlot cattle fed
  50
• Cows fed 50, Replacement heifers fed 60
• 1000 head feedlot (turned 2x per year)
• 10.78 mil lbs DGS DM fed per year
• 3.8 of output of 50 mgy ethanol
  plant
• Wet DGS would replace 2.75 mil gal water/yr
• 15.9 of water requirement of cattle
• Water use
• 50 mgy ethanol plant - 200 to 250 mgy water
• 26.5 beef units to use DGS from 50 mgy plant -
  460 mgy
• Feed wet DGS Recycle 29 to 36 of water
• used by ethanol plant

15
Integrating Cattle and Ethanol Improves Net
Energy Biofuel energy/Petroleum energy

• Based on EBAMM model
• University of California-Berkeley
• Benefits
• Reduce use of commercial nitrogen fertilizer
• Greater value of DGS
• Reduce use of natural gas
• Feed wet DGS
• Dependent on feeding high levels of wet DGS to
  cattle
• How much can be fed?

Cattle Cattle
Digester
16
Effects of Feeding Wet Distillers Grains on
Carcass Measurements Steers and HeifersFour
Experiments
Medium 20 or 28, high 40 wet DGS AOV ADG P
lt 0.04, Dress (P lt 0.05) Bonferroni t-test
No significance
17
Steers Fed Modified Wet Distillers Grains(52 DM)
Cattle 690 lb steers fed 186 days, implanted 2
x. Carcass value based on premiums and
discounts. DGS 52 DM.
18
Net Income Steers Fed Modified Wet DGS
Net income from feeding 690 lb steers a
corn-based diet or modified DGS. Net income
based on carcass value and related to price of
corn and DGS (as of corn price).
19
Steers and Heifers Fed Modified Wet DGS(52 DM)
aFed 120 days bFed 169 days. Control diet 86
corn and supplement, 10 corn silage, 4
tub-ground grass hay. One combination implant in
the cattle on day 1. DGS 52 DM.
20
Steers and Heifers Fed Modified Wet DGS
Carcass value based on premiums and discounts.
21
Net Income Heifers Fed Modified Wet DGS
Net income from feeding 725 lb heifers a
corn-based diet or modified DGS. Net income
based on carcass value and related to price of
corn and DGS (as of corn price).
22
Net Income Steers Fed Modified Wet DGS
Net income from feeding 830 lb steers fed a
corn-based diet or modified DGS. Net income
based on carcass value and related to price of
corn and DGS (as of corn price).
23
Steers and Heifers Fed Wet DGS (32 DM)2007
Experiment (Preliminary data at 84 days)
Control diet 86 corn and supplement, 10 corn
silage, 4 tub ground grass hay. One combination
implant in the cattle on day 1.
24
Conclusions

• High levels of wet DGS can be fed to cattle
• Up to 60 of dry matter intake
• Satisfactory performance of the cattle can be
  maintained
• Effects on carcass quality can be managed
• Feeding high levels of DGS seems to decrease
  marbling to some extent
• Wet DGS can be priced relative to corn grain
• Price should be less than corn grain on a dry
  basis
• Provide economic incentive to cattle producers
• Need to allow economic return to ethanol plant
  for co-product

25
Implications

• Integrating livestock with production of biofuels
• addresses many of the concerns being
  expressed
• Energy obtained from petroleum energy invested
• Food production/price
• Sustainability environmental/economic
• Rural development
• Water conservation