The importance of including soil carbon changes, ecotoxicity and biodiversity impacts in environmental life cycle assessments of organic and conventional milk in Western Europe
Open accessThe claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Existing studies generally determine one single value, calculated as the sum of annual GHG emissions minus CO2 removal by soil C-sequestration.
“To explore the potential for SOC increases to mitigate climate change, existing studies generally determine one single value, calculated as the sum of annual GHG emissions minus CO2 removal by soil C-sequestration11,16.”
From Risk to rely on soil carbon sequestration to offset global ruminant emissions (2023) · cites this paper as [16]
In “Soil carbon changes” (page unavailable), the paper includes soil carbon changes in its climate-change result and reports that they reduce the carbon footprint by 5–18%. This supports combining emissions and sequestration in a net result, but the paper does not establish that existing studies generally calculate a single value by directly subtracting annual CO₂ removal from annual GHG emissions; its own method models the longer-term effects of one year’s carbon input. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredSimilar effects have been observed in studies in climates similar to Sweden: Alemu et al. (2017) reduced emissions by 12-25% (beef system, western Canada), while Trydeman Knudsen et al. (2019) decreased emissions by 5-18% (dairy systems, western Europe).
“Similar effects have been observed in studies in climates similar to Sweden.In a study by Alemu et al. (2017), emissions were reduced by 12-25% (beef system, western Canada), while in a study by Trydeman Knudsen et al. (2019) emissions were decreased by 5-18% (dairy systems, western Europe).”
From Time-dependent climate impact of beef production – can carbon sequestration in soil offset enteric methane emissions? (2022) · cites this paper as Trydeman Knudsen et al. (2019)
The Soil carbon changes section reports a 5–18% reduction in the calculated carbon footprint of Western European dairy systems when soil carbon changes are included. It does not report a 5–18% decrease in the systems’ emissions themselves; that distinction limits support for the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIf sequestration of carbon in soils is accounted for, extensive systems can show more favourable results, since growing grass leys or using grassland for livestock diets often leads to higher sequestration rates than annual cropping.
“However, if sequestration of carbon in soils is accounted for, extensive systems can show more favourable results, since growing grass leys or using grassland for livestock diets often leads to higher sequestration rates than annual cropping (Trydeman Knudsen et al., 2019;Alemu et al., 2017).”
From Time-dependent climate impact of beef production – can carbon sequestration in soil offset enteric methane emissions? (2022) · cites this paper as Trydeman Knudsen et al., 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Baldini, C., Gardoni, D., Guarino, M., 2017. A critical review of the recent evolution of Life Cycle Assessment applied to milk production. J Clean. Prod. 140, 421-435.
- Chaudhary, A., Verones, F., de Baan, L., Hellweg, S., 2015. Quantifying land use impacts on biodiversity: combining species -area models and vulnerability indicators. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015 (49), 9987-9995.
- De Baan, L., Alkemade, R., Koellner, T., 2013. Land use impacts on biodiversity in LCA: a global approach. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18 (6), 1216-1230.
- EEA, 2007. EMEP/CORINAIR Emission inventory guidebook -3rd edition. 2007 Update. Technical report no. 30. Environmental European Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2374 pp.
- Felsot, A.S., Unsworth, J.B., Linders, J.B.H.J., Roberts, G., Rautman, D., Harris, C., Carazo, E., 2010. Agrochemical spray drift; assessment and mitigation-A review. J. Environ. Sci. Heal. Part B 46, 1-23.
- Gattinger, A., Muller, A., Haeni, M., Skinner, C., Fliessbach, A., Buchmann, N., Mäder, P., Stolze, M., Smith, P., Scialabba, N.E.-H., Niggli, U., 2012. Enhanced top soil carbon stocks under organic farming. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109, 18226- 18231.
- Hauschild, M (2005). Assessing environmental impacts in a life cycle perspective. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39 (4), 81A-88A.
- Hörtenhuber, S., Lindenthal, T., Amon, B., Markut, T., Kirner, L., Zollitsch, W., 2010. Greenhouse gas emissions from selected Austrian dairy production systems-model calculations considering the effects of land use change. Renew. Agr. Food Syst. 25(4), 316-329.
- Kristensen, I.S., Halberg, N., Nielsen, A.H., Dalgaard, R., 2005. N-turnover on Danish mixed farms. Part II, in Bos, J., Pflimlin, A., Aarts, F., Vertes, F., (Eds), Nutrient management on farm scale. How to attain policy objectives in regions with intensive dairy farming. Report of the first workshop of the EGF Workshop. http://agrsci.dk/var/agrsci/storage/original/application/21bf0ab8f732a82cffed895192 1067d6.pdf
- Meier, M.S., Stoessel, F., Jungbluth, N., Juraske, R., Schader, C., Stolze, M., 2015. Environmental impacts of organic and conventional agricultural products-Are the differences captured by life cycle assessment? Journal of Environmental Management 149, 193-208.
- Mueller, C., de Baan, L., Koellner, T., 2014. Comparing direct land use impacts on biodiversity of conventional and organic milk -based on a Swedish case study. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 19 (1), 52-68.
- Parajuli, R., Kristensen, I.S., Knudsen, M.T., Mogensen, L., Corona, A., Birkved, M., Dalgaard, T., 2017. Environmental life cycle assessments of producing maize, grass- clover, ryegrass and winter wheat straw for biorefinery. J. Clean. Prod. 142(4), 3859-3871.
- Rosenbaum, R., Anton, A., Bengoa, X., Bjørn, A., Brain, R., Bulle, C., Cosme, N., Dijkman, T.J., et al. 2015. The Glasgow consensus on the delineation between pesticide emission inventory and impact assessment for LCA. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 20, 765-776.
- Tuck, S.L.,Winqvist, C., Mota, F., Ahnstrom, J., Turnbull, L.A., Bengtsson, J., 2014. Land-use intensity and the effects of organic farming on biodiversity: a hierarchical meta-analysis. J. Appl. Ecol. 51 (3), 746-755.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Risk to rely on soil carbon sequestration to offset global ruminant emissions
Wang, Y., de Boer, I. J. M., Persson, U. M., Ripoll-Bosch, R., Cederberg, C., Gerber, P. J., Smith, P., & van Middelaar, C. E. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-43452-3 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Hammar, T., Hansson, P.-A., & Röös, E. (2022) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129948 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
- Authors
- Knudsen, M. T., Dorca-Preda, T., Djomo, S. N., Peña, N., Padel, S., Smith, L. G., Zollitsch, W., Hörtenhuber, S., & Hermansen, J. E.
- Affiliations
- Aarhus University (DK)
- Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (ES)
- Organic Research Centre (GB)
- BOKU University (AT)
- Corresponding author
- Knudsen, Marie Trydeman
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Cleaner Production
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-04
- Volume
- 215
- Pages
- 433-443
- ISSN
- 0959-6526 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2907472266
- Cited by
- 110
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 4.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of Cleaner Production (publishedVersion)
- IRTA (Institut de Recerca i Tecnologia Agroalimentaries) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- European Community financial participation under the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7-KBBE.2010.1.2-02)
- Sustainable Organic Low-Input Dairying (266367)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
- Keywords
- organic milk, soil carbon change, soil carbon sequestration, biodiversity impacts, freshwater ecotoxicity, resource depletion, global warming potential, eutrophication, acidification, mixed farming, organic vs conventional comparison
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
