1. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R Queensland University of Technology CRICOS No. 00213J Beverley Henry, Queensland University of Technology Stephen Wiedemann, FSA Consulting Tom Davison, Meat and Livestock Australia Managing greenhouse gas intensity and resource use for beef cattle in Australia

2. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R Results of an Australian beef LCA 1981-2010 PRODUCTION: 52% increase in total beef produced from 1981 to 2010. WATER: 65% reduction in water use from 1981 to 2010 (1465 to 515 L/ kg LW). ENERGY: 75% i ncrease in fossil fuel energy demand from 1981 to 2010 (6.3 to 11 MJ/kg LW). LAND: 700% increase in arable land occupation (0.2 – 1.7Mha) 19% decrease in non-arable land (from 57% to 46% of Australia’s total area) CLIMATE CHANGE: 14% decrease in GHG intensity (excluding LUC) from 1981 to 2010 (15.3 to13.1 kg CO2e/ kg LW) ~41% decline in net LUC GHG emissions for beef.

3. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R Interpreting the results for Australian beef Challenges: Data & Methodology: Non-uniform variations in data availability and quality; methods? eg land use Context and reasons for changes: Management and natural factors interact in complex ways

4. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R Tropical Temperate Environmental context for Australian beef Distance, arid/semi-arid rangelands, nutrient-poor soils Based on a standard 30-year climatology (1961-1990) BoM Source: BoM & MLA

5. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R Beef production LCA beef regions Understanding development of the industry Expansion of pastoralism

6. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R Water use for beef production 1981-2010 65% reduction in consumptive water use (1465 L/ kg LW in 1981 to 515 L / kg LW in 2010). 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2010 Fresh water consumption (L per kg LW)

7. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R Fossil fuel energy demand for beef production Fossil fuel energy demand increased by 75% 1981-2010 (6.3 to 11 MJ/kg LW). 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2010 Energy demand (MJ per kg LW)

8. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R LAND: 700% increase in arable land occupation (0.2 – 1.7Mha) 19% decrease in non-arable land (from 57% to 46% of Australia’s total area) Land occupation for beef production 19% decrease in non-arable land (57% to 46% of Australia’s total area of 7.7 M km 2 ) 1981-1985 2006-2010 7-fold increase in arable land use (0.2 – 1.7Mha)

9. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R GHG emissions intensity 41% decrease in net LUC emissions for beef (higher uncertainty) 14% decrease in GHG intensity (exclu LUC) GHG emissions (kg CO 2 -e per kg LW) Examples of production changes Carcase weight increased by 13.5% Mortality rates down from 4.0% to 2.7% Weaning rates showed little change

10. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R Carbon credit incentives = opportunities?? Notes: Values for total over the crediting period and maximum carbon abatement contract duration, e.g. 7 yrs for Herd Management Method Expenses include reporting and auditing but not capital expenditure or non-carbon revenue impacts. Analysis identified the best opportunities for Australian beef producers as:  Herd Management for backgrounding operations when large (>30,000 AE) [to minimise compliance costs per credit unit]  Nitrates where high level supplementation given to more cattle (>50,000 AE)  Savannah burning projects in non-productive [high rainfall >1000mm] pastoral areas with recurring late dry season wildfires  Native forest projects [Avoided tree clearing and managed native regrowth] variable potential depending on scale and site productivity Analysis of opportunities for income from GHG mitigation in Australia’s Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF)

11. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R Summary LCA results for Australia’s beef industry generally show:  positive trend in resource use efficiency;  negative trend in emissions intensity. Consistency in data quality/completeness and methodology is a challenge! Producers are already making changes mostly for productivity and profitability but are improving environmental outcomes. Future gains will benefit from new technologies but be challenged by climate variability/change. Opportunities for income from carbon credits exist, but magnitude and direction depend on scale and admin costs. Good record keeping is critical.

12. CRICOS No. 00213J a university for the world real R THANK YOU beverley.henry@qut.edu.au We gratefully acknowledge MLA for financial support for the LCA study and leadership in the ERF analysis; QUT for support for the LCA study; Phil Cohn for financial analysis of ERF opportunities