Thinking climate protection globally – The example of beef

In Germany, cattle for fattening mainly originate from dairy farming. Their finishing takes place in barns based on a feed ratio of silage maize, concentrated feed and grains. National production is declining: since 2015, Germany has been a net importer of beef. Besides Europe, South America is the most important region of origin for imported beef.

In Brazil, cattle are grazed all year round and come almost exclusively from suckler cow production. The country has the world’s largest cattle population and is the most important exporter of beef with an increasing export volume. Nevertheless, 80% of the beef produced is consumed domestically.

Profitability and emissions in comparison

Research conducted by the Thünen Institute in the worldwide agri benchmark network yielded interesting results. In 2021, the production of a kilogramme of beef cost about €2.80 in Brazil and about €4.10 in Germany. However, the differences in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are even greater, and this calculation is in favour of Germany.

The sum of emissions from digestion, farm manure management and feed production, converted into CO₂ equivalents (CO_2eq), is about 27 kg CO_2eq per kg beef in a typical beef finishing operation in Brazil, and only about 8 kg CO_2eq in a typical conventional finishing operation in Germany. One of the main reasons for this big difference is that the slow-growing cattle in Brazil produce much higher methane emissions per kilogram of beef. In the classic pasture fattening system, only the grass growth and additional minerals are available to the animals. The seasonal variation in pasture growth and the prevailing pasture management limit the finishing performance.

Possible strategies to mitigate emissions

The key to reducing GHG emissions and increasing productivity in the Brazilian system lies in pasture management, or more precisely, in subdividing huge areas of pasture into smaller plots. Higher-performing grass varieties are then used on these plots, and the cattle are moved to a fresh plot at regular intervals. This change favours feed intake as well as feed conversion and ultimately leads to faster growth of the animals. Sometimes even silvopastoral grazing systems are introduced, which make additional contributions to climate protection and climate adaptation. By combining such measures, GHG emissions per kilogramme of meat can be almost halved. In addition, the total cost per kg of beef is reduced.

IIn German beef finishing, it is mainly technical solutions that are available for GHG reduction, such as covering slurry tanks, improved spreading technology and methane inhibiting additives in feeding and slurry storage. These measures are comparatively expensive and have no positive effects on animal performance.

However, GHG emissions per kilogramme of beef are still significantly higher in improved Brazilian pasture finishing systems than from German production. This is also due to the fact that beef in Germany is mainly a by-product of milk. In Brazil, on the contrary, it comes primarily from suckler cow husbandry. In the GHG balance, the emissions from the suckler cow herd have to be fully attributed to beef, whereas in German systems a large share is attributed to the milk produced.

There are several reasons why the current practice in Brazil is being changed only hesitantly: Existing practices are profitable, at least in the short term. The necessary knowledge to switch to new land use and fattening systems is lacking. Rising variable costs mean additional financial risk. Access to capital is lacking or not very attractive. In addition, there are no climate policy incentives in Brazil or Germany that would make improving the GHG balance economically lucrative for farms.