Determination of Environmental Impacts of Different Improvement Methods Applied in a Natural Rangeland Using Life Cycle Assessment

Abstract

Besides being of great importance for livestock, rangelands are also very valuable natural areas for the ecosystem. The planning and execution of activities to be carried out in such areas with a multidimensional evaluation can facilitate us to ensure their social, economic and ecological sustainability. However, rangelands have a proportionally significant share in terrestrial areas. Improvement practices in such large areas are also large-scale activities that can affect the health and sustainability of the entire ecosystem. Life cycle assessment is a widely used method that allows us to cumulatively assess the environmental impacts that occur throughout the production process. In this study, with life cycle assessment, it was aimed to determine and compare the environmental impacts of the practices based on the results of a improvement experiment conducted in a rangeland abandoned by plowing 30 years ago in Samsun province. The treatments of Aeration (H), barn manure application (AG), chemical fertilizer application (SG), aeration + barn manure application (HAG) and aeration + chemical fertilizer applications (HSG) were evaluated using functional units of one ton of hay and one ton of protein yield. As a result of the life cycle assessment, it was observed that for one ton of dry grass functional unit, the treatments causing the highest environmental burden were SG and HSG, while the treatments causing the lowest environmental burden were AG and H, respectively. It was determined that the highest environmental load for a ton of protein functional unit was HSG and SG, and the lowest environmental load was in AG and H, respectively. It was concluded that the use of chemical fertilizers in rangeland improvement practices caused a very high environmental load per unit output, and that the use of chemical fertilizers should be evaluated very carefully in the improvement processes to be carried out. It was evaluated that it would be more appropriate to prioritize methods such as grazing control, cutting, aeration for improvement, and to compensate for plant nutrient deficiencies with barn manure.