J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J. Anim Sci. 1980. 50:360-366.
© 1980 American Society of Animal Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Forster, D. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Forster, D. L.

Economic Comparisons of Alternative Waste Management Systems for Swine and Dairy Cattle1

D. Lynn Forster2

Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center and The Ohio State University, Columbus 43210

Abstract

A number of dairy and swine systems are analyzed by comparing the monetary benefits and costs of each system. These results are part of a larger study that describes and evaluates waste management systems for all major livestock species. Benefits from livestock waste are derived from the nutrients available and used for plant growth. The methods used to collect, store, transport and spread the waste affect these benefits. Costs include all fixed and variable costs of the waste management system, which also vary by the system used. Results indicate that strong economies of size are present with most dairy and swine waste systems. Small livestock producers are at a strong economic disadvantage because of these economies of size. Open lot systems compare favorably to confinement systems. However, costly runoff control components may be required for open lot systems. Runoff control by grass infiltration is a much less costly alternative than runoff control by the settling basin, detention pond and irrigation system. Storage of manure is costly. However, part of these higher costs may be mitigated by using plowdown rather than surface spreading. Finally, recommendations can be made about the "best" waste management system only by closely analyzing individual farm situations. Net system costs are nearly the same for a number of waste management systems. Thus, recommendations should be made by recognizing the existing system and analyzing the monetary costs and benefits as well as the expected environmental improvements resulting from a range of possible changes.

Footnotes

1 Presented at the Joint 70th Annu. Meet, of the ASAS and 73rd Annu. Meet, of the ADSA, Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, July 12, 1978, as part of a symposium on Management and Utilization of Animal Waste. The symposium was sponsored by the Animal Waste Management Program Committee, ASAS, with financial assistance from the US Environmental Protection Agency and from the US Food and Drug Administration.

2 Associate Professor, Dept. of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1980 by the American Society of Animal Science.