Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.

UCSD - GPS CASE 16 - 01

US LIVESTOCK PRODUCER
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONSMANAGEMENT AND
UNDERREPORTING
By: Katie Cafouros

School of Global Policy and Strategy, UC at San Diego
Prepared for Professor Peter Gourevitch
Course on Corporate Social Responsibility
Winter 2016

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
US LIVESTOCK PRODUCER GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS MANAGEMENTAND UNDERREPORTINGI.

AREA OF SOCIAL CONCERN
The United States (US) Livestock Producer Industry is not reporting greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions associated with the management of livestock. A study in 2013 made up of
researchers from Harvard, Stanford, and NOAA determined that the US is underreporting its
national greenhouse gas emissions to the UN by 4% as a direct result of Congress not requiring
the EPA to collect emissions data from livestock producers, which includes the meat and dairy
industry. The three major greenhouse gas emissions from the livestock producer sector include
methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O) an carbon dioxide (CO2)1.
In December 2015, Congress renewed a legislation under the US Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2014 that prevents the EPA from requiring emissions reports fromlivestock producers, despite requiring this data from 41 other sectors. Furthermore, recent
amendments made to the cut EPA funding from FY2014 levels. Therefore, WH Group has little
incentive to change management practices of their subsidiaries, like Smithfield Foods, in aneffort to reduce emissions. However, efficiencies can be gained by implementing management
practices that reduce GHG emissions and will reduce operating costs over time. It is therefore
argued that WH Group and their subsidiary Smithfield Foods should implement emissions
reduction technologies and effectively monitor and report these efficiencies and reductions toencourage competitors in the industry to follow suit, and pressure government to enact policies
to support these changes.
In addition to the omission of greenhouse gas reporting from the livestock producer
sector, there are disincentives for operators to implement emission reduction technologies such1

http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3437e/i3437e00.htm

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
as methane capture systems which then convert waste methane to energy. Utilizing a methane
capture system for electricity generation would result in significant reduction emissions throughpreventing the release to atmosphere as well as from reusing the methane to generate electricity
thereby not using fossil fuels to run generators or energy from the grid. However, by doing so
this would then trigger climate change regulations, opening livestock up to additional fees
associated with compliance and reporting. By doing nothing, they avoid these EPA greenhousegas rules.
This is a highly political issue as politicians and even most environmental groups fear
public backlash against the US meat-loving diet. Despite increasing consumer awareness andlocalized shifts toward veganism, global demand for livestock products is projected to at least
double by 2050. Scientists report that changing the US food system will have a quicker impact
on slowing climate change than altering fossil fuel consumption2. Production of animal-source
foods, particularly ruminant animals such as cattle, can increase global greenhouse gas emissions
and have a larger carbon footprint than vegetarian diets, as shown below.

Figure 1: Lifecycle GHG emissions (CO2eq) for 22 different food types

2

https://www.revealnews.org/article/us-gives-meat-producers-a-pass-on-climate-change-emissions/Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.

Source: Tilman, David and Michael Clark. “Global Diets Link Environmental Sustainabilityand Human Health”. Nature vol 515 pp 518-522. November 27, 2014.
A study in the journal Nature has shown that if current global dietary trends continue
unchecked, greenhouse gases from the agriculture sector could grow an estimated 80% fromfood production and land clearing, this is the equivalent of the 2010 global transportation
emissions. The study also reported that meats from ruminants have 250 times the emissions perCopyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
gram of protein than legume3. If meat consumption decreased and the global diet became theaverage of the Mediterranean, pescetarian and vegetarian diets shown in Figure 1, there would be
no net increase in food production emissions (Tilman 2014).
Methane from cattle accounts for 20% of greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultureindustry. Emissions are generated from the cattle’s enteric fermentation and farm operator’s
management of liquid manure4.

Enteric fermentation and emissions refer to the methane

released from an animal through the digestive process in breaking down carbohydrates5.
According to current research, US Agriculture industry accounts for 9% of US emissions in2013. However, as indicated in the Harvard et al study above, this is an inaccurate proportiondue to underreporting from the agriculture industry.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Economic Sector
GlobalUnited States

Source: IPCC (2014); based on global emissions from 2010
Source: US EPA Sources of GHG emissions –link3

Tilman, David and Michael Clark. “Global Diets Link Environmental Sustainability and Human Health”. Nature
vol 515 pp 518-522. November 27, 2014.
4
VanderZaag, A.C. et al. “Measuring Methane Emissions from Two Diary Farms: Seasonal and ManureManagement Effects”. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology: Oxford. 2014.
5https://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/ch14/final/c14s04.pdf

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
The accuracy of this data is being debated due to the fact that the EPA does not collectemissions date from livestock producers under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, which isthen submitted to the United Nations under the Framework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCC). The UNFCC requires emission data from livestock and manure management as
outlined in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Agriculture,
Forestry and Other Land Use6. In the 2014 Climate Action Report provided by the US to the
UNFCC, agriculture sector emissions are reported however, this does not include data fromlivestock producers following the 2008 ban on EPA from collecting emissions reports from the
US livestock industry, which was recently renewed in December 2015. In a prospectus topotential investors, WH Group reported that the company has never filed a greenhouse gas reportto the EPA due to Congress intervention7. They also confirmed that providing this information to
the EPA would not significantly affect their bottom line in hog production8.
The following table illustrated the industrial profiles collated under the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Program, in which the agriculture industry as conspicuously absent:

Industry: ClickHighlights
Power Plants

toView Most Recent Industrial
Profile2013

Petroleum and Natural Gas 2014
Systems

6

UNFCC. “Chapter 10: Emissions From Livestock and Manure Management. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories”. Vol 4: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use.
7
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/01/us-meat-emissions-paris-cop21
8
https://www.revealnews.org/article/us-gives-meat-producers-a-pass-on-climate-change-emissions/Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
Industry: ClickHighlights

toView Most Recent Industrial
ProfileRefineries

2013

Non-fluorinated Chemicals

2013

Fluorinated Chemicals

2012

Metals2012

Minerals

2012

Pulp and Paper

2012

Miscellaneous Combustion

2012

Electronics Manufacturing

2012

Suppliers of Natural Gas and 2012
Natural Gas Liquids

Source: US EPA http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/ghgrp-industrial-profiles

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
Furthermore, recent amendments made to the US Consolidated Appropriations Act of2014 cut overall EPA funding from FY2014 levels. Specific funding cuts are listed under subpart
JJ of Part 98 Part of the act which explicitly excludes funding for the collection of emissions datafrom Manure Management in the agriculture sector. No other area specifically relating toagriculture is referenced in this list.

Source: US EPA http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/resources-subpart-ghg-reporting
In order to accurately report US emissions data to the UN and devise appropriate
emissions reduction management practices, the US Congress must lift the provision under the
The Consolidated Appropriations Act 2014 that bans funding to collect comprehensive emissions
data from the agriculture sector.
II.

SMITHFIELD FOODS
Smithfield Foods, a WH Group owned business, has been identified as a key player inbeing able to reform this industry as they are a $15 billion global food company in packaged
meats, and the world’s largest pork processor and hog producer operating in the US, Mexico andEurope. WH Group, a Hong Kong based company, acquired Smithfield in 20139. Smithfieldclaims to seek new methods of reducing their environmental footprint and operate transparently
by providing in-depth reporting on environmental impacts of their operations. They provide astatement stating general compliance with federal, state and local legislation by tracking

9

http://bi.galegroup.com/global/company/307911?u=ucsandiegoCopyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
emissions and researching methods for improvement. However, no emissions reporting data
could be located in the 2014 Smithfield Food Sustainability & Financial Report10.
According to a USDA 2009 Annual Report on Manure and Byproduct Utilization, thelargest 2% of all livestock farms produce more than 40% of all livestock. Therefore, if
Smithfield Foods installed methane monitoring technologies, this reporting data to the EPA
would cover most of the US emissions11. No reports on Smithfield Foods emissions data post2009 could be located.
III.

US MUST LEAD IN GLOBAL GHG EMISSION REDUCTIONSThe United States submitted its target of reducing emissions 26-28% of 2005 levels by

2025 to the UNFCC as part of the COP21 Climate Change Summit. Economy-wide measures toreduce other greenhouse gases such as methane were also included, which specifically identified
the agriculture sector12. In order to responsibly manage, reduce and accurately report emissions
reductions, every sector of the agriculture industry must be included. This specifically pertains
the livestock producers and their management of methane associated with ruminants and manure
management.
The Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC) is an agreement led by the US and Canada
to reduce methane and other short lived climate pollutants (SCLPs). It is a voluntary coalition
consisting of 51 counties, 16 intergovernmental organizations, and various public and private
institutions13. It is hypocritical of the United States to be a leader of this coalition by not
requiring one of the country’s largest methane emission sectors to reduce emissions nor require
10

Smithfield Foods 2014 Sustainability and Financial Report.
USDA. “National Program 206: Manure and Byproduct Utilization FY-09 Annual Report”
12
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/03/31/fact-sheet-us-reports-its-2025-emissions-target-unfccc
13
http://www.ccacoalition.org/en/news/ccac-welcomes-us-canada-joint-statement-climate-energy-and-arcticleadership11

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
them to monitor and establish a baseline from which to reduce. How are the other 50 countries
expected to enact measures the US is not willing to implement themselves?
Data collected from emissions reporting is critical for guiding policy and management
practices to address climate change; however, the US EPA has not collected emissions data fromthe livestock producer industry since 2010. This is a significant omission of data as The Foodand Agriculture Organization (FAO) has reported that livestock producer emissions constitute
18% of global greenhouse gas emissions, with pork and poultry contributing 9% of theseemissions14. Pork is Smithfield Foods primary product and emissions from this sector are derived
from manure storage and high intensity feed production.
Figure 2: Global Emissions from Pig Supply Chains, by category of emissions 15

1415

http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3437e/i3437e00.htm
http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3437e/i3437e00.htm

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), if passed, would boost US pork production foroverseas export, particularly with Japan. US pork producers have been vocal pro-trade supporters
and would benefit significantly from TPP, particularly with increased access to the Japanesemarket with a value of $1.8Billion16.

In order to manage these increased emissions fromincreased international trade, accurate emissions reporting must be implemented.
IV.

EXTERNAL PRESSURE
a. Smithfield Food Lobby Funding
The following shows a breakdown of Smithfield Food funding to political parties since

2000. Funding went to both democratic and republican members of the House and Senate.
According to OpenSecrets.org, Smithfield Foods has consistently paid lobby groups in excess of$1M/year since 2000, with the most recent data from 2012. The lobby firms address issues inagriculture, energy & nuclear power, taxes, trade, food industry, fuel, immigration and labor17.
The reports did not detail the specific of lobby efforts behind regulation reform.

16

Submission by the National Pork Producers Council to the USITC. “Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: Likely
Impact on US Economy and on Specific Industry Sectors”. February 15, 2016.
17https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientissues_spec.php?id=D000022254&year=2012&spec=AGR

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
Source: OpenSecrets: Smithfield Foods18
b. Livestock Producer Industry Lobby
The livestock industry is composed of ranchers and supporting organization and have
faced significant challenges to compete on the global market. National Cattlemen’s Beef
Association, National Pork Producers Council and Texas Southwestern Cattle Raisers are the top
livestock interest groups, and have contributed millions of dollars to political campaigns. Theirlobby efforts are focused on livestock producer exemptions particularly from EPA air pollution
regulations.
In 2014, the National Pork Producers Council paid $873,000 on federal government
lobby efforts to influence policy outcomes. That year Congress continued the prohibition ofcollecting emissions data from manure management practices in the livestock industry under theConsolidated Appropriations Act 201419. An industry high of nearly $3.5 million was paid by the
livestock industry in 2006, down to $2.8 million in 201420. Annual lobbying funds from thelivestock industry is show below in Figure 3.

18

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?cycle=2016&strID=C00359075
http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/resources-subpart-ghg-reporting20
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/background.php?cycle=2016&ind=A06
19

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
Figure3:

Annual

Lobbyingon

LivestockintheUnitedStates

Source: OpenSecrets.org
c. NGOs
Sierra Club has campaigns addressing climate change impacts, and while they do nothave a specific campaign addressing the agriculture industry impact on climate change, they
have ad hoc media releases addressing the subject matter21.
Sid Learner in association with Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Healthfounded “Meatless Mondays” in 2003 in an effort to raise awareness to reduce household carbon
footprint by cutting out some meat from their diets.
Greenpeace has campaigns to reduce emissions from the livestock industry with a
primary focus in Europe22, and has a Sustainable Foods Campaign with a US focus23. However,this issue of Congress restricting the collection of emissions data from producers has not been21

http://www.sierraclub.org/compass/2015/05/my-plate-my-planet
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/Global/international/publications/agriculture/2013/EcologicalLivestock.pdf?2e6e49
23
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/sustainable-agriculture/22

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
addressed publicly by any of the large US NGOs, as those listed above. The issue has been raisedby media outlets such as Mother Jones, research institutions, and documentary filmmakers of
Cowspiracy24.
While there has not been an overwhelming response to regulatory insufficiencies, beef
consumption in the United States has been steadily declining from 27.9 billion pounds in 2002 to
24.1 billion pounds in 201425 (USDA 2015), which may be attributed to NGO public awarenesscampaigns.

d. Consumer Pressure
In 2014, Smithfield Foods encouraged their hog suppliers to phase out the use ofcontroversial gestation crates by 2022 in response to consumer demand addressing the inhume
practice26. There was no regulatory impetus for issue, which illustrates the impact consumers canhave on corporate behavior. It remains to be seen if Smithfield Foods does not renew contracts
with suppliers that continue to use gestation stalls.
As Smithfield Foods is the world leader in pork production, demand for their products is
relatively inelastic as consumers are not likely aware of options for suitable alternatives even if
Smithfield Foods practices of not efficiently managing and reporting greenhouse gas emissions
become a larger social issue. However, as Smithfield Foods is in compliance with national
legislation, the real issue revolves around US greenhouse gas emissions regulatory reform.

24

http://www.cowspiracy.com/facts/
http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/animal-products/cattle-beef/statistics-information.aspx
26
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/01/07/hog-crates-ban/4362353/
25

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
V.

EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE AGRICULTURE
SECTOR

Regardless of insufficient regulatory policy managing and monitoring GHG emissions,numerous management practices have been successfully implemented showing not only areduction of emissions but also efficiency in farming operations. Therefore, corporations such as
Smithfield Foods would benefit from implementing such management procedures prior tolegislative requirements to do so.
As Smithfield Foods is primarily focused on the pork industry, emissions reduction
technology and procedures and the resulting efficiencies will be focused around pork
management. Significant emissions reductions in pig production systems can be achieved
through improvements in manure management, livestock management, improving feed quality,
and installing energy saving technologies.
One approach is to use better quality feed. By doing so, this will help to lower manureand enteric emissions. Strategic breeding programs also eliminate surplus or unproductive partsof the herd thus reducing emissions that would be generated by those animals. In addition tobetter quality feed, manure can be managed through practices that recover nutrients in the
manure and recycle that for other purposes, such as electricity generation. The EPA estimatesthat due to the over 8,000 dairy and hog farms in the US, methane recovery systems could
generate enough electricity to power over a million homes and cut emissions by the equivalent oftaking nearly four million cars off the road 27.
A 2012 study found that environmental emissions impacts can be mitigated through theapplication of soil to different slurry fractions. With respect to CH4 emissions, they were found27

http://phys.org/news/2015-08-cow-poo-power-profitable-farm.html#jCpCopyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
to be short-lived and rates returned to normal levels within three days after the slurry
application28. A selection of emission reduction opportunities outlined in the table below.

Examples of Reduction Opportunities for the Agriculture Sector
Type

How Emissions are Reduced

Land
and Adjusting the methods for
Crop
managing land and growing
Management crops.

Examples••Fertilizing crops with the precise
amount of nitrogen required, sinceless efficient nitrogen application canlead to higher N2O emissions.
Draining water from wetland ricesoils during the growing season to
reduce CH4 emissions.

Livestock
Management

Adjusting feeding practices and Improving pasture quality to increase animalother management methods to productivity, which can reduce the amount of
reducetheamountof CH4 emitted per unit of animal product. Also,
CH4 resulting from enteric increased productivity can be accomplishedfermentation.
through breeding.

ManureManagement••

Controlling the way
in which manuredecomposes to reduce
N2 O
andCH4 emissions.
Capturing CH4 frommanuredecomposition
toproducerenewableenergy.

•••Handling manure as a solid or
depositing it on pasture rather thanstoring it in a liquid-based systemsuch as a lagoon. This would likely
reduce CH4 emissions but may
increase N2O emissions.
Storingmanureinanaerobic
containment areas to maximize
CH4 production and then capturing
the CH4to use as an energy substitutefor fossil fuels.
For
more
information
see
EPA's AgSTAR Program,avoluntary outreach and education
program that promotes recovery anduse of methane from animal manure.

Source: US EPA http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/sources/agriculture.html

28

Fangueiro, David et al. “Nitric Oxide and Greenhouse Gases Emissions Following the Application of Different
Cattle Slurry Particle Size Fractions to Soil”. Atmospheric Environment, vol 47 pp 373-30. February 2012.

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
VI.

POLICY REQUIREMENTSFirst and foremost, Congress must not restrict EPA funding required to collect emissions

data from the agriculture sector. Smithfield Foods sustainability reports show that emissions data
is being collected, and some emissions mitigation technologies and practices have been enacted.
This data must be provided to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program to be included in the
United States’ national emissions accounting to ensure accurate data is provided to the UNFCC
to effectively develop emissions reductions strategies in the long term goal of reducing global
temperature increase below 2C.
Viable technologies for methane capture and electricity generation are successfully
utilized in other countries outside of the US. Policies in the US require reform to encourage
livestock producers to comprehensively implement these technologies to reduce greenhouseemissions and consumption of energy from the grid or fossil fuel generators. Current climatechange regulations discourage implementation due to the increased cost of compliance for the
agriculture sector. Developing a carbon pricing mechanism, essentially creating price on
greenhouse gas emissions, will encourage market forces to enact these greenhouse gas reduction
technologies. More robust energy policies may adversely affect farmers’ incomes in the shortterm, but would encourage innovation and adaptation to climate change effects in the long run. A
market based system of emissions control would incentivize companies such as Smithfield Foods
to be innovative in the emissions management and adopt practices.
Carbon markets have performed relatively well and continue to grow in segmented global
energy markets. However, there has been little incentive for the agriculture sector due todifficulty in cost-effectively measuring emissions reductions, but this can be improved with

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
additional research and development in measurement methodologies and evolving carbon
markets29
The Agricultural and Industrial Byproducts National Program aims to develop andevaluate management practices and technology to use manure effectively while protecting theenvironment, which is then provided to policy makers to establish environmental programs anddevelop legislation. It is recommended that this research continue and Congress utilize thevaluable data to enforce manure management and emissions reporting from all agriculture
relevant sectors.
VII.

CONCLUSION

Climate change is a global issue requiring global cooperation. The adoption of Olsonian
cooperation strategy at COP21 has shown the greatest opportunity for achieving climate change
objections through the formation of small coalition groups, such as the CCAC which aims to
reduce short lived pollutants such as methane. Smithfield Foods and their parent company WH
Group are in an influential position to reduce global emission reductions through refining
management practices and effectively reporting and disseminating the results to encourage
competitor compliance.
Emissions reductions and subsequent efficiencies gained in production should be
published to encourage governments, both US and abroad, to adopt policies supporting theimplementation of these technologies and practices. Acting local to bring about global change
can play a significant part of Smithfield Food’s Corporate Social Responsibility mission. They
29

Gerber, P.J., et al “Tackling climate change through livestock – A global assessment ofemissions and mitigation opportunities.” Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations (FAO), Rome. 2013.

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
have the capacity to bring about great success in the goal to reduce global greenhouse gas
emissions and slow the effects of climate change.
Congress must revise legislation to encourage efficient management and reporting ofgreenhouse gas emissions with an end goal of overall national reductions. Climate change
regulations must also encourage innovation through the establishment of market-based carbon
pricing mechanisms.

Bibliography:
Climate and Clean Air Coalition. Date accessed March 10, 2016.
http://www.ccacoalition.org/en/news/ccac-welcomes-us-canada-joint-statement-climateenergy-and-arctic-leadership.
Doering, Christopher. “Smithfield Urges Farmers to End Use of Gestation Crates”. USAToday.
Washington, January 7, 2014.
Gerber, P.J., Steinfeld, H., Henderson, B., Mottet, A., Opio, C., Dijkman, J., Falcucci, A. &Tempio, G. “Tackling climate change through livestock – A global assessment ofemissions and mitigation opportunities.” Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations (FAO), Rome. 2013.
Halverson, Nathan. “This Huge Loophole Helps the Meat Industry Hide Its Pollution”. Mother
Jones. January 5, 2016. http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/01/us-meatemissions-paris-cop21
Hongmin Dong; Joe Mangino, Time McAllister et al. “Chapter 10: Emissions From Livestockand Manure Management”. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories. Vol 4: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use.
Lazar, Alex. “Livestock Industry”. OpenSecrets.org: Center for Responsive Politics. September
2015. https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/background.php?cycle=2016&ind=A06
Perry, Caroline. “US Methane Emissions Exceed Government Estimates”. Harvard Gazette.
SEAS Communications. November 25, 2013.
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2013/11/u-s-methane-emissions-far-exceedgovernment-estimates/

Copyright 2016. No quotation or citation without attribution.
National Pork Producers Council. “Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: Likely Impact on US
Economy and on Specific Industry Sectors”. Submission by the National Pork Producers
Council to the USITC.February 15, 2016.
OpenSecrets. Smithfield Foods Political Funding Breakdown.
https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?cycle=2016&strID=C00359075
Orr, Karen. “Animal Agriculture Causing Disastrous Effects” The Gainesville Sun. January 4,
2016. http://www.gainesville.com/article/20160104/OPINION03/160109878
Smithfield Foods. 2014 Integrated Sustainability and Financial Report.
http://www.smithfieldfoods.com/financial-reporting
Tilman, David and Michael Clark. “Global Diets Link Environmental Sustainability and Human
Health”. Nature vol 515 pp 518-522. November 27, 2014.
United States of America. “US Climate Action Report 2014 under the UNFCC”. US Departmentof State, 2014. http://www.state.gov/e/oes/rls/rpts/car6/index.htm
US EPA. Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2013 Executive
Summary. http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html
US EPA. http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/ghgrp-industrial-profiles
US EPA. http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/sources/agriculture.html
US EPA. http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/resources-subpart-ghg-reporting
USDA Economic Research Service. “Cattle and Beef Statistics and Information”. Last updated
January 20, 2016. http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/animal-products/cattle-beef/statisticsinformation.aspx
VanderZaag, A.C., T.K. Flesch. R.L Desjardins, H. Balde, T. Wright. “Measuring Methane
Emissions from Two Dairy Farms: Seasonal and Manure-Management Effects”.
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology: 194 pp 259-267. Oxford, 2014.
White House Office of Press Secretary. “Fact Sheet: US Reports it’s 2025 Emissions Target to
the UNFCC”. March 31, 2015.