# The Carbon Footprint of Milk Production on a Farm
## 3 Results and Discussion
### GHG Emission and CF Reduction Methods, Technological Innovations, and Future Directions  
The results of a study by [PERSON] et al. [50] indicated the particular importance of proper soil and manure management as a strategy for reducing the CF. The same study also demonstrated that improving the proportion of lactating cows and reducing excessive stocking densities can effectively reduce emissions. The potential for implementing silvopastoral systems as a form of adaptation to climate change, improving carbon (C) sequestration in the soil, and reducing CH\({}_{4}\) emissions was also noted. A study by [PERSON] [57] showed that the implementation of a silvopastoral system can reduce the total CF for milk by up to 40%, primarily due to C sequestration and improved feeding efficiency. In addition, [PERSON] [17] analysed three types of farms in Colombia and documented that the farms most integrated with the silvopastoral system had a 20-39% lower CF value than conventional farms. However, a study conducted in Costa Rica demonstrated that the use of trees in the form of hedges can reduce the CF of milk production by 21-37% through C sequestration [2]. LCA models showed that considering CO\({}_{2}\) absorption by plant biomass can significantly affect the ultimate environmental assessment of milk production. Increasing attention is also being paid to sustainable organic fertilisation and the optimisation of mineral fertiliser rates and water and waste management at the farm level. Technological advances and growing environmental requirements are driving the development of new solutions aimed at reducing emissions in milk production. Among the studies analysed, the following methods were most frequently indicated as ways of reducing the GHG emissions and the CF: improving feed digestibility and quality; reducing the age at first calving; shortening the calving interval; automating the feeding and milking process; selecting cows for environmental performance (e.g., lower CH\({}_{4}\) emissions);using digital systems for production and emissions management; implementation of the silvopastoral system; utilisation of RES (e.g., biogas plants or photovoltaics); and the use of feed additives (e.g., essential oils--EOs) [2; 24; 47]. It was demonstrated that the addition of EO to feed can reduce the CH\({}_{4}\) emissions from enteric fermentation by as much as 8.8% while increasing the milk yield [24]. A study by [PERSON] et al. [46] noted that future CF reduction strategies should focus on precise adjustment of the feeding system to local conditions and cow genotypes. [PERSON] et al. [45] showed that the transition from conventional production to organic production can reduce the CF by 9%, yet the increase in CH\({}_{4}\) emissions from enteric fermentation requires compensatory effects to be taken into account. This indicates the need to implement technologies that reduce CH\({}_{4}\) emissions (e.g., feed additives) and provide more accurate emission data for organic systems. Technologies are being developed to enable CF assessment in real time and integrate environmental data into farms' economic accounts. In the longer term, financial support policies for the implementation of green technologies will also be important. The development of IT tools for emission modelling is an important direction for supporting environmental decisions in dairy farms. The DairyGHG model, presented by [PERSON] et al. [9], integrates greenhouse gas sources and sinks at the entire farm level, thereby enabling the estimation of the CF of milk production while taking into account different nutritional strategies, stocking densities and fertiliser management. In turn, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [26] proposed a simplified calculation tool, LatteGHG, which enables quick estimation of the effect of various factors (productivity, stocking density, manure management system) in typical Italian dairy farms.