Stacks Image 5

Our Carbon Footprint

If the Dairy industry alone was to shift towards the low nitrogen import system that Biohelp has historically proven to be as effective as conventional fertiliser use, then the carbon savings to the Country would be over a million tons of Co2 per year. Fuel savings alone from spreading, carting, shipping and manufacturing would be additional to this.
There would be less requirement for Lime, which is currently at 250,000 tons of use per year. Every time we Lime with Calcium Carbonate, the Carbon component converts back to Co2, which goes back into the atmosphere.
The increased moisture holding capacity through the summer months, of Biohelp treated soil, allows for more effective irrigation. This in turn allows for reduced operation of irrigators and the associated electricity costs, reducing that carbon footprint.
Our exceptional results, in a comparison study for nitrate leaching, indicated changes in the digestive system when cows were grazing on a Biohelp treated area. We anticipate significant changes in methane output, and we are looking forward to conducting these studies.

The cost associated with the farms carbon footprint can’t be ignored no matter how stressful it appears today. You could easily have a carbon emissions cost of 25-50cents/Kg milk solids at the current average carbon outputs. We have solutions.
When the data from the leaching study mentioned above was applied to Lincoln University’s carbon calculator, reducing fertiliser and nitrous oxide emissions dropped the carbon emissions by a 29% .This is well beyond the 10% target the government has set for 2030.
Interestingly, as a comparison, reducing stock numbers from 4.5 to 3.5 cows/Ha and maintaining 200KgN fertiliser reduced CO2 emissions by only 523 tons/Ha or 19%. Several hundred thousand dollars in reduced income would also occur from less stock.