Economic feasibility of cooling dry cows across the United States

Fernanda Ferreira, R. S. Gennari, G. E. Dahl, A. De Vries

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Heat stress during the dry period reduces milk yield in the subsequent lactation of dairy cows. Our objectives were to quantify the economic losses due to heat stress if dry cows are not cooled and to evaluate the economic feasibility of dry cow cooling. We used weather data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to calculate the number of heat stress days for each of the 50 US states. A heat stress day was declared when the daily average temperature-humidity index was ≥68. The number of dairy cows in each state in 2015 was obtained from the USDA-National Agricultural Statistics Service. We assumed that 15% of the cows were dry at any time, a 60-d dry period, and a calving interval of 400 d. Only cows in their second or greater parity (65%) benefitted from cooling during the dry period of the previous parity. Milk yield decreased by 5 kg in the subsequent lactation (340 d) if the cow experienced heat stress during the dry period based on a review of the literature. The default marginal value of milk minus feed cost was $0.33/kg of milk. The investment analysis included purchases of fans and soakers and use of water and electricity. Investment in a dry cow barn was considered separately. The average US dairy cow would experience 96 (26%) heat stress days during the year if not cooled and loses 447 kg of milk in the subsequent lactation if not cooled when dry. Annual losses would be $810 million if dry cows were not cooled ($87/cow per yr). For the top 3 milk-producing states (California, Wisconsin, New York), and Florida and Texas, the average milk losses in the subsequent lactation were 522, 349, 387, 1,197, and 904 kg, and reduced profit per cow per year would be $101, $68, $75, $233, and $176, respectively. The average benefit-cost ratio and payback periods of cooling dry cows in the United States were 3.15 and 0.27 yr (dry cow barn already present) and 1.45 and 5.68 yr (if investing in a dry cow barn) in the default scenario. To reach positive net present values, 6 d (barn is present) and 55 d (barn investment necessary) of heat stress annually were necessary (default assumptions). Other benefits of cooling, such as increased health and more productive offspring, were not considered. In conclusion, cooling of dry cows was profitable for 89% of the cows in the United States when building a new barn is required (under default assumptions) and very profitable when construction of a dry cow barn is not required (except for Alaska).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)9931-9941
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Dairy Science
Volume99
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

economic feasibility
Milk
cooling
Hot Temperature
Economics
cows
Lactation
barns
heat stress
dry period (lactation)
Parity
milk
lactation
United States Department of Agriculture
Electricity
Weather
dairy cows
Humidity
Cost-Benefit Analysis
milk yield

Keywords

  • dry cow
  • economic feasibility
  • heat stress
  • temperature-humidity index

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Food Science
  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Genetics

Cite this

Economic feasibility of cooling dry cows across the United States. / Ferreira, Fernanda; Gennari, R. S.; Dahl, G. E.; De Vries, A.

In: Journal of Dairy Science, Vol. 99, No. 12, 01.12.2016, p. 9931-9941.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ferreira, Fernanda ; Gennari, R. S. ; Dahl, G. E. ; De Vries, A. / Economic feasibility of cooling dry cows across the United States. In: Journal of Dairy Science. 2016 ; Vol. 99, No. 12. pp. 9931-9941.
@article{31cd947f83774e39befe14ad1c23fed9,
title = "Economic feasibility of cooling dry cows across the United States",
abstract = "Heat stress during the dry period reduces milk yield in the subsequent lactation of dairy cows. Our objectives were to quantify the economic losses due to heat stress if dry cows are not cooled and to evaluate the economic feasibility of dry cow cooling. We used weather data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to calculate the number of heat stress days for each of the 50 US states. A heat stress day was declared when the daily average temperature-humidity index was ≥68. The number of dairy cows in each state in 2015 was obtained from the USDA-National Agricultural Statistics Service. We assumed that 15{\%} of the cows were dry at any time, a 60-d dry period, and a calving interval of 400 d. Only cows in their second or greater parity (65{\%}) benefitted from cooling during the dry period of the previous parity. Milk yield decreased by 5 kg in the subsequent lactation (340 d) if the cow experienced heat stress during the dry period based on a review of the literature. The default marginal value of milk minus feed cost was $0.33/kg of milk. The investment analysis included purchases of fans and soakers and use of water and electricity. Investment in a dry cow barn was considered separately. The average US dairy cow would experience 96 (26{\%}) heat stress days during the year if not cooled and loses 447 kg of milk in the subsequent lactation if not cooled when dry. Annual losses would be $810 million if dry cows were not cooled ($87/cow per yr). For the top 3 milk-producing states (California, Wisconsin, New York), and Florida and Texas, the average milk losses in the subsequent lactation were 522, 349, 387, 1,197, and 904 kg, and reduced profit per cow per year would be $101, $68, $75, $233, and $176, respectively. The average benefit-cost ratio and payback periods of cooling dry cows in the United States were 3.15 and 0.27 yr (dry cow barn already present) and 1.45 and 5.68 yr (if investing in a dry cow barn) in the default scenario. To reach positive net present values, 6 d (barn is present) and 55 d (barn investment necessary) of heat stress annually were necessary (default assumptions). Other benefits of cooling, such as increased health and more productive offspring, were not considered. In conclusion, cooling of dry cows was profitable for 89{\%} of the cows in the United States when building a new barn is required (under default assumptions) and very profitable when construction of a dry cow barn is not required (except for Alaska).",
keywords = "dry cow, economic feasibility, heat stress, temperature-humidity index",
author = "Fernanda Ferreira and Gennari, {R. S.} and Dahl, {G. E.} and {De Vries}, A.",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3168/jds.2016-11566",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "99",
pages = "9931--9941",
journal = "Journal of Dairy Science",
issn = "0022-0302",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Economic feasibility of cooling dry cows across the United States

AU - Ferreira, Fernanda

AU - Gennari, R. S.

AU - Dahl, G. E.

AU - De Vries, A.

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - Heat stress during the dry period reduces milk yield in the subsequent lactation of dairy cows. Our objectives were to quantify the economic losses due to heat stress if dry cows are not cooled and to evaluate the economic feasibility of dry cow cooling. We used weather data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to calculate the number of heat stress days for each of the 50 US states. A heat stress day was declared when the daily average temperature-humidity index was ≥68. The number of dairy cows in each state in 2015 was obtained from the USDA-National Agricultural Statistics Service. We assumed that 15% of the cows were dry at any time, a 60-d dry period, and a calving interval of 400 d. Only cows in their second or greater parity (65%) benefitted from cooling during the dry period of the previous parity. Milk yield decreased by 5 kg in the subsequent lactation (340 d) if the cow experienced heat stress during the dry period based on a review of the literature. The default marginal value of milk minus feed cost was $0.33/kg of milk. The investment analysis included purchases of fans and soakers and use of water and electricity. Investment in a dry cow barn was considered separately. The average US dairy cow would experience 96 (26%) heat stress days during the year if not cooled and loses 447 kg of milk in the subsequent lactation if not cooled when dry. Annual losses would be $810 million if dry cows were not cooled ($87/cow per yr). For the top 3 milk-producing states (California, Wisconsin, New York), and Florida and Texas, the average milk losses in the subsequent lactation were 522, 349, 387, 1,197, and 904 kg, and reduced profit per cow per year would be $101, $68, $75, $233, and $176, respectively. The average benefit-cost ratio and payback periods of cooling dry cows in the United States were 3.15 and 0.27 yr (dry cow barn already present) and 1.45 and 5.68 yr (if investing in a dry cow barn) in the default scenario. To reach positive net present values, 6 d (barn is present) and 55 d (barn investment necessary) of heat stress annually were necessary (default assumptions). Other benefits of cooling, such as increased health and more productive offspring, were not considered. In conclusion, cooling of dry cows was profitable for 89% of the cows in the United States when building a new barn is required (under default assumptions) and very profitable when construction of a dry cow barn is not required (except for Alaska).

AB - Heat stress during the dry period reduces milk yield in the subsequent lactation of dairy cows. Our objectives were to quantify the economic losses due to heat stress if dry cows are not cooled and to evaluate the economic feasibility of dry cow cooling. We used weather data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to calculate the number of heat stress days for each of the 50 US states. A heat stress day was declared when the daily average temperature-humidity index was ≥68. The number of dairy cows in each state in 2015 was obtained from the USDA-National Agricultural Statistics Service. We assumed that 15% of the cows were dry at any time, a 60-d dry period, and a calving interval of 400 d. Only cows in their second or greater parity (65%) benefitted from cooling during the dry period of the previous parity. Milk yield decreased by 5 kg in the subsequent lactation (340 d) if the cow experienced heat stress during the dry period based on a review of the literature. The default marginal value of milk minus feed cost was $0.33/kg of milk. The investment analysis included purchases of fans and soakers and use of water and electricity. Investment in a dry cow barn was considered separately. The average US dairy cow would experience 96 (26%) heat stress days during the year if not cooled and loses 447 kg of milk in the subsequent lactation if not cooled when dry. Annual losses would be $810 million if dry cows were not cooled ($87/cow per yr). For the top 3 milk-producing states (California, Wisconsin, New York), and Florida and Texas, the average milk losses in the subsequent lactation were 522, 349, 387, 1,197, and 904 kg, and reduced profit per cow per year would be $101, $68, $75, $233, and $176, respectively. The average benefit-cost ratio and payback periods of cooling dry cows in the United States were 3.15 and 0.27 yr (dry cow barn already present) and 1.45 and 5.68 yr (if investing in a dry cow barn) in the default scenario. To reach positive net present values, 6 d (barn is present) and 55 d (barn investment necessary) of heat stress annually were necessary (default assumptions). Other benefits of cooling, such as increased health and more productive offspring, were not considered. In conclusion, cooling of dry cows was profitable for 89% of the cows in the United States when building a new barn is required (under default assumptions) and very profitable when construction of a dry cow barn is not required (except for Alaska).

KW - dry cow

KW - economic feasibility

KW - heat stress

KW - temperature-humidity index

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995982195&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84995982195&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3168/jds.2016-11566

DO - 10.3168/jds.2016-11566

M3 - Article

C2 - 27743663

AN - SCOPUS:84995982195

VL - 99

SP - 9931

EP - 9941

JO - Journal of Dairy Science

JF - Journal of Dairy Science

SN - 0022-0302

IS - 12

ER -