THE SCIENCE BEHIND SUSTAINABLE ANIMAL AFTERCARE
Two Methods. One Measurable Environmental Difference.
Measuring the Impact of Animal Aftercare
To better understand the environmental impact of animal aftercare, Barn Angels undertook a comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) examining traditional rendering and our animal composting operations.
The assessment evaluated the greenhouse gas emissions associated with each method, providing a measurable comparison of their environmental performance.
Rather than relying on assumptions about sustainability, this research provides a data-driven perspective on how different animal aftercare methods affect the environment.
The results demonstrate the environmental advantages of composting compared with traditional rendering, within the scope of the assessment.
Research Findings
Hover, tap or select a question to reveal the finding.
How much lower were total greenhouse gas emissions?
LOWER TOTAL GHG EMISSIONS Barn Angels Composting compared with traditional animal rendering.
What was the difference across the volume assessed?
TONNES CO₂e The calculated difference in total GHG emissions across the volume assessed.
How much material was included in the assessment?
METRIC TONNES Of processed material included in the assessment.
Environmental impacts were assessed per metric tonne of processed deadstock, allowing both aftercare processes to be evaluated using the same functional unit and lifecycle approach. Barn Angels’ environmental impact assessment was prepared by qualified third-party environmental consultants.
Putting 3,423 Tonnes Into Perspective
What does that look like in passenger vehicles?
Equivalent to the annual emissions from approximately 798 gasoline-powered passenger vehicles driven for one year.
How far would an average vehicle travel?
Miles driven by an average gasoline-powered vehicle
How many homes’ annual energy use is equivalent?
Equivalent to approximately 460 homes’ energy use for one year.
What is the equivalent annual forest carbon impact?
Equivalent to the annual carbon impact associated with approximately 3,433 acres of forest.
Holland Marsh, Ontario
Assessment scope and supporting context
Barn Angels works with environmental and sustainability professionals to understand the environmental impact of our operations, identify where those impacts occur and find opportunities to continually improve.
Our environmental assessment takes a lifecycle approach. That means we look beyond what happens during composting itself and consider the broader process, including collection and transportation, fuel and equipment use, aerobic decomposition, finished compost, and the environmental benefits created when that material is returned to the land.
Our assessment considers environmental indicators including greenhouse gas emissions, air impacts, solid waste and diversion, and water use and discharge.
Because real environmental responsibility starts with knowing your impact.
Rendering has long been a familiar end-of-life pathway within the horse industry. But familiar doesn’t necessarily mean environmentally equal.
Our lifecycle assessment used traditional animal rendering as a baseline to measure how Barn Angels’ composting process performs. The difference was significant.
Additional environmental considerations
Soil Carbon
Finished compost returned to land can contribute to carbon storage within the soil.
Fertilizer Offset
Using finished compost as a soil amendment can reduce reliance on some conventional fertilizer inputs.
Organic Matter Returned to the Land
Composting transforms organic material into a usable finished product instead of treating the end of an animal’s life as the end of the material’s usefulness.
Landfill Diversion
Composting contributes to the beneficial management of organic material that may otherwise enter other waste streams.
ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOUNTABILITY
Measured. Compared. Understood.
Our environmental research goes beyond surface-level assumptions. By evaluating greenhouse gas impacts across defined life cycle boundaries, we gain a clearer understanding of the environmental performance of composting and traditional rendering.
These findings help inform our operational decisions and our continued commitment to responsible, environmentally conscious animal aftercare.
The figures presented reflect the specific scenario and methodology assessed, rather than a universal comparison of every composting and rendering operation.
The purpose of this research is not to characterize rendering as inherently harmful, but to advance evidence-based understanding of the environmental impacts associated with different animal management methods.