Journal article Open Access
Sodikun , Sukardi , Andes Ismayana and Elisa Anggraeni
This study is aiming for evaluating the resulting carbon footprint from the farmsheeppartnership endeavor without usury as well as givingalternative recommendationsfor farmsheep activity to breeders and partners. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) identification on impacted environment using SimaPro 9.1.1 softwareutilizesbaseline CML-IA V3.06/EU2method. Evaluation on carbon footprint performed on three form partnership, namely (1)Investors provide sheeps going, while cattle managers provide cages, feed, livestock care workers (not integrated agriculture and to be used as comparison ) called SDK1, (2) Investors provide cages, land for the location of the cages, sheep seeds, and feed, while the cattle manager as livestock care workers (integrated agriculture ) called SDK2.3 , and (3) Investors provide land as the location of the cage, while the cattle manager provide feed and livestock care staff called SDK 3.Assessment results show that the carbon footprint value observed on SDK3 partnership provides the highest donation of emission carbon when compared with SDK2.3 and SDK1. However, the value of emission carbon on SDK2.3 and SDK1 partnerships also donates emission carbonlower compared to SDK2.3 and SDK3 partnership. The emission carbon on the third form of partnership is due to the existence of dirt cage and the use of fuel on transportation activity. When the recommendation is implemented, the value of emission carbon in each form of partnership experiences dropwith the highest percentage drop happens on SDK2.3 partnership, which is 59.14%, followed by the form of partnership SDK3 (49.14) and SDK1 (39.45%). Partnership form of SDK2.3 donates emission carbonlower compared to SDK1 and SDK3 partnership.