Influence of season, ventilation strategy, and slurry removal on methane emissions from pig houses

Haeussermann, Angelika; Hartung, Eberhard; Gallmann, Eva; Jungbluth, Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.agee.2005.08.011

Cited by 55 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, emissions can occur from manure presented on the floor and these have been evaluated by Kermarrec (1999) Koerkamp and Uenk, 1997;Hornig et al, 2001;European Commission, 2003;Gallmann et al, 2003;Godbout et al, 2003;Guarino et al, 2003;Haeussermann et al, 2006). Variations originated from the kind of slatted floor (totally or partly), the ventilation system (natural or controlled) and the season.…”

Section: Gas Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, emptying and cleaning the slurry pits between batches contributes to an important decrease in CH 4 emissions during the first weeks of the fattening period (Haeussermann et al, 2006). However, in this study, the mean emission after the third week of fattening was already 50% of the emission at the end of the fattening period but, compared with the results of Haeussermann et al (2006), the total slurry production was about 50% lower with a high dry matter content (12.9%), a factor interfering with methanogenesis. In litter, CH 4 formation is negatively correlated with aeration rate.…”

Section: Gas Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gaseous emissions during the fattening of pigs kept either on fully slatted floors or on straw flow

Philippe

Laitat

Canart

et al. 2007

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the environmental impact of the straw-flow system for fattening pigs with the slattedfloor system by measuring pollutant gas emissions such as ammonia (NH 3 ), nitrous oxide (N 2 O), methane (CH 4 ) and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), manure nitrogen (N) content and emissions of water vapour (H 2 O). Three successive batches of 32 pigs were fattened. For each batch, pigs were allotted to two groups raised in separated rooms fitted either with a concrete totally slatted-floor system (0.75 m 2 per pig) or with a straw-flow system (0.79 m 2 per pig). With this last system, pigs were kept on a sloped floor, straw being provided daily at the top of the pen. Throughout the fattening period, about 34.4 kg of straw were supplied per pig. The straw, mixed with dung, travelled down the slope by pig motion and went out of the pen to a scraped passage. The solid fraction was scraped every day, stored in a heap in the room and removed every month, 1 week before each period of gaseous emission measurement. The liquid fraction was automatically pumped from the scraped passage into a hermetic tank, which was emptied at the end of each fattening period. Rooms were ventilated mechanically in order to maintain a constant ambient temperature. Once a month, the emissions of NH 3 , N 2 O, CH 4 , CO 2 and H 2 O were measured hourly for 6 consecutive days via infrared photoacoustic detection. Mean daily emissions per pig fattened on the slatted floor or on the sloped floor were, respectively, 4.98 and 13.31 g NH 3 , 0.67 and 0.68 g N 2 O, 15.2 and 8.88 g CH 4 , 548 g and 406 g CO 2 equivalents, 1.61 and 1.77 kg CO 2 and 2.33 and 2.95 kg H 2 O. Except for N 2 O emissions, all the differences were statistically significant (P , 0.001). From the slatted-floor system, the amount of slurry removed per fattening period was on average 256 kg per pig. From the straw-flow system, solid manure amounted on average to 209 kg per pig and liquid manure to 53 kg per pig. The total N-content of the manure was 2.23 kg N per pig with the straw-flow system (solid and liquid manure) v. 3.26 kg N per pig for slurry from the slatted-floor system. This reduction of 30% observed with the sloped floor was mainly explained by the higher level of NH 3 -N emissions.

show abstract

Section: Gas Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gas Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gaseous emissions during the fattening of pigs kept either on fully slatted floors or on straw flow

Philippe

Laitat

Canart

et al. 2007

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Ch 4 and N 2 O Emissions From Manure: Sources And Sinksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For cool temperate climates, frequent removal of manure from the housing to an outside store has been proposed as a low-cost strategy to reduce CH 4 emissions (Sommer et al, 2009). However, the predicted effect of frequent removal assumes that there is no difference in the potential for CH 4 production between slurry pits and the outside storage facility, which may not be the case if adapted organisms have not yet developed in the slurry pit, for example, because of inhibitory concentrations of NH 3 , or cleaning after emptying (Haeussermann et al, 2006).Presumably, during the gradual filling of an outside storage tank or lagoon, there will be a fast inoculation of newly added slurry, such that in the final storage facility CH 4 production and emissions can be predicted by the physical and chemical properties of the slurry, that is, substrate availability for methanogens (Wood et al, 2012). This is also the assumption of the 2006 methodology of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which links CH 4 emissions from liquid manure to mean storage temperature (IPCC, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Manure management for greenhouse gas mitigation

Petersen

Blanchard

Chadwick

et al. 2013

Animal

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ongoing intensification and specialisation of livestock production lead to increasing volumes of manure to be managed, which are a source of the greenhouse gases (GHGs) methane (CH 4 ) and nitrous oxide (N 2 O). Net emissions of CH 4 and N 2 O result from a multitude of microbial activities in the manure environment. Their relative importance depends not only on manure composition and local management practices with respect to treatment, storage and field application, but also on ambient climatic conditions. The diversity of livestock production systems, and their associated manure management, is discussed on the basis of four regional cases (Sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia, China and Europe) with increasing levels of intensification and priorities with respect to nutrient management and environmental regulation. GHG mitigation options for production systems based on solid and liquid manure management are then presented, and potentials for positive and negative interactions between pollutants, and between management practices, are discussed. The diversity of manure properties and environmental conditions necessitate a modelling approach for improving estimates of GHG emissions, and for predicting effects of management changes for GHG mitigation, and requirements for such a model are discussed. Finally, we briefly discuss drivers for, and barriers against, introduction of GHG mitigation measures for livestock production. There is no conflict between efforts to improve food and feed production, and efforts to reduce GHG emissions from manure management. Growth in livestock populations are projected to occur mainly in intensive production systems where, for this and other reasons, the largest potentials for GHG mitigation may be found.Keywords: methane, nitrous oxide, storage, treatment, farm model ImplicationsLivestock manure is a source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, mainly as methane and nitrous oxide. GHG emissions are biogenic and regulated by manure characteristics, and therefore emissions can be manipulated via handling, treatment and storage conditions. Globally, livestock production systems vary widely, and this is also true for GHG mitigation potentials, but generally efforts to conserve nutrients in manure for crop production will also reduce GHG emissions. Future growth in livestock production is projected to occur mainly in confined animal feeding operations, which also appear to have the greatest potential for GHG mitigation. IntroductionSince the mid 20th century, there has been a growing pressure on land resources for production of food and feed for livestock and, increasingly, crops for energy production (Hoogwijk et al., 2005). To fulfil the demand for meat, milk and eggs, livestock production in developing countries is expanding, especially in peri-urban areas (Gerber et al., 2005), and worldwide becomes more specialised (Steinfeld et al., 2006). In consequence of these trends, increasing volumes of livestock manure are produced, which are a source of greenhouse gases (GHGs) contributing t...

show abstract

“…Using default values from the IPCC Tier 2 methodology with an MCF of 46% (average of temperature storage conditions), estimated methane emissions from a swine facility are 5.83 kg CH 4 per finished pig (in a grow-finish operation). Although this methodology would seem to offer a good approximation for an average facility, researchers have pointed out a substantial variation in the amount of methane being emitted (Haeussermann et al, 2006), and any practice designed to reduce methane emissions would presumably be most beneficial if its application could be targeted to operations with the largest methane emissions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lab-assay for estimating methane emissions from deep-pit swine manure storages

Andersen

Weelden

Trabue

et al. 2015

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methane emission is an important tool in the evaluation of manure management systems due to the potential impact it has on global climate change. Field procedures used for estimating methane emission rates require expensive equipment, are time consuming, and highly variable between farms. The purpose of this paper is to report a simple laboratory procedure for estimating methane emission from stored manure. The test developed was termed a methane production rate (MPR) assay as it provides a short-term biogas production measurement. The MPR assay incubation time is short (3d), requires no sample preparation in terms of inoculation or dilution of manure, is incubated at room temperature, and the manure is kept stationary. These conditions allow for high throughput of samples and were chosen to replicate the conditions within deep-pit manure storages. In brief, an unaltered aliquot of manure was incubated at room temperature for a three-days to assay the current rate of methane being generated by the manure. The results from this assay predict an average methane emission factor of 12. RightsWorks produced by employees of the U.S. Government as part of their official duties are not copyrighted within the U.S. The content of this document is not copyrighted. b s t r a c tMethane emission is an important tool in the evaluation of manure management systems due to the potential impact it has on global climate change. Field procedures used for estimating methane emission rates require expensive equipment, are time consuming, and highly variable between farms. The purpose of this paper is to report a simple laboratory procedure for estimating methane emission from stored manure. The test developed was termed a methane production rate (MPR) assay as it provides a shortterm biogas production measurement. The MPR assay incubation time is short (3d), requires no sample preparation in terms of inoculation or dilution of manure, is incubated at room temperature, and the manure is kept stationary. These conditions allow for high throughput of samples and were chosen to replicate the conditions within deep-pit manure storages. In brief, an unaltered aliquot of manure was incubated at room temperature for a three-days to assay the current rate of methane being generated by the manure. The results from this assay predict an average methane emission factor of 12.

show abstract

Influence of season, ventilation strategy, and slurry removal on methane emissions from pig houses

Cited by 55 publications

References 4 publications

Gaseous emissions during the fattening of pigs kept either on fully slatted floors or on straw flow

Gaseous emissions during the fattening of pigs kept either on fully slatted floors or on straw flow

Manure management for greenhouse gas mitigation

Lab-assay for estimating methane emissions from deep-pit swine manure storages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About