Towards improving the manure management chain

Hou, Yong

doi:10.18174/392808

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 158 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, several publications looked at EU policy developments relevant to sustainable soil management (Montanarella and Panagos, 2021;Römbke et al, 2016). Sustainable manure management (Hou, 2016;Malomo et al, 2018) and practices for nutrient recovery from manure at the EU level (Huygens et al, 2020) gained more importance. Nonetheless, scientific papers on sustainable manure management (Hou et al, 2017;Malomo et al, 2018) and reports produced by the EU and European advisory boards on soil biodiversity neglect the risks and benefits of manure for soil biodiversity.…”

Section: Manure and Its Management Under Current Eu Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Manure management and soil biodiversity: Towards more sustainable food systems in the EU

Köninger

Lugato

Panagos

et al. 2021

Agricultural Systems

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Manure and Its Management Under Current Eu Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Manure management and soil biodiversity: Towards more sustainable food systems in the EU

Köninger

Lugato

Panagos

et al. 2021

Agricultural Systems

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To estimate the total avoided emission of biogas production, it is necessary to take into account the fact that biogas production causes emissions due to methane leakage from the digester and CHP (1% and 1.5%, respectively) [44,45].…”

Section: Ecological Added Valuementioning

confidence: 99%

To What Extent Is Manure Produced, Distributed, and Potentially Available for Bioenergy? A Step toward Stimulating Circular Bio-Economy in Poland

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioenergy production from animal waste can be a key driver to achieving bio-economy goals. Developing a bio-economy sector could help to create opportunities for a circular system where not only people and the planet will be benefited, but it will also provide economic profitability to farmers, especially in the post-Covid period. To this end, manure production, its nutrient content, and bioenergy potential were estimated, along with their spatial distribution in the Lubelskie province, Poland. Farm-level data were processed and aggregated at the municipality level. Material balance equations were used to calculate the theoretical potential of livestock manure and bioenergy for different use scenarios: (1) Baseline (BC): direct manure application to land, which was compared against (2) Anaerobic Digestion (AD): anaerobic digestion to biogas with digestate returned to the fields (3) AD + Separation (AD + Sep): mechanical separation followed by anaerobic digestion, and (4) Surplus + AD: surplus manure (after application to the fields) is sent to anaerobic digestion. Manure, biogas, electricity, and thermal energy production of the AD scenario were estimated to be 7.5 Mt y−1, 378 Mm3 y−1, 907 GWe y−1, and 997.8 GWth y−1, respectively. The scenario, including mechanical separation followed by anaerobic digestion (AD + Sep), contributed to avoiding emissions to the largest extent (1 Mt CO2 eq), whereas AD outperformed the others in avoiding costs of fertilization. According to the estimated potential and the environmental cost-effectiveness of AD, new plants can be established that will recycle manure through bioenergy production, and, subsequently, the digestate can be applied as organic fertilizer, closing the nutrients cycle.

show abstract

“…where, PM emission = Particulate matter emission (kg PM y -1 ) EF PM 2.5/ 10 = Particulate matter emission factor of housing system and animal category, kg PM animal -1 d -1 1000 = conversion factor from gram to kilogram 365= conversion factor from year to day FNR, 2006;Frey et al, 2013) CH4 leakage from installation % of biogas 1 (Hou, 2016; CH4 leakage from CHP % of biogas 1.5 (Hou, 2016; LHV of methane-mass MJ kg -1 50 (Masters, 2013) E g -Electricity conversion efficiency % 38 (Lansche and Müller, 2012) Heat conversion efficiency % 46 (Lansche and Müller, 2012) Specific energy of diesel MJ kg -1 45.6 (Anonymous, 2017) E vs -Conversion efficiency of digester % 35 (Møller et al, 2004) Methane productivity kg CH 4 kg -1 VS 0.35 (Hill, 1984;Møller et al, 2004) CH 4 yield in AD % 65 CO 2 yield in AD % 35 F run -CHP running time % 85 Assumed Specific heat capacity of manure KJ Kg -1 °C -1 2.8 (Nayyeri et al, 2009) Mesophilic Temperature °C 38 (Yu et al, 2014) TS of substrate % Energy requirement for H S cleaning kWh h -1 0.4 (Anonymous, 2013) 1 Assumed for the modeled large scale biogas plant.…”

Section: Description Of Process-based Analysis 121 Collection and Housingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technical, environmental and cost-benefit assessment of manure management chain: A case study of large scale dairy farming

Sefeedpari

Vellinga

Rafiee

et al. 2019

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improper management of livestock manure has resulted in loss of nutrients and organic matter available in manure in addition to negative environmental impacts. This study developed and compared eight manure management scenarios across their entire life cycles, rom excretion to transport to land, considering technical, environmental and economic aspects. The scenarios based on combinations of collection, sand separation, solid/liquid (S/L) separation, anaerobic digestion (AD), composting, and storage were compared. Mass balances, costs and benefits and greenhouse emissions were evaluated. The model framework was tested and validated for a large-scale dairy farm with 9,000 heads of cattle and daily 2 manure production of approximately 505 t in Iran. The study indicated that sand separation and S/L separation did not contribute to a change in manure nutrients or emissions but reduced sand, maintenance cost, and transport requirements. AD followed by separation achieved the highest emission reduction (27.7 kg CO 2eq t -1 ) due to the avoided emissions from replacing fossil fuels by renewable energy. Composting method had the lowest costs; however it resulted in a low nutrient recovery efficiency and high nitrous oxide emission. The assessment revealed that AD is a promising management option yielding a high potential greenhouse gas savings, nutrients recovery and nitrogen availability in fertilizer for plants. In spite of the high investment costs of AD, it could be a profitable strategy due to the high subsidies paid to renewable energy projects in Iran. In conclusion, this study showed that the choice of manure treatment method has a strong influence on nutrients, profitability and greenhouse gas balances by performing sensitivity analysis. The results of this study and the application of this model further indicate the need to consider various significant impacts, farm specifications and local conditions to decide the best manure management options.

show abstract

Towards improving the manure management chain

Cited by 4 publications

References 158 publications

Manure management and soil biodiversity: Towards more sustainable food systems in the EU

Manure management and soil biodiversity: Towards more sustainable food systems in the EU

To What Extent Is Manure Produced, Distributed, and Potentially Available for Bioenergy? A Step toward Stimulating Circular Bio-Economy in Poland

Technical, environmental and cost-benefit assessment of manure management chain: A case study of large scale dairy farming

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About