Whole-Farm Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Review with Application to a Pennsylvania Dairy Farm

Chianese, Dawn S; Rotz, C. Alan; Richard, Thomas L.

doi:10.13031/2013.26895

Cited by 61 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Emissions from animal facilities primarily consist of animal respiration and enteric fermentation. In addition, emissions from manure storage are also a potential source of CH 4 [13].…”

Section: Methane (Chmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methane Emission from Sheep Respiration and Sheepfolds During the Grazing Season in a Desert Grassland

Zhai¹,

Lu²,

Tang³

et al. 2015

TOASCJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methane (CH 4 ) emissions from ruminants should be accounted for the natural grazed rangeland ecosystems when devising greenhouse gas budget inventory, in particular, their contribution to global warming. In this study, CH 4 emission from sheep respiration at different grazing intensities (light grazing, 0.75 sheep/ha, LG; moderate grazing, 1.50 sheep/ha, MG; and heavy grazing, 2.25 sheep/ha, HG) and in sheepfolds were evaluated in a desert grassland of Inner Mongolia. Results indicated that daily CH 4 emission from sheep was not significantly different between treatments. When CH 4 emission was expressed emission per 100g daily, there was a significant difference of LG vs HG and MG vs HG, with the values of 15.64g, 20.00g and 28.63g for LG, MG and HG, respectively, during the grazing season. There was no significant difference among CH 4 fluxes in sheepfolds (mean 39.0 ug m -2 h -1 ). Considering CH 4 emissions from the grazing ecosystem, net CH 4 emissions from LG, MG and HG plots were -18.33, -1.91 and 21.19 g/ha/day, respectively. The digestibility of forage had a positive correlation with CH 4 emission expressed on daily and metabolic body weight basis. It is concluded that MG will improve the balance between CH 4 emission from grassland and grazing livestock in the desert grasslands of Inner Mongolia.

show abstract

“…Emissions from animal facilities primarily consist of animal respiration and enteric fermentation. In addition, emissions from manure storage are also a potential source of CH 4 [13].…”

Section: Methane (Chmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methane Emission from Sheep Respiration and Sheepfolds During the Grazing Season in a Desert Grassland

Zhai¹,

Lu²,

Tang³

et al. 2015

TOASCJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Akdeniz and Janni / Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 62 (2012) [170][171][172][173][174][175][176][177][178][179][180][181][182] anaerobically to let NO x be reduced to N 2 with intermediate production of N 2 O and NO (Chianese et al, 2009;Davidson et al, 2000). This usually happens when dry media gets wet in heavy rain and media pores are filled with water.…”

Section: Sitementioning

confidence: 99%

“…High-moisture-content biofilter media improves gas absorption into the biofilm layer but can create anaerobic zones that cause additional gas production (Chianese et al, 2009;Davidson et al, 2000;Ro et al, 2008). An example of additional gas production is N 2 O production from NH 3 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Full-scale biofilter reduction efficiencies assessed using portable 24-hour sampling units

Akdeniz

Janni

2012

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Portable 24-hr sampling units were used to collect air samples from eight biofilters on four animal feeding operations. The biofilters were located on a dairy, a swine nursery, and two swine finishing farms. Biofilter media characteristics (age, porosity, density, particle size, water absorption capacity, pressure drop) and ammonia (NH 3 ), hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ), and nitrous oxide (N 2 O) reduction efficiencies of the biofilters were assessed. The deep bed biofilters at the dairy farm, which were in use for a few months, had the most porous media and lowest unit pressure drops. The average media porosity and density were 75% and 180 kg/m 3 , respectively. Reduction efficiencies of H 2 S and NH 3 (biofilter 1: 64% NH 3 , 76% H 2 S; biofilter 2: 53% NH 3 , 85% H 2 S) were close to those reported for pilot-scale biofilters. No N 2 O production was measured at the dairy farm. The highest H 2 S, SO 2 , NH 3 , and CH 4 reduction efficiencies were measured from a flat-bed biofilter at the swine nursery farm. However, the highest N 2 O generation (29.2%) was also measured from this biofilter. This flat-bed biofilter media was dense and had the lowest porosity. A garden sprinkler was used to add water to this biofilter, which may have filled media pores and caused N 2 O production under anaerobic conditions. Concentrations of H 2 S and NH 3 were determined using the portable 24-hr sampling units and compared to ones measured with a semicontinuous gas sampling system at one farm. Flat-bed biofilters at the swine finishing farms also produced low amounts of N 2 O. The N 2 O production rate of the newer media (2 years old) with higher porosity was lower than that of older media (3 years old) (P ¼ 0.042).Implications: Media characteristics and gas reduction efficiencies of eight field-scale biofilters were evaluated. The media characteristics measured in this study indicated that media older than 3 years should be tested for high-pressure drops and nitrous oxide (N 2 O) production. The results also indicated that regular water addition can improve gas reduction efficiencies of biofilters but adding excessive amounts of water can cause N 2 O production. Uniform water distribution can be a challenge.

show abstract

“…Out of four facilities in which these studies were conducted, only one was in North America, with the other three in Europe. Almost a decade later, Chianese et al (2009) reviewed GHG emissions from dairy operations. In the latter review, CH 4 emissions ranged from 129 to 194 g d À1 AU À1 for dry cows and from 258 to 332 g d À1 AU À1 for lactating cows; while N 2 O emissions were below 2.00 g d À1 AU À1 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4. Distribution of hourly mean GHG emission rates from the two dairy barns during each of the three measurement periods (n ¼ 101e106; the top and bottom of box plots indicate the first quartile (Q1) and third quartile (Q3), respectively; the lines dividing the boxes show the median; and the whiskers indicate the minimum and maximum values).<2 g d À1 AU À1(Chianese et al, 2009) Samer et al (2012Samer et al ( , 2011a. reported significantly higher emissions values for N 2 O ranging from 21.6 to 47.3 g d À1 AU À1 from naturally ventilated dairy barns in Germany.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Greenhouse gas emissions from naturally ventilated freestall dairy barns

Joo

Ndegwa

Heber

et al. 2015

Atmospheric Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whole-Farm Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Review with Application to a Pennsylvania Dairy Farm

Cited by 61 publications

References 60 publications

Methane Emission from Sheep Respiration and Sheepfolds During the Grazing Season in a Desert Grassland

Methane Emission from Sheep Respiration and Sheepfolds During the Grazing Season in a Desert Grassland

Full-scale biofilter reduction efficiencies assessed using portable 24-hour sampling units

Greenhouse gas emissions from naturally ventilated freestall dairy barns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About