Gaseous emissions from pig-on-litter systems : composting

(1)

A L I M E N T A T I O N A G R I C U L T U R E

E N V I R O N N E M E N T

Eager workshop

Gaseous emissions from

pig-on-litter systems

(2)

Pig housing

M. Hassouna (1), P. Robin (1),

C. Kermarrec (1), C. Texier (2)

(1) INRA UMR Sol-Agronomie-Spatialisation – 65, rue de Saint-Brieuc – CS 84215

– 35042 Rennes cedex

(3)

Eager workshop

3 series of experiments

-the influence of physical structure

and chemical composition

4 different types of litter

: 2 commercial products (BioPig, straw

compacted in small cubes), broken straw, crushed willow

-the influence of using old litter on gaseous emissions

4 different mixtures:

old sawdust litter only, old sawdust litter +

1/3 or 2/3 of fresh sawdust, fresh sawdust only

-the influence of turning and excretion input:

4 treatments:

with/without excretion x with/without turning

Controlled conditions

Broken straw

Compacted straw

BioPig

®®

Crushed

(4)

3 pigs/cell 3m²

25-60kg

Standard food

Ad libitum

T

_ins

≈

23°C

Air extraction and treatment

Cooled air

Air renewal

water & food

litter

pigs

Enceinte

3m

2

Naturally ventilated cells

Temperature controlled floor

14m

2

(5)

A L I M E N T A T I O N A G R I C U L T U R E E N V I R O N N E M E N T

Eager workshop

Gas concentrations

N

2

O, H

₂

O, CO

₂

, NH

₃

Air speed

Air temperature, humidity

Litter

temperature

D

a

ta

lo

g

e

r

D

a

ta

lo

g

e

r

Inside air Outside air Air temperature, humidity

Air inlet

Air outlet Computer

(6)

Results

Biopig N2 11% NH3 26% N2O 1% Pig 33% Solid manure 29% Crushed willow NH3 16% N2O Pig 33% N2 13% Broken straw NH3 19% Pig 33% N2 12% Compacted straw NH3 26% N2O 1% Pig 33% N2 7% Solid manure 33%

Type of litter

(7)

Eager workshop

3/3 new sawdust NH3 8% N2O 1% Pig 33% N2 19% Solid manure 39% 2/3 new sawdust NH3 11% N2O 1% Pig 33% N2 15% Solid manure 40% 1/3 new sawdust NH3 13% N2O 1% Pig 33% Solid manure 13% N2 40% 0/3 new sawdust NH3 12% N2O 1% Pig 33% Solid manure 9% N2 45%

(8)

Lying area, turned or not

Excretion area, turned

6,9%

Excretion area, not turned

N-deficit

+14%

N-N

₂

O 5%

N-NH

₃

1%

N-final

94%

5%

N-N

₂

O

N-NH

₃

8%

N-excreted

44%

N-final

72%

N-initial

56%

Ndeficit

-15%

N-initial

86%

N-N

₂

O

8%

N-deficit

-31%

N-NH

₃

7%

N-initial

54%

N- excreted

46%

N-final

54%

maximum effects of turning and excretion input

100%

N conservation

0%

(9)

Eager workshop

References

• KERMARREC C. ,1999. Bilan et transformations de l’azote

en élevage intensif de porc sur litière. Thèse Université

RENNES 1, 185p.

• ROBIN P., DE OLIVEIRA P. A., KERMARREC C., 1999.

Journées Rech Porcine en France, 31, 111-115

• KERMARREC C., ROBIN P.,2002. Journées Rech Porcine

en France, 34, 155-160.

(10)

Commercial conditions

⇒

Measurements of gaseous emissions in commercial buildings

(pig-on-litter systems):

Contrasted stocking density

Contrasted building insulation

Contrasted seasons (winter and summer)

(11)

Eager workshop

Commercial conditions

Livestock building

Experimental station

Commercial buildings

Year of the measurements

2002

2003

2001

2002

2001

2002

2003

Duration (weeks) Winter

Summer

18

21

14

21

20

16

14

13

13 Number of pigs Winter

Summer

30

40

35

30

40

103

106 3x23

3x23

Final weight (kg) Winter

Summer

146

143

117

144

146

110

115

105

115

115 Measurement technique

Simplified method

Tracer

gas

Simplified method

Tracer gas

Initial straw quantity (kg/pig) Winter

Summer

16

58

16

30

10

10 Straw supply (kg/day.pig) Winter

Summer

0,8

0.5

0

0.7 0,5

0.6 ≈

0,6

≈

0,6

≈

0,6

≈

0,6

≈

0,6

Litter surface (m²/pig) Winter

Summer

1,4

1.4 1,0

1.2 1,4

1.0 1,2

1.2 2,6

2,6

(12)

Commercial conditions

Gas concentrations :

NH

₃

, N

₂

O, CO

₂

, CH

₄

, SF

₆

SF

₆

Air flow rate

(13)

Eager workshop

Commercial conditions

(A) growing period

0

50

100

150

200

250

27

29

31

33 pig weight (kg.pig

-1

)

a

mmo

n

ia

e

mi

s

io

n

(mg

N

_

N

H

3

.h

-1

.p

ig

-1

)

tracing

heat production

(B) finishing period

0

500 1000

1500

78

80

82

84

86

88

90

92 pig weight (kg.pig

-1

)

a

m

o

n

ia

e

m

is

s

io

n

(m

g

N

_

N

H

3

.h

-1

.p

ig

-1

)

tracing

heat production

Emission estimates from tracing and heat production give

similar values

(14)

Commercial conditions

Validation of the results

Water emission

Carbon emission

Nitrogen emission

Gaz

H

2

O

(kg H

₂

O.pig

-1

)

CO

2

(kg C-CO

₂

.pig

-1

)

CH

4

(kg C-CH

₄

.pig

-1

)

NH

3

(kg N-NH

₃

.pig

-1

)

N

2

O

(kg N-N

₂

O.pig

-1

)

Tracing

402

92 1,1

1,4

0,01

Heat production

391

84 1,0

1,3

0,01

Concentration ratios

a

387

91 1,1

0,7

0,01

a

the water emission of 387 kg H2O

.pig

-1

is the deficit of the mass balance increased by 10% metabolic water produced,

the ratios of gas concentration to water vapor are used to calculate the other emissions

(15)

Eager workshop

Commercial conditions

B1 Winter 2003 1,2 m ²/p ig 5,4 kg N-food + 0,4 kg N-straw /pig

N-pigs 29% NH3-N 26% N2-N 9% N2O-N 1% N-manure 35% B2-R1 Sum m er 2002 2,6m ²/pig 4,5 kg N-food + 0,5 kg N-straw /pig

N-pigs 29% NH3-N 10% N2O-N 5% N-manure 32% N2-N 24% B2-R1 Winter 2001 2,6m ²/pig 4,5 kg N-food + 0,5 kg N-straw /pig

N-pigs 29% N2-N 40% NH3-N 3% N2O-N 3% N-manure 25% B1 Summ er 2003 1,2 m²/pig 5,4 kg N-food + 0,4 kg N straw /pig

N2-N 15% N-manure 25% N2O-N 1% N-pigs 33% NH3-N 26%

ITP-R1 Sum m er 2002 1,4 m ²/pig 8,5 kg N-food + 0,4 kg N straw /pig

NH3-N 26% N-pigs 33% N2O-N 1% N-manure 25% N2-N 15%

ITP-R1 Winter 2002 1,4 m ²/pig 8 kg N-food + 0,4 kg N straw /pig

iTP-R2 Sum m er 2002 1,0 m ²/pig 6 kg N-food + 0,4 kg N straw /pig

NH3-N 26% N-pigs 33% N2O-N 1% N-manure 25% N2-N 15%

ITP-R2 Winter 2002 1,4 m ²/pig 9 kg N-food + 0,4 kg N straw /pig

(16)

Discussions

Influence of the stocking density:



Pigs activity



Gaseous exchange

Influence of solid manure water content

Rather homogenous low nitrogen content in the manure

despite the variability in NH

₃

and N

₂

O emissions

(17)

Eager workshop

Conclusions

For N

₂

O

:

Variations between 0,02 and 0,16kg N-N

₂

O/kg excreted N

Higher than the given reference for pig-on-slatted floor systems:

0,02 N-N

₂

O/kg excreted N (IPCC)

EF(N

₂

O) = 4 - 12% excreted N for livestock buildings

with less than 2 m

2 litter/pig

EF(N

₂

O) = 2 - 8% excreted N for livestock buildings

with more than 2 m

2 litter/pig

These emission factors should be reduced when the

litter inputs are over 100 kg litter/pig

(18)

Conclusions

For NH

₃

:

Small influence of the indoor conditions, the rearing conditions

or the litter management in the livestock buildings with a

normal stocking density (between 1 and 1,4m

2 _{/pig), regular}

straw supplies and thermal insulation of the building

Agreement with English and Danish results: 100 to 400mg

NH

₃

/h.pig (Groot Koerkamp P.W.G et al.,1998)

EF(NH

₃

) = 15 - 25% excreted N for pigs reared

for at least 10 weeks with a litter input in the

range 50-80 kg/pig

(19)

Eager workshop

Conclusions

Hypothesis: combined Effects explain high variability

for pig-on-litter reared for at least 10 weeks, 1,2m²/pig, 50-80kg

litter/pig, no turning, normal management (% excreted N):

EF(NH

₃

) = 20%;

EF(N

₂

O) = 8%; EF(N

_loss

) = 64%

NH

₃

= 0,20 . 17/14 . N

_excret

. E

_{AnimalDensity}

. E

_Maintenance

. E

_{SubstrateAmount}

N

₂

O = 0,08 . 44/28 . N

_excret

. E

_LitterType

. E

_Maintenance

. E

_mixing

N

_Loss

= 0,64 . N

_excret

. E

_LitterType

. E

_Maintenance

. E

_Mixing

Gas

Variation Factors

Litter type

Animal density

(m²/pig)

Management

Substrate amount

(kg/pig)

Turning

straw

sawdust

2

1 careful careless

> 100

< 30

frequent

NH

₃

1

1.1

0.5

0.8

2

0.8

1.2

1 N

2

O

0.8

1.2

0.8

0.5

0.2

0.8

2

(20)

References

ROBIN P., HASSOUNA M., RAMONET Y., TEXIER C., 2004. In : Maitrise des émissions gazeuses

en bâtiments sur litière (validation en élevage des résultats acquis en station expérimentale).

Rapport final convention MEDD-DE /INRA. GIS Porcherie Verte, UMR SAS, Rennes, 110 p.

http://www.rennes.inra.fr/umrsas/documentation

HASSOUNA M., ROBIN P., TEXIER C. 2004 - N

₂

O and CH

₄

emissions in french straw-based

pig-on-litter breeding systems. In : Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture mitigaton options

and strategies Internationa Conference Febr. 10-12 2004 Leipzig Germany, 245-247

HASSOUNA M., ROBIN P., TEXIER C, RAMONET Y. 2005 - N

₂

O anc CH

₄

emissions in french

straw-based pig-on-litter breeding systems. In : International workshop on green pork

production May. 25-27 2005 Paris France, 121-122.

HASSOUNA M., ROBIN P.,PAILLAT J.M. 2007-Multi-element combined methods increase the

reliability of emission factor measurement. In Ammonia emissions in agriculture, G-J Monteny

and E. Hartung, 2007, Wageningen Academic Publishers, 341-342

RIGOLOT C., ESPAGNOL S., ROBIN P., HASSOUNA M., BELINE F., PAILLAT J.M., DOURMAD

J.Y. Mathematical modelling of manure production by pigs: part II NH

₃

, N

₂

O, and CH

₄

emissions

and nutrient and matter flows in animal house and during manure storage and treatment. To be

(21)

Eager workshop

COMPOSTING

(22)

Introduction

0

20

40

60

80

100 Available N (%)

Oxygen

-porosity (%)

Biodegradable C (%)

Water

content (%)

pig slurry

compost

wheat straw

(23)

Eager workshop

Experimental design

Mixtures with straw, sawdust, pig slurry, solid manure, molasses, urea, and

water. Water content

≈

70% and free air space

≈

70%

0,45

0,55

0,65

0,75

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

0,9

A

_C

B

G

E

H

F

D

N

N+

N++

N-

N--C+

C

C-Available N

Biodegradable C

(24)

Material and method

Gas concentration:

N

2

O, CO

2

, NH

3

, CH

4

, H

2

O

Air speed

Air temperature,

humidity

Compost

temperature

D

a

ta

lo

g

e

r

ta

lo

g

e

r

Inside air Outside air

Air temperature,

humidity

Compost

Air inlet

Air outlet

Computer

(25)

Eager workshop

Results

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 A N--C

_D

N++C-N

H

3

-N

e

m

it

te

d

(

g

k

g

-1

TN

h

-1

)

time (d)

C

N-C

B

N-C

E NC

F

N+C-H N+C

G

NC+

•more manure =>

shorter response

time

• more available N

=> longer emission

(26)

Results

Heap identification

A

N--/C

B

N-/C

C

N-/C

D

N++/C-E

N/C

F

N+/C-G

N/C+

H

N+/C

N-NH

3

(g kg

-1

totalN)

165

275

387

489

362

479

248

249 C:N

29.0

24.7

17.6

19.0

19.5

21.2

19.6

19.5 Wheat straw

18.5

28.1

10.0

26.0

21.0

12.7

15.3

19.4 Sawdust

-

10.6 -

2.2 Sugarcane molasses

-

7.5

10.9 Pig manure

45.0

15.3

80.1 -

-

-Pig slurry

36.5 -

-

72.8

78.9

52.9

71.9

15.6 Urea

-

0.5

0.4

1.2

0.1

0.6 -

0.8 Water

-

56.2

9.5 -

-

23.2

5.3

51.1

(27)

Eager workshop

Results

EF(C-CO

₂

) =19- 61% of the initial carbon content

EF(CH

₄

)=0,02-0,29 % of the initial carbon content

EF (N-NH

₃

)=9-48% of the initial nitrogen content

EF (N-N

₂

O)=0,4-1,2% of the initial nitrogen

content

(28)

Results

NH

₃

-N emitted at 56 d = 16,38 SN – 0,903 SH

_VS

+ 643,7

(N=8; P<0,05 ; R

2 _{= 0,82)}

CO

₂

-C emitted at 28 d = 0,683 SH

_VS

-58,92

(N=8; P<0,01 ; R

2 _{= 0,84)}

with NH

₃

-N expressed in g kg

-1

_{TN, CO}

2 -C in g kg

-1

TC, SN and SH-VS en g

kg

-1

_{DM. NH}

3 .

These relations are valid for heaps with water content

≈

70% and

free air space

≈

70%

SN : Soluble Nitrogen

(29)

Eager workshop

Results

.

SN : Soluble Nitrogen

SH

_VS

: Soluble + Hemicellulose-like fractions from the Van Soest analysis

Équations « dynamiques » de Jean-Marie pour C,N,O2,H2O

(30)

Conclusion

Biodegradable C, available N influence NH

₃

emissions; O

₂

content

influence NH

₃

and CO

₂

emissions

NH

₃

-N and CO

₂

-C potential emission can be calculated for the

thermophilic phase

The model describing the 5 main influencing factors (C, N, O

₂

,

H

₂

O, time) on N-NH

₃

, C-CO

₂

, H

₂

O potential emissions during

composting of animal manure will be published

Other experiments have been done for model validation with

various climate, cover sheet, bovine or poultry manure

(31)

Eager workshop

References

Paillat, J.-M., Robin, P., Hassouna, M. & Leterme, P. (2005). Predicting

ammonia and carbon dioxide emissions from carbon and nitrogen

biodegradability during animal waste composting. Atmospheric Environment,

39(36), 6833-6842.

Paillat, J.-M., Robin, P., Hassouna, M. & Leterme, P., 2005. Effet du

compostage d’effluents porcins sur les émissions gazeuses et les teneurs en

éléments polluants. Rapport final convention ADEME-INRA 0375C0077, GIS

Porcherie Verte, UMR SAS, Rennes, 106 p.