Download Environmental consequences of producing liquid

Environmental consequences of producing liquid
N-K and solid P-fertiliser from animal slurry
A Greener Agriculture for a Bluer Baltic Sea, October 2012, Copenhagen
Jerke W. De Vries
Wageningen UR Livestock Research
Urine
Faeces
Content
 Introduction
● Mineral N-K concentrates to replace mineral fertiliser
● Production process
 Environmental consequences of producing mineral
concentrates
● Life cycle assessment
● Aim and scenarios
● Results
 Conclusions
Introduction (1/3)
 Producing mineral N-K concentrates to replace fertiliser
● Started in 2009
● Government and Agricultural industry
 Research trajectories
● Monitoring of production installations
● Agricultural & environmental effects of using
concentrates as fertiliser
● Economic and user analysis
● Environmental consequences (Life Cycle
Assessment)
Introduction (2/3)
 Mineral concentrate to replace mineral fertiliser
Max N application
Current
situation
Situation with mineral
concentrate
Mineral fertilizer
Mineral fertiliser
Mineral
concentrate
Animal manure
Animal manure
N limit animal manure
170 kg N/ha
External effects?
Introduction (3/3)
Manure
Solid fraction
Flocculant/
coagulant
Liquid
fraction
Mineral
concentrate
9 ‐ 13 Euro per ton
Permeate
Environmental consequences (1/6)
Life cycle assessment
N2O, CH4,
CO2
NH3
Greenhouse gases
(CO2, CH4, N2O)
Acidification
(NH3, SO2, NOx)
N2O, CH4,
CO2,
NH3
Eutrophication
(NH3, NOx, NO3)
N2O
CO2
NH3
Particulate matter
(NH3, NOx, SO2)
Fossil fuel depletion
NO3
Environmental consequences (2/6)
Aim & Scenarios
 Aim: Assess change in environmental impact of
processing pig/ dairy cattle manure to produce
● Mineral fertilizer
● Bio-energy
 Compare it to conventional manure management
system: storage, transport, field application
 Change oriented, what is affected
Environmental consequences (3/6)
Aim & Scenarios
 Distribution locations
● Local application (arable and grassland)
● External application in NL (arable)
● Export outside NL (arable)
Environmental consequences (4/6)
Aim & Scenarios
 Impacts: greenhouse gases, fossil fuel depletion,
acidification, eutrophication, and particulate matter
 Scenarios:
1. Only processing
2. Including anaerobic digestion of solid fraction

Comparison based on 1 ton liquid manure
Environmental consequences (5/6)
140%
Results
NH3/ NOx
N2O
120%
100%
Ref (100%)
80%
Concentrate
60%
Incl digestion
40%
CO2
20%
0%
-20%
Greenhouse gases
•
•
Acidification
Eutrophication
Particulate Matter
Fossil Fuel
Depletion
Energy for transportation halved, but energy needed for processing
With anaerobic digestion, energy is produced
Environmental consequences (6/6)
Results
 Sensitivity analysis
● Shortening storage time essential for CH4
● NH3 emission from processing low and bio-energy
production, equal or better performance
● Heat use from digestion improves performance for
greenhouse gases and FFD
● Processing only surplus pig manure in intensive
production regions (39%) did not lead to changed
impact
Conclusions
 Production of mineral concentrate
● Increases environmental impact, except for
eutrophication, compared to conventional manure
management
● Led to similar fertiliser replacement
 Including anaerobic digestion reduces climate change
and fossil energy depletion
End
Questions?
More information:
[email protected]
Or (De Vries et al, 2012)
Other recent studies show
 Source separation reduces climate change, acidification
and particulate matter
(De Vries et al, 2012c)
 Anaerobic mono-digestion reduces environmental impact
and produces some bio-energy
(De Vries et al, 2012b)
 Co-digestion with wastes/ residues increases bio-energy
and reduces GHGs and other impacts
(De Vries et al, 2012b)
 Co-digestion with feedstocks increases energy
production, but also GHG emission through LUC
al, 2012b)
(De Vries et