Zifei Liu and Wendy Powers

D e p a r t m e n t s o f A n i m a l S c i e n c e

a n d B i o s y s t e m s & A g r i c u l t u r e E n g i n e e r i n g

Measuring Greenhouse Gases Emissions from Animal Operations in

Environmental Rooms

Background

Animal operations are important sources of anthropogenic GHG, mostly of CH4 and N2O.

Measurements of both CH4 and N2O from animal operations have large uncertainties.

Dietary strategies have been studied to reduce air emissions while maintaining animal performance (Powers et al., 2007).

Air emissions from different species were measured in environmental rooms in 17 studies.

Objectives

Compare CH4 measurements from 55C and INNOVA analyzer

Summarize the measured GHG emissions and compare with the IPCC values

Summarize the effects of various dietary strategies on GHG emissions

Animals and Housing

AAQRF at Michigan State University.

12 environmental rooms

Each room: H 2.14 m W 3.97 m L 2.59 m

Animals and Housing

Cow, heifer or

Steer (1)

Finishing pigs

(6)

Turkeys

(20)

Broiler chickens

(50)

Laying hens

(56-80)

Air sampling and measurement system

Model 17C

Model

55C

BINOS

INNOVA

Room1

Room2

Room3

Room4

Room5

Room6

Room7

Room8

Room9

Room10

Room11

Room12

Incoming air

Sampling manifold

NH3, NO, NO2

CH4

CO2 / O2

CO2, CH4, N2O, NMTHC, NH3

Gas samples were sequentially monitored from each room and incoming air

Data collection and analysis

Software control (LabVIEW v. 8.2)

Purge for 9.5 min, data collection for 5.5 min

One measurement cycle is 195 min.

7 to 8 daily observations per room

Data analyzed using mixed model (SAS v. 9.1) Date was a random variable and room was treated as nested

term within diet

Species and diets of the 17 studies

Broilers

Reduced N

vs. control

3*2

Reduced N and litter

amendment PLT

Laying hens

0 and 15%

DDGS

0,10%,20%

DDGS

2*2

0, 20% DDGS

organic or inorganic

trace minerals

With or without

supplemental methionine

Turkeys

2*2

100%, 110% NRC

2, 3AA

Finishing pigs

0 and 20%

DDGS

15% DDGS

with or without

microbial or chemical additive

Steers

0, 40%, 60%

DDGS

0, 60% or 60% DDGs plus

added copper and

molybdenum

Quillaja, yucca, or no

extract

Quillaja, yucca, or no

extract

Heifers

High and low rumen degraded protein

High and low rumen degraded protein

Dairy cows

Typical Western

Midwestern or

Southeastern U.S. diets

Typical Western

Midwestern or

Southeastern U.S. diets

Air measurements from different instruments

17C

INNOVA

NH3

R2=0.95

BINOS INNOVA

CO2

R2=0.96

55C

INNOVA CH4

R2=0.60

0.001ppm

0.2ppm

100ppm

5.1ppm

0.02ppm

0.1ppm

CH4 measurements from 55C and INNOVA

y = 1.1692x - 1.3693

R² = 0.60

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 5 10 15 20 25

CH

4 co

nce

ntr

atio

ns

by I

NN

OV

A (

ppm

)

CH4 concentrations by the Model 55C analyzer

(ppm)

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 5 10 15 20

INNOVA

CH4

__________

55C CH4

CH4 concentrations by the Model 55C analyzer

(ppm)

RPD of CH4 measurements from 55C and INNOVA

0%

200%

400%

600%

800%

1000%

1200%

1400%

1600%

1800%

2000%

5 10 15 20 25

RP

D o

f C

H4 f

rom

the

two i

nst

rum

ents

Temperature (oC)

0%

200%

400%

600%

800%

1000%

1200%

1400%

1600%

1800%

2000%

400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

RP

D o

f C

H4 f

rom

the

two i

nst

rum

ents

CO2 concentrations (ppm)

RPD of CH4 measurements from 55C and INNOVA

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

5 10 15 20 25 30

CO

2 c

on

centr

atio

n (

pp

m)

Temperature (oC)

Bubble size represent RPD of CH4 measurements

Estimating CH4emission using the IPCC approaches

Manure CH4 emission

Enteric fermentation

CH4 emission

Total CH4 emission

=VS·Bo·0.67 ·MCF Swine: 4.2 g head-1 day-1 Steers: 145 g head-1 day-1 Dairy cows: 351 g head-1 day-1

CH4 conversion factor

maximum CH4 producing capacity

Excreted volatile solid

Comparison of measured CH4with the IPCC values

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

BR

01

08

BR

0208

LY

0108

LY

0109

LY

0209

LY

0309

TY

0108

CH

4 e

mis

sion r

ate

(g h

ead

-1 d

ay-1

)

Codes of studies

Meaured emissions

IPCC estimated

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

SW

0109

SW

0209

ST

0109

ST

0209

ST

0110

ST

0210

HF

0108

HF

0208

DY

0108

DY

0208

CH

4 e

mis

sion r

ate

(g h

ead

-1 d

ay-1

)

Codes of studies

Meaured emissions

IPCC estimated

Comparison of measured CH4 with the IPCC values

Species

CH4 emission rate g hd-1 day-1 (1)/(2)

Measured (1) IPCC (2)

Broiler 0.02±0.05 0.036 56%

Laying hen 0.03±0.03 0.078 38%

Turkey 0.25±0.05 0.25 100%

Finishing pig 3.4±2.0 6.9 49%

Steer 53±23 151 35%

Heifer 220±71 368 60%

Dairy cow 399±88 368 108%

Estimating N2O emission using the IPCC approaches

N excretion

rate

N2O emission

factor

Direct N2O

emission

0.31-1.10 kg N (1000kg BW)-1day-1

0.001-0.02 kg N2O-N/kg N

Comparison of measured N excretion rate with the IPCC values

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2B

R010

8

BR

020

8

LY

010

8

LY

010

9

LY

020

9

LY

030

9

TY

010

8

SW

01

09

SW

02

09

HF

01

08

HF

02

08

DY

010

8

DY

020

8

N e

xcr

etio

n r

ate

kg

N (

10

00

kg B

W)-1

day

-1

Codes of studies

Measured IPCC

Comparison of measured N2O with the IPCC values

Species

N2O emission rate g kgBW-1 day-1 (1)/(2)

Measured (1) IPCC (2)

Broiler 0.10±0.12 0.0017 59

Laying hen 0.04±0.02 0.0013 31

Turkey 0.05±0.13 0.0012 42

Finishing pig 0.010±0.005 0.0013 8

Steer 0.004±0.006 0.0010 4

Heifer 0.014±0.006 0.0013 11

Dairy cow 0.020±0.006 0.0013 15

GHG emissions in CO2e

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

broiler Laying hen Turkey Finishing

pig

Steer Heifer Dairy cow

GH

G e

mis

sio

n

(g k

gB

W-1

day

-1 i

n C

O2e)

N2O

CH4

CO2

Effects of dietary strategies on CH4 emissions

Broilers

Reduced N

vs. control

3*2

Reduced N and litter

amendment PLT

Laying hens

0 and 15%

DDGS

0,10%,20%

DDGS

2*2

0, 20% DDGS

organic or inorganic

trace minerals

With or without

supplemental methionine

Turkeys

2*2

100%, 110% NRC

2, 3AA

Finishing pigs

0 and 20%

DDGS

15% DDGS

with or without

microbial or chemical additive

Steers

0, 40%, 60%

DDGS

0, 60% or 60% DDGs plus

added copper and

molybdenum

Quillaja, yucca, or no

extract

Quillaja, yucca, or no

extract

Heifers

High and low rumen degraded protein

High and low rumen degraded protein

Dairy cows

Typical Western

Midwestern or

Southeastern U.S. diets

Typical Western

Midwestern or

Southeastern U.S. diets P<0.10

Effects of diet DDGS on CH4 emissions

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0%DDGS 15%DDGS

CH

4 e

mm

ison

(g h

ead

-1 d

ay-1

)

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0%DDGS

In

0%DDGS

Org

20%DDGS

In

20%DDGS

Org

CH

4 e

mm

ison

(g h

ead

-1 d

ay-1

)

a ab b b

LY0209 (P=0.02)

a b

0

2

4

6

8

Control 20%DDGS

In

20%DDGS

Org

CH

4 e

mm

ison

(g h

ead

-1 d

ay-1

)

a b

c

SW0109 (P<0.01)

0

1

2

3

A:15%DDGS B: A+Reduced

N

C: B+Microb D: B+Chem

CH

4 e

mm

ison (

g h

ead

-1 d

ay-1

)

a a a b

SW0209 (P<0.01)

LY0108 (P=0.01)

Effects of diet CP on CH4 emissions

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

MW S W MW S W

CP

con

ten

t in

die

ts

(%)

CH

4 e

mis

sio

n (

g h

ead

-1 d

ay-1

)

Diet

CH4 emission rate CP content in feed

DY0108 (P=0.08) DY0208 (P=0.07)

//

a

b b

a

b b

Effects of dietary strategies on N2O emissions

Effects of dietary strategies on N2O emissions were not observed in any of the 17 studies at α=0.10 level.

Conclusions

Large discrepancy between the INNOVA and the Model 55C CH4 measurements were observed when air temperatures were relatively high (21 to 25oC) and CO2 concentrations were low.

The measured CH4 emission rates were comparable with the IPCC estimated values.

The measured N2O emission rates were much higher than the IPCC values, especially for poultry (dry manure handling system), indicating an underestimation of the IPCC N2O emission factors.

Conclusions

Poultry had lower CH4 emission rates than dairy cows, heifers and steers, but poultry had much higher N2O emission rates in g kg BW-1 day-1. As a result, poultry had similar GWP with dairy cows, heifers and steers, if not higher, as expressed in g kg BW-1 day-1 CO2e.

Diets with higher content of DDGS resulted in higher CH4 emissions from laying hens and swine operations. Diets with higher CP content resulted in higher CH4 emissions from dairy cow operations.

The N2O emissions were not influenced by the applied dietary strategies.

Implications

The results suggested conditions when either instrument for CH4 measurement is acceptable (temp, concentration)

Diet strategies merit further investigation for both ruminant and non-ruminant species.

Acknowledgements

This project was supported by National Research Initiative Competitive Grant nos. 2003-35112-17916, 2005-35112-17912, and 2008-55112-18827 from the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service Air Quality Program.

Funding was provided through USDA Cooperative Agreement Number 2005-35102-15356 and 2005-35112-17912.