Methane emission rates averaged over a year from ten farm-scale manure storage tanks.

Methane (CH4) emissions from animal manure stored in outdoor tanks are difficult to predict because of several influencing factors. In this study, the tracer gas dispersion method (TDM) was used to quantify CH4 emissions from ten manure storage tanks, along with the collection of supporting information, in order to identify its emission drivers. The dataset included two tanks storing dairy cattle manure, six holding pig manure, and two with digestate from manure-based biogas plants. CH4 emissions from the tanks were measured six to 14 times over a year. Emissions varied from 0.02 to 14.30 kg h-1, or when normalised by the volume of manure stored, emission factors (EFs) varied from 0.05 to 11 g m-3 h-1. Annual average CH4 EFs varied greatly between the tanks, ranging from 0.20 to 2.75 g m-3 h-1. Normalised EFs are similar to literature values for cattle and digested manure, but at the high end of the interval for pig manure. The averaged manure temperature for all tanks varied from 10.6 to 16.4 °C, which was higher than reported in a previous Danish study. Volatile solids (VS) concentration was in average higher for cattle manure (ranging from 3.1 and 4.4 %) than pig manure (ranging from 1.0 to 3.6 %). CH4 emission rates were positively correlated with manure temperature, whereas this was not the case for VS concentration. Annual average EFs were higher for pig than for cattle manure (a factor of 2.5), which was greater than digested manure emissions (a factor of 1.2). For the pig manure storage tanks, CH4 emissions were higher for covered tanks than for uncovered tanks (by a factor of 2.3). In this study, manure storage tanks showed a large disparity in emission rates, driven not only by physical factors, but also by farm management practices.

Methane emissions from five Danish pig farms: Mitigation strategies and inventory estimated emissions.

This study investigated whole-farm methane emissions from five Danish pig farms with different manure management practices and compared measured emission rates to international and national greenhouse gas inventory emission models. Methane emissions were quantified by using the tracer gas dispersion method. Farms were measured between five and eight times throughout a whole year. One of the farms housed sows and weaners (P1) and the others focused on fattening pigs (P2-P5). The farms had different manure treatment practices including biogasification (P3), acidification (P4-P5) and no manure treatment (liquid slurry) (P1-P2). Quantified methane emissions ranged from 0.2 to 20 kg/h and the highest rates were seen at the farms with fattening pigs and with no manure treatment (P2), while the lowest emissions were detected at farms with manure acidification (P4 and P5). Average methane emission factors (EFs), normalised based on livestock units, were 14 ± 6, 18 ± 9, 8 ± 7, 2 ± 1 and 1 ± 1 g/LU/h, for P1, P2, P3, P4 and P5, respectively. Emissions from fattening pig farms with biogasification (P3) and acidification (P4-P5) facilities were 55% and 91-93% lower, respectively, than from farm with no manure treatment (P2). Inventory models underestimated farm-measured methane emissions on average by 51%, across all models and farms, with the Danish model performing the worst (underestimation of 64%). A revision of model parameters related to manure emissions, such as the estimation of volatile solids excreted and methane conversion factor parameters, could improve model output, although more data needs to be collected to strengthen the conclusions. As one of the first studies assessing whole-pig farm emissions, the results showed the potential of the applied measuring method to identify mitigation strategy efficiencies and highlighted the necessity to investigate inventory model accuracy.