Comparing thermal conditions inside and outside lactating dairy cattle barns in Canada.

The health, longevity, and performance of dairy cattle can be adversely affected by heat stress. This study evaluated the in-barn condition [i.e., temperature, relative humidity, and resulting temperature-humidity index (THI)] at 9 dairy barns with various climates and farm design-management combinations. Hourly and daily indoor and outdoor conditions were compared at each farm, including both mechanically and naturally ventilated barns. On-site conditions were compared with on-farm outdoor conditions, meteorological stations up to 125 km away, and NASA Power data. Canadian dairy cattle face periods of extreme cold and periods of high THI, dependent on the regional climate and season. The northernmost location (53°N) experienced about 75% fewer hours of THI >68 compared with the southernmost location (42°N). Milking parlors had higher THI than the rest of the barn during milking times. The THI conditions inside dairy barns were well correlated with THI conditions measured outside the barns. Naturally ventilated barns with metal roofs and without sprinklers fit a linear relationship (hourly and daily means) with a slope <1, indicating that in-barn THI exceeded outdoor THI more at lower THI and reached equality at higher THI. Mechanically ventilated barns fit nonlinear relationships, which showed the in-barn THI exceeded outdoor THI more at lower THI (e.g., 55-65) and approached equality at higher THI. In-barn THI exceedance was greater in the evening and overnight due to factors such as decreased wind speed and latent heat retention. Eight regression equations were developed (4 hourly, 4 daily) to predict in-barn conditions based on outdoor conditions, considering different barn designs and management systems. Correlations between in-barn and outdoor THI were best when using the on-site weather data from the study, but publicly available weather data from stations within 50 km provided reasonable estimates. Climate stations 75 to 125 km away and NASA Power ensemble data gave poorer fit statistics. For studies involving many dairy barns, the use of NASA Power data with equations for estimating average in-barn conditions in a population is likely appropriate especially when public stations have incomplete data. Results from this study show the importance of adapting recommendation on heat stress to the barn design and guide the selection of appropriate weather data depending on the aim of the study.

Does Fall Removal of the Dairy Manure Sludge in a Storage Tank Reduce Subsequent Methane Emissions?

When liquid manure is removed from storages for land application, "sludge" generally remains at the bottom of the tank. This may serve as an inoculum when fresh manure is subsequently added, thereby increasing methane (CH) emissions. Previous pilot-scale studies have shown that completely emptying storages can decrease CH emissions; however, no farm-scale studies have been conducted to quantify the effect of sludge removal. In this study, a commercial dairy farm removed as much manure and sludge from their concrete storage as possible in the fall (∼2% by volume remained). Emissions of CH were measured during the following winter, spring, and summer, and compared with emissions measured the preceding 2 yr when most of the sludge had not been removed (∼14% of tank volume remained). Emissions were measured using a micrometeorological technique, utilizing open-path CH lasers. Contrary to what was hypothesized, removing the majority of sludge in fall did not delay the onset of CH emissions and did not decrease emissions the following summer. In fact, annual CH emissions were ∼16% higher. It is possible that fall removal provided sufficient time for microbial dynamics to be restored before the following summer when emissions were high. Future farm-scale research should examine the effect of spring (rather than fall) emptying for on-farm CH mitigation in both concrete tanks and earthen storages.

Fugitive methane emissions from two agricultural biogas plants.

This study quantified fugitive methane (CH4) losses from multiple sources (open digestate storages, digesters and flare) at two biogas facilities over one year, providing a much needed dataset integrating all major loss pathways and changes over time. Losses of CH4 from Facility A were primarily from digestate storage (5.8% of biogas CH4), followed by leakage/venting (5.5%) and flaring (0.2%). At Facility B, losses from digestate storage were higher (10.7%) due to shorter hydraulic retention time and lack of a screwpress. Fugitive emissions from leakage were initially 3.8% but were reduced to 0.6% after the dome membrane was repaired at Facility B. For biogas to have a positive impact on greenhouse gas emissions and provide a low-carbon fuel, it is important to minimize fugitive losses from digestate storage and avoid leakage during abnormal operation (leakage, roof failure).

Effects of Two Manure Additives on Methane Emissions from Dairy Manure.

Liquid manure is a significant source of methane (CH4), a greenhouse gas. Many livestock farms use manure additives for practical and agronomic purposes, but the effect on CH4 emissions is unknown. To address this gap, two lab studies were conducted, evaluating the CH4 produced from liquid dairy manure with Penergetic-g® (12 mg/L, 42 mg/L, and 420 mg/L) or AgrimestMix® (30.3 mL/L). In the first study, cellulose produced 378 mL CH4/g volatile solids (VS) at 38 °C and there was no significant difference with Penergetic-g® at 12 mg/L or 42 mg/L. At the same temperature, dairy manure produced 254 mL CH4/g VS and was not significantly different from 42 mg/L Penergetic-g®. In the second lab study, the dairy manure control produced 187 mL CH4/g VS at 37 °C and 164 mL CH4/g VS at 20 °C, and there was no significant difference with AgrimestMix (30.3 mL/L) or Penergetic-g® (420 mg/L) at either temperature. Comparisons of manure composition before and after incubation indicated that the additives had no effect on pH or VS, and small and inconsistent effects on other constituents. Overall, neither additive affected CH4 production in the lab. The results suggest that farms using these additives are likely to have normal CH4 emissions from stored manure.

Assessing the Impacts of Climate Variability on Fertilizer Management Decisions for Reducing Nitrogen Losses from Corn Silage Production.

There is an incentive for dairy farmers to maximize crop production while minimizing costs and environmental impacts. In cold climates, farmers have limited opportunity to balance field activities and manure storage requirements while limiting nutrient losses. A revised DeNitrification DeComposition (DNDC) model for simulating tile drainage was used to investigate fertilizer scenarios when applying dairy slurry or urea on silage corn ( L.) to examine N losses over a multidecadal horizon at locations in eastern Canada and the US Midwest. Management scenarios included timing (spring, fall, split, and sidedress) and method of application (injected [10 cm], incorporated [5 cm], and broadcast). Reactive N losses (NO from drainage and runoff, NO, and NH) were greatest from broadcast, followed by incorporated and then injected applications. Among the fertilizer timing scenarios, fall manure application resulted in the greatest N loss, primarily due to increased N leaching in non-growing-season periods, with 58% more N loss per metric ton of silage than spring application. Split and sidedress mineral fertilizer had the lowest N losses, with average reductions of 9.5 and 4.9%, respectively, relative to a single application. Split application mitigated losses more so than sidedress by reducing the soil pH shift due to urea hydrolysis and NH volatilization during the warmer June period. This assessment helps to distinguish which fertilizer practices are more effective in reducing N loss over a long-term time horizon. Reactive N loss is ranked across 18 fertilizer management practices, which could assist farmers in weighing the tradeoffs between field trafficability, manure storage capacity, and expected N loss.

Intermittent agitation of liquid manure: effects on methane, microbial activity, and temperature in a farm-scale study.

Liquid manure storages are a significant source of methane (CH4) emissions. Farmers commonly agitate (stir) liquid manure prior to field application to homogenize nutrients and solids. During agitation, manure undergoes mechanical stress and is exposed to the air, disrupting anaerobic conditions. This on-farm study aimed to better understand the effects of agitation on CH4 emissions, and explore the potential for intentional agitation (three times) to disrupt the exponential increase of CH4 emissions in spring and summer. Results showed that agitation substantially increased manure temperature in the study year compared to the previous year, particularly at upper- and mid-depths of the stored manure. The temporal pattern of CH4 emissions was altered by reduced emissions over the subsequent week, followed by an increase during the second week. Microbial analysis indicated that the activity of archaea and methanogens increased after each agitation event, but there was little change in the populations of methanogens, archaea, and bacteria. Overall, CH4 emissions were higher than any of the previous three years, likely due to warmer manure temperatures that were higher than the previous years (despite similar air temperatures). Therefore, intermittent manure agitation with the frequency, duration, and intensity used in this study is not recommended as a CH4 emission mitigation practice. Implications: The potential to mitigate methane emissions from liquid manure storages by strategically timed agitation was evaluated in a detailed farm-scale study. Agitation was conducted with readily-available farm equipment, and targeted at the early summer to disrupt methanogenic communities when CH4 emissions increase exponentially. Methane emissions were reduced for about one week after agitation. However, agitation led to increased manure temperature, and was associated with increased activity of methanogens. Overall, agitation was associated with similar or higher methane emissions. Therefore, agitation is not recommended as a mitigation strategy.

Potential methane emission reductions for two manure treatment technologies.

The effect of two dairy manure treatments, solid-liquid separation (SLS) and anaerobic digestion (AD), on methane potential and the speed of production was evaluated. Assays were performed in the lab to measure methane (CH4) production over 202 d from dairy manure samples taken before and after each treatment. Compared to raw manure, CH4 emissions on a per-L basis were reduced 81% by SLS and 59% by AD, on average. The mean (SD) ultimate CH4 emission potential (B0) per kg of volatile solids (VS) was 247 (8) L CH4 kg-1 VS for raw manure, 221 (9) L CH4 kg-1 VS for separated liquid, and 160 (4) L CH4 kg-1 VS for anaerobic digestate. Thus, SLS reduced the B0 of the liquid fraction by 11% and AD reduced B0 by up to 35% compared to raw manure. Manure treatment affected the speed of CH4 production: SLS increased the CH4 production rate and thus separated liquid manure was the fastest to produce 90% of the ultimate CH4 production. Therefore, both the speed of degradation and B0 should be considered when assessing these techniques for farm-scale manure storages, because actual emission reductions will depend on storage conditions.

Methane emissions from digestate at an agricultural biogas plant.

Methane (CH4) emissions were measured over two years at an earthen storage containing digestate from a mesophilic biodigester in Ontario, Canada. The digester processed dairy manure and co-substrates from the food industry, and destroyed 62% of the influent volatile solids (VS). Annual average emissions were 19gCH4m(-3)d(-1) and 0.27gCH4kg(-1)VSd(-1). About 76% of annual emissions occurred from June to October. Annual cumulative emissions from digestate corresponded to 12% of the CH4 produced within the digester. A key contributor to CH4 emissions was the sludge layer in storage, which contained as much VS as the annual discharge from the digester. These findings suggest that digestate management provides an opportunity to further enhance the benefits of biogas (i.e. reducing CH4 emissions compared to undigested liquid manure, and producing renewable energy). Potential best practices for future study include complete storage emptying, solid-liquid separation, and storage covering.