Agricultural Biogas Production—Climate and Environmental Impacts
Henrik B. Møller,
Peter Sørensen,
Jørgen E. Olesen,
Søren O. Petersen,
Tavs Nyord and
Sven G. Sommer
Additional contact information
Henrik B. Møller: Department of Biological and Chemical Engineering, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
Peter Sørensen: Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
Jørgen E. Olesen: Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
Søren O. Petersen: Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
Tavs Nyord: Concito, Læderstræde 20, 1201 København, Denmark
Sven G. Sommer: Department of Biological and Chemical Engineering, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
Sustainability, 2022, vol. 14, issue 3, 1-24
Abstract:
Livestock manure is a major source of the greenhouse gases (GHGs) methane (CH 4 ) and nitrous oxide (N 2 O). The emissions can be mitigated by production of biogas through anaerobic digestion (AD) of manure, mostly together with other biowastes, which can substitute fossil energy and thereby reduce CO 2 emissions and postdigestion GHG emissions. This paper presents GHG balances for manure and biowaste management as affected by AD for five Danish biogas scenarios in which pig and cattle slurry were codigested with one or more of the following biomasses: deep litter, straw, energy crops, slaughterhouse waste, grass–clover green manure, and household waste. The calculated effects of AD on the GHG balance of each scenario included fossil fuel substitution, energy use for transport, leakage of CH 4 from biogas production plants, CH 4 emissions during storage of animal manure and biowaste, N 2 O emissions from stored and field applied biomass, N 2 O emissions related to nitrate (NO 3 − ) leaching and ammonia (NH 3 ) losses, N 2 O emissions from cultivation of energy crops, and soil C sequestration. All scenarios caused significant reductions in GHG emissions. Most of the reductions resulted from fossil fuel substitution and reduced emissions of CH 4 during storage of codigestates. The total reductions in GHG emissions ranged from 65 to 105 kg CO 2 -eq ton −1 biomass. This wide range showed the importance of biomass composition. Reductions were highest when straw and grass–clover were used as codigestates, whereas reductions per unit energy produced were highest when deep litter or deep litter plus energy crops were used. Potential effects of iLUC were ignored but may have a negative impact on the GHG balance when using energy crops, and this may potentially exceed the calculated positive climate impacts of biogas production. The ammonia emission potential of digestate applied in the field is higher than that from cattle slurry and pig slurry because of the higher pH of the digestate. This effect, and the higher content of TAN in digestate, resulted in increasing ammonia emissions at 0.14 to 0.3 kg NH 3 -N ton −1 biomass. Nitrate leaching was reduced in all scenarios and ranged from 0.04 to 0.45 kg NO 3 -N ton −1 biomass. In the scenario in which maize silage was introduced, the maize production increased leaching and almost negated the effect of AD. Methane leakage caused a 7% reduction in the positive climate impact for each percentage point of leakage in a manure-based biogas scenario.
Keywords: biogas; anaerobic digestion; manure; greenhouse gases; methane; nitrous oxide; environmental impacts (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)
Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1849/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1849/ (text/html)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1849-:d:743040
Access Statistics for this article
Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu
More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().