The Science of Farm Emissions

60 %
40 %
Information about The Science of Farm Emissions
Business & Mgmt

Published on December 28, 2008

Author: michaelkielymarketing

Source: slideshare.net

Description

Professor Richard Eckart is Australia's most prominent scientific mind in the greenhouse gas in agriculture field. He specialises in methane and nitrous oxide measurement and amelioration. The presentation and data herein is for information only and can only be reproduced with permission of the author.

The Science of Farm Emissions Methane & Nitrous Oxide Richard Eckard Associate Professor, The University of Melbourne & Department of Primary Industries

Sectoral Greenhouse Gas Emissions Australia 2006 DCC 2008

Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2006 Agriculture 58% of all methane 81% of all nitrous oxide Enteric Methane 10.8% of National emissions Nitrous Oxide from soils 2.8% of National emissions DCC 2008 Methane Nitrous oxide

Agriculture

58% of all methane

81% of all nitrous oxide

Enteric Methane

10.8% of National emissions

Nitrous Oxide from soils

2.8% of National emissions

Methane and Nitrous Oxide sources

Typical Farm Emissions Dairy 3 - 7 t CO2e/cow 4 – 45 t CO2e/ha Beef 2 t CO2e/steer 2 – 3 t CO2e/ha Grains 0.2 - 1 t CO2e/ha

Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Agricultural emissions Start by 2015, decision by 2013 If not in CPRS, other policies will be considered 16% of national account cannot be ignored Other polices could provide less flexibility Either way We will face some incentive to reduce emissions on-farm

Agricultural emissions

Start by 2015, decision by 2013

If not in CPRS, other policies will be considered

16% of national account cannot be ignored

Other polices could provide less flexibility

Either way

We will face some incentive to reduce emissions on-farm

Enteric Methane Emissions Produced by methanogens in rumen Anaerobic microbes of the Archaea Domain Use H 2 to reduce CO 2 to form CH 4 >90% breathed or eructated Shorter lifetime in atmosphere & high GWP 21 x CO 2 A significant loss of energy 6 to 10% of energy intake lost as methane Eckard 2006 Animal Class Methane (kg/year) Equivalent grazing days of energy lost per animal Potential km driven in 6-cylinder LPG car Mature ewe 10 to 13 41 to 53 90 to 116 Beef steer 50 to 90 32 to 57 450 to 800 Dairy cow 90 to 146 24 to 38 800 to 1350

Produced by methanogens in rumen

Anaerobic microbes of the Archaea Domain

Use H 2 to reduce CO 2 to form CH 4

>90% breathed or eructated

Shorter lifetime in atmosphere & high GWP

21 x CO 2

A significant loss of energy

6 to 10% of energy intake lost as methane

Methane Measurement Methane from Individual animals in the field using SF 6 Tracer Permeation tubes Evacuated Yolk Grainger et al. 2007

Methane Measurement Precise Methane from Individual Animals - Chambers/Calorimeters Grainger et al. 2007

Wind Reflector Reflector Laser Methane Measurement Methane from herds in the field - Open Path Laser & FTIR Griffiths et al. 2007

 

Methane Abatement Options Animal Management Reducing unproductive animal numbers Extended lactation in dairy Earlier finishing of beef 10-15% less methane Grainger et al. 2008 Wilson & Edwards 2008

Reducing unproductive animal numbers

Extended lactation in dairy

Earlier finishing of beef

10-15% less methane

Methane Abatement Options Animal Breeding Heritability Methanogenesis (15%) Conflicts with breeding objectives? Net Feed Intake (13%) Compatible with efficiency gains Angus, Vasse, WA Dairy cattle, Ellinbank & NZ Clark et al. 2005; Grainger et al. 2008; Hegarty et al. 2007; Waghorn et al 2006

Heritability

Methanogenesis (15%)

Conflicts with breeding objectives?

Net Feed Intake (13%)

Compatible with efficiency gains

Angus, Vasse, WA

Dairy cattle, Ellinbank & NZ

Methane Abatement Options Dietary Supplements Dietary Oils (5-25%) Beauchemin et al. 2007 Grainger et al. 2007 1% added fat = 6% less methane

Dietary Oils (5-25%)

Methane Abatement Options Dietary Supplements Tannins (10-25%) Less Methane loss Urinary N loss More Dung N Soil retention Sources of Tannin Acacia spp Commercial beverage additives High tannin legumes Plant breeding Waghorn et al 2006 Grainger et al. 2008

Tannins (10-25%)

Less

Methane loss

Urinary N loss

More

Dung N

Soil retention

Sources of Tannin

Acacia spp

Commercial beverage additives

High tannin legumes

Plant breeding

Methane Abatement Options Dietary Supplements Monensin (0-10%) Yeasts (0-5%) Enzymes (9-28%) Nitrates, TCM, BCM etc

Monensin (0-10%)

Yeasts (0-5%)

Enzymes (9-28%)

Nitrates, TCM, BCM

etc

Methane Abatement Options Longer-Term Options (5 – 20 yrs) Biological control Vaccination Bacteriophages, Bacteriocins, Archaeal Viruses, Fungal Pathogens Acetogenesis Kangaroo, wallaby Faster gut rate of passage = acetogens Same function as methanogens But produce acetate, not methane

Biological control

Vaccination

Bacteriophages, Bacteriocins,

Archaeal Viruses, Fungal Pathogens

Acetogenesis

Kangaroo, wallaby

Faster gut rate of passage = acetogens

Same function as methanogens

But produce acetate, not methane

Nitrous Oxide Long residence time in atmosphere High GWP 310 x CO 2 Denitrification Warm, water-logged soils Excess N in soil Inefficient use of nitrogen >60% N inputs lost from grazing systems

Long residence time in atmosphere

High GWP

310 x CO 2

Denitrification

Warm, water-logged soils

Excess N in soil

Inefficient use of nitrogen

>60% N inputs lost from grazing systems

 

N 2 O Measurement Automatic Chambers & Micromet Systems Automatic Chambers Micromet system

Temporal Variability in Daily N 2 O Irrigated dairy pastures Phillips et al. 2006

Rate of N on N 2 O Emissions Irrigated Cotton Grace et al. 2007

Season and N Source on N 2 O Emissions Dryland Pastures Eckard et al. 2002

Nitrification Inhibitors on N 2 O Emissions Pastures 50% less N 2 O for 50 days mid-spring 25% less N 2 O for 25 days in mid-summer Kelly et al;. 2008

50% less N 2 O for 50 days mid-spring

25% less N 2 O for 25 days in mid-summer

Land Conversion impacts on N 2 O Emissions Wheat/Sheep Rotations, Hamilton -0.5 to 183 g N 2 O-N/ha/d 1.6 kg N 2 O-N/ha in one event Kelly & Graham 2008 Year 1 Year 2

-0.5 to 183 g N 2 O-N/ha/d

1.6 kg N 2 O-N/ha in one event

Refining N 2 O Emission Factors Low Rainfall Cropping Cunderdin Rutherglen Horsham EF (% of N) 0.02 % <0.01 % 0.14 % Annual Loss (kg N 2 O-N/ha) 0.09 - 0.11 0.17 – 0.24 0.42 – 0.5 Barton et al. 2007 Barker-Reid et al. 2007 Officer et al. 2008

Managing Nitrous Oxide from Nitrogen Fertiliser management Rate, Timing, Source and Placement Soil management Soil structure Stubble retention Fertiliser formulation Controlled Release Inhibitors Urine Tannins Protein : Energy ratios Spray inhibitors

Fertiliser management

Rate, Timing, Source and Placement

Soil management

Soil structure

Stubble retention

Fertiliser formulation

Controlled Release

Inhibitors

Urine

Tannins

Protein : Energy ratios

Spray inhibitors

Key Challenges Point of Obligation for CPRS Up-stream and Down-Stream Fertiliser company Coat all fertilisers at a cost Processor, abattoir No incentive for on-farm action But lower cost On-Farm Higher Transaction Costs 130,000 extra reporting No agreed method for reliable & cost-effective reporting

Point of Obligation for CPRS

Up-stream and Down-Stream

Fertiliser company

Coat all fertilisers at a cost

Processor, abattoir

No incentive for on-farm action

But lower cost

On-Farm

Higher Transaction Costs

130,000 extra reporting

No agreed method for reliable & cost-effective reporting

Key Challenges No low cost ‘measurement’ methods Need agreed modelling method Method must allow incentive through differentiation Is a cow a cow? Inventory vs on-farm models Industries have developed DSS Tools Dairy, Beef, Sheep, Grains, Wine calculators Cotton (QUT), FarmGas (AFI) and DGAS (Dairy) Industries have developed models & Tools Grains – APSIM Dairy – DairyMod Beef/Sheep – GrassGro / SGS

No low cost ‘measurement’ methods

Need agreed modelling method

Method must allow incentive through differentiation

Is a cow a cow?

Inventory vs on-farm models

Industries have developed DSS Tools

Dairy, Beef, Sheep, Grains, Wine calculators

Cotton (QUT), FarmGas (AFI) and DGAS (Dairy)

Industries have developed models & Tools

Grains – APSIM

Dairy – DairyMod

Beef/Sheep – GrassGro / SGS

In Conclusion Farmers will face emissions restrictions in future BUT HOW? Less options for extensive systems Research may take 5 to 20 years still Should we be imposing new costs? Global economic crisis Predicted food shortages Drought & climate change World Food Price Increases BUT - Clearly we cannot farm in the future as we have in the past Need on-farm technologies that deliver Abatement of methane and nitrous oxide PLUS improving profitability & resilience Meeting world demand & in a changing climate

Farmers will face emissions restrictions in future

BUT HOW?

Less options for extensive systems

Research may take 5 to 20 years still

Should we be imposing new costs?

Global economic crisis

Predicted food shortages

Drought & climate change

World Food Price Increases

BUT - Clearly we cannot farm in the future as we have in the past

Need on-farm technologies that deliver

Abatement of methane and nitrous oxide

PLUS improving profitability & resilience

Meeting world demand & in a changing climate

www.greenhouse.unimelb.edu.au

Whole Farm Systems Analysis Needed Inhibitor sprays 61-91% less nitrous oxide from urine Whole farm abatement = 8.4 and 12.5% But 25% more pasture growth 25% more cows = 11.5 and 7.6% MORE CO2e OR 25% less N fert = 12.0 and 16.2% LESS CO2e Dietary Oils 4% more oil = 22.4% less CH4 = 16% less total farm emissions Additivity of options Not all additive

Inhibitor sprays

61-91% less nitrous oxide from urine

Whole farm abatement = 8.4 and 12.5%

But 25% more pasture growth

25% more cows = 11.5 and 7.6% MORE CO2e

OR

25% less N fert = 12.0 and 16.2% LESS CO2e

Dietary Oils

4% more oil = 22.4% less CH4

= 16% less total farm emissions

Additivity of options

Not all additive

Add a comment

Related presentations