Review of greenhouse gas emissions from the storage and land application of farm dairy effluent

The amounts of farm dairy effluent stored in ponds and irrigated to land have steadily increased with the steady growth of New Zealand's dairy industry. About 80% of dairy farms now operate with effluent storage ponds allowing deferred irrigation. These storage and irrigation practices cause emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) and ammonia. The current knowledge of the processes causing these emissions and the amounts emitted is reviewed here. Methane emissions from ponds are the largest contributor to the total GHG emissions from effluent in managed manure systems in New Zealand. Nitrous oxide emissions from anaerobic ponds are negligible, while ammonia emissions vary widely between different studies, probably because they depend strongly on pH and manure composition. The second-largest contribution to GHG emissions from farm dairy effluent comes from nitrous oxide emissions from land application. Ammonia emissions from land application of effluent in New Zealand were found to be less than those reported elsewhere from the application of slurries. Recent studies have suggested that New Zealand's current GHG inventory method to estimate methane emissions from effluent ponds should be revised. The increasing importance of emissions from ponds, while being a challenge for the inventory, also provides an opportunity to achieve mitigation of emissions due to the confined location of where these emissions occur. © 2015 © 2015 The Royal Society of New Zealand.

Down scaling to regional assessment of greenhouse gas emissions to enable consistency in accounting for emissions reduction projects and national inventory accounts for northern beef production in Australia

This paper explores the effect of using regional data for livestock attributes on estimation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the northern beef industry in Australia, compared with using state/territory-wide values, as currently used in Australia’s national GHG inventory report. Regional GHG emissions associated with beef production are reported for 21 defined agricultural statistical regions within state/territory jurisdictions. A management scenario for reduced emissions that could qualify as an Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) project was used to illustrate the effect of regional level model parameters on estimated abatement levels. Using regional parameters, instead of state level parameters, for liveweight (LW), LW gain and proportion of cows lactating and an expanded number of livestock classes, gives a 5.2% reduction in estimated emissions (range +12% to –34% across regions). Estimated GHG emissions intensity (emissions per kilogram of LW sold) varied across the regions by up to 2.5-fold, ranging from 10.5 kg CO2-e kg–1 LW sold for Darling Downs, Queensland, through to 25.8 kg CO2-e kg–1 LW sold for the Pindan and North Kimberley, Western Australia. This range was driven by differences in production efficiency, reproduction rate, growth rate and survival. This suggests that some regions in northern Australia are likely to have substantial opportunities for GHG abatement and higher livestock income. However, this must be coupled with the availability of management activities that can be implemented to improve production efficiency; wet season phosphorus (P) supplementation being one such practice. An ERF case study comparison showed that P supplementation of a typical-sized herd produced an estimated reduction of 622 t CO2-e year–1, or 7%, compared with a non-P supplemented herd. However, the different model parameters used by the National Inventory Report and ERF project means that there was an anomaly between the herd emissions for project cattle excised from the national accounts (13 479 t CO2-e year–1) and the baseline herd emissions estimated for the ERF project (8 896 t CO2-e year–1) before P supplementation was implemented. Regionalising livestock model parameters in both ERF projects and the national accounts offers the attraction of being able to more easily and accurately reflect emissions savings from this type of emissions reduction project in Australia’s national GHG accounts.