Comparison of ammonia and odour emissions during and following digested manure landspreading
| Autor: | Girault, R., Roux, J.C., Mazoyer, Josiane, Nunès, Geoffrey, Auvinet, N., Leroux, S., Daumoin, M., Saint Cast, P., Guiziou, Fabrice |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Irstea Publications, Migration, Optimisation des procédés en Agriculture, Agroalimentaire et Environnement (UR OPAALE), Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies pour l'environnement et l'agriculture (IRSTEA), Technologies et systèmes d'information pour les agrosystèmes (UR TSCF) |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2017 |
| Předmět: | |
| Zdroj: | Emili2017 Emili2017, May 2017, Saint Malo, France |
| Popis: | International audience; Digested manure can generate high ammonia emissions during landspreading because of their high pH value and ammonium content. In addition, its landspreading can generate odour emissions, even if they are reduced comparing to raw manure (Orzi et al., 2010). Hence, ammonia and odour emissions have to be mitigated to optimize the environmental balance of anaerobic digestion. Post-treatments can strongly modify digested manure properties and contribute to emission mitigation. Nevertheless, to quantify the impact of post-treatments on ammonia and odors emissions associated to the landspreading step, most of the studies only consider emissions following landspreading without considering emissions during landspreading. The objective of this paper is to quantify ammonia and odour emissions during digested manure dispersion in comparison to those observed following landspreading. To this purpose, raw and post-treated digested manure were landspreaded in a hermetic experimental room with a real-scaled spreader. Ammonia and odor emissions during manure landspreading were accumulated into the experimental room. Emissions following landspreading were assessed using wind tunnel systems (Van Der Weerden et al., 1996). Ammonia emissions were quantified using an infrared multi-gas monitor (INNOVA 1412) combined with acid traps. Odour emissions were quantified using olfactory measurements (dynamic dilution olfactometer-ONOSE-8). Concerning ammonia, results highlight that emissions during digested manure landspreading are between 0.11 and 0.95% of total ammonium content of the manure. Hence, these emissions can be considered as non-significant comparing to ammonia emissions following landspreading. That kind of result is also observed for raw manure. Indeed, for cow manure and poultry droppings, ammonia emissions during landspreading reach 4.86% and 0.55% of total ammonium content, respectively. Concerning odour emissions, results highlight that emissions during digested manure landspreading are significant and, depending on the digested manure considered, can be superior to emissions following landspreading. For example, for dried digested manure, odour emissions during landspreading reach 819 OU.kg-1. However, odour emissions following landspreading reach only 53 OU.kg-1.h-1. In addition, depending on the considered digested manure, impact of post-treatments on odour emissions during and following landspreading can be different. For example, digested manure drying leads to an increase of odour emissions during landspreading, and a decrease of odour emissions following landspreading. To conclude, to estimate ammonia emission factors for landspreading, emissions during landspreading can be considered as non-significant. Only emissions following landspreading can be considered. However, concerning odour emissions, emissions during and following landspreading have to be considered together. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|