IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v187y2021ics0308521x2030857x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal manure utilization chain for distributed animal farms: Model development and a case study from Hangzhou, China

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Jiangong
  • Akdeniz, Neslihan
  • Kim, Harrison Hyung Min
  • Gates, Richard S.
  • Wang, Xinlei
  • Wang, Kaiying

Abstract

Manure management is a concern for many livestock and poultry producers all around the world. Manure is generated, processed, transported, and utilized in various ways. Manure management requires the coordination of animal feeding operations (AFOs), centralized processing facilities (CPFs), and crop farms. Such a manure utilization chain is more than an individual farm scale, and it is a complex nexus between different production systems. In this study, the manure utilization chain, which recognizes manure management behaviors at different units of a region, was proposed to ensure sustainable manure utilization for distributed animal farms. The goal of this study was to develop a regional manure utilization chain (RMUC) model to minimize annual manure utilization costs by identifying the optimal manure flow patterns among AFOs, CPFs, and crop farms. The model was implemented to evaluate the manure utilization chain in Hangzhou, China. The results showed that the average solid manure logistics cost was CNY 20/ton (1 CNY ~ 0.14 USD), and the average slurry manure utilization cost was CNY 25.4/ton when the manure nutrients were adequately distributed. If the solid manure processing capacities of CPF were optimized, the average solid manure logistics cost would be reduced to CNY 8/ton. This paper also discusses the cost of executing the manure land application setbacks (the minimum distance required between manure application areas and sensitive areas). If Hangzhou followed manure land application restrictions of Illinois, U. S, the slurry manure utilization cost (CNY 65.8/ton) would be 2.59 times greater than the cost (CNY 25.4/ton) in the current scenario. Manure management would be more similar to other waste management and rely on centralized strategy instead of individual farm management.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Jiangong & Akdeniz, Neslihan & Kim, Harrison Hyung Min & Gates, Richard S. & Wang, Xinlei & Wang, Kaiying, 2021. "Optimal manure utilization chain for distributed animal farms: Model development and a case study from Hangzhou, China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:187:y:2021:i:c:s0308521x2030857x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X2030857X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102996?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sharara, Mahmoud A. & Runge, Troy & Larson, Rebecca & Primm, John G., 2018. "Techno-economic optimization of community-based manure processing," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 117-123.
    2. McDonald, C.K. & MacLeod, N.D. & Lisson, S. & Corfield, J.P., 2019. "The Integrated Analysis Tool (IAT) – A model for the evaluation of crop-livestock and socio-economic interventions in smallholder farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    3. Leidy Klotz & Elke Weber & Eric Johnson & Tripp Shealy & Morela Hernandez & Bethany Gordon, 2018. "Beyond rationality in engineering design for sustainability," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(5), pages 225-233, May.
    4. Poffenbarger, Hanna & Artz, Georgeanne & Dahlke, Garland & Edwards, William & Hanna, Mark & Russell, James & Sellers, Harris & Liebman, Matt, 2017. "An economic analysis of integrated crop-livestock systems in Iowa, U.S.A," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 51-69.
    5. Ribaudo, Marc & Kaplan, Jonathan D. & Christensen, Lee A. & Gollehon, Noel R. & Johansson, Robert C. & Breneman, Vincent E. & Aillery, Marcel P. & Agapoff, Jean & Peters, Mark, 2003. "Manure Management For Water Quality Costs To Animal Feeding Operations Of Applying Manure Nutrients To Land," Agricultural Economic Reports 33911, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Mathot, M. & Lambert, R. & Stilmant, D. & Decruyenaere, V., 2020. "Carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium flows and losses from solid and semi-solid manures produced by beef cattle in deep litter barns and tied stalls," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    7. Groot, Jeroen C.J. & Oomen, Gerard J.M. & Rossing, Walter A.H., 2012. "Multi-objective optimization and design of farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 63-77.
    8. Zheng, Chaohui & Liu, Yi & Bluemling, Bettina & Chen, Jining & Mol, Arthur P.J., 2013. "Modeling the environmental behavior and performance of livestock farmers in China: An ABM approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 60-72.
    9. De Menna, Fabio & Malagnino, Remo Alessio & Vittuari, Matteo & Segrè, Andrea & Molari, Giovanni & Deligios, Paola A. & Solinas, Stefania & Ledda, Luigi, 2018. "Optimization of agricultural biogas supply chains using artichoke byproducts in existing plants," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 137-146.
    10. Case, S.D.C. & Oelofse, M. & Hou, Y. & Oenema, O. & Jensen, L.S., 2017. "Farmer perceptions and use of organic waste products as fertilisers – A survey study of potential benefits and barriers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 84-95.
    11. Mayerle, Sérgio Fernando & Neiva de Figueiredo, João, 2016. "Designing optimal supply chains for anaerobic bio-digestion/energy generation complexes with distributed small farm feedstock sourcing," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 46-54.
    12. Mackenzie, S.G. & Wallace, M. & Kyriazakis, I., 2017. "How effective can environmental taxes be in reducing the environmental impact of pig farming systems?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 131-144.
    13. Villalba, D. & Díez-Unquera, B. & Carrascal, A. & Bernués, A. & Ruiz, R., 2019. "Multi-objective simulation and optimisation of dairy sheep farms: Exploring trade-offs between economic and environmental outcomes," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 107-118.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li, Jiangong & Akdeniz, Neslihan & Kim, Harrison Hyung Min & Gates, Richard S. & Wang, Xinlei & Wang, Kaiying, 2021. "Quantification of sustainable animal manure utilization strategies in Hangzhou, China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    2. Zeng, Yangmei & He, Ke & Zhang, Junbiao & Li, Ping, 2023. "Adoption and ex-post impacts of sustainable manure management practices on income and happiness: Evidence from swine breeding farmers in rural Hubei, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    3. Jianxing Chen & Xuesong Gao & Yanyan Zhang & Petri Penttinen & Qi Wang & Jing Ling & Ting Lan & Dinghua Ou & Yang Li, 2023. "Analysis on Coupling Coordination Degree for Cropland and Livestock from 2000 to 2020 in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-20, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Heidari, Mohammad Davoud & Turner, Ian & Ardestani-Jaafari, Amir & Pelletier, Nathan, 2021. "Operations research for environmental assessment of crop-livestock production systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    2. Díaz-Trujillo, Luis Alberto & Nápoles-Rivera, Fabricio, 2019. "Optimization of biogas supply chain in Mexico considering economic and environmental aspects," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1227-1240.
    3. Li, Jiangong & Akdeniz, Neslihan & Kim, Harrison Hyung Min & Gates, Richard S. & Wang, Xinlei & Wang, Kaiying, 2021. "Quantification of sustainable animal manure utilization strategies in Hangzhou, China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    4. Pengfei Song & Wen Qin & YanGan Huang & Lei Wang & Zhenyuan Cai & Tongzuo Zhang, 2020. "Grazing Management Influences Gut Microbial Diversity of Livestock in the Same Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-12, May.
    5. Schreefel, L. & de Boer, I.J.M. & Timler, C.J. & Groot, J.C.J. & Zwetsloot, M.J. & Creamer, R.E. & Schrijver, A. Pas & van Zanten, H.H.E. & Schulte, R.P.O., 2022. "How to make regenerative practices work on the farm: A modelling framework," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    6. Vogel, Everton & Martinelli, Gabrielli & Artuzo, Felipe Dalzotto, 2021. "Environmental and economic performance of paddy field-based crop-livestock systems in Southern Brazil," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    7. Key, Nigel D. & Kaplan, Jonathan D., 2007. "Multiple Environmental Externalities and Manure Management Policy," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 32(1), pages 1-20, April.
    8. Zuo, Alec & Hou, Lingling & Huang, Zeying, 2020. "How does farmers' current usage of crop straws influence the willingness-to-accept price to sell?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    9. Colyer, Dale, 2004. "Environmental Regulations And Competitiveness," Working Papers 19100, West Virginia University, Department of Agricultural Resource Economics.
    10. Moojen, Fernanda Gomes & Ryschawy, Julie & dos Santos, Davi Teixeira & Barth Neto, Armindo & Vieira, Paulo Cardozo & Portella, Elisa & de Faccio Carvalho, Paulo César, 2022. "The farm coaching experience to support the transition to integrated crop–livestock systems: From gaming to action," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    11. Timler, Carl & Alvarez, Stéphanie & DeClerck, Fabrice & Remans, Roseline & Raneri, Jessica & Estrada Carmona, Natalia & Mashingaidze, Nester & Abe Chatterjee, Shantonu & Chiang, Tsai Wei & Termote, Ce, 2020. "Exploring solution spaces for nutrition-sensitive agriculture in Kenya and Vietnam," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    12. Karner, Katrin & Schmid, Erwin & Schneider, Uwe A. & Mitter, Hermine, 2021. "Computing stochastic Pareto frontiers between economic and environmental goals for a semi-arid agricultural production region in Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    13. Britz, Wolfgang & Ciaian, Pavel & Gocht, Alexander & Kanellopoulos, Argyris & Kremmydas, Dimitrios & Müller, Marc & Petsakos, Athanasios & Reidsma, Pytrik, 2021. "A design for a generic and modular bio-economic farm model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    14. Villalba, D. & Díez-Unquera, B. & Carrascal, A. & Bernués, A. & Ruiz, R., 2019. "Multi-objective simulation and optimisation of dairy sheep farms: Exploring trade-offs between economic and environmental outcomes," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 107-118.
    15. Cui, Yunfei & Geng, Zhiqiang & Zhu, Qunxiong & Han, Yongming, 2017. "Review: Multi-objective optimization methods and application in energy saving," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 681-704.
    16. Haluk Gedikoglu & Sansel Tandogan & Joseph Parcell, 2023. "Neighbor effects on adoption of conservation practices: cases of grass filter systems and injecting manure," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 70(3), pages 723-756, June.
    17. Key, Nigel D. & McBride, William D. & Mosheim, Roberto, 2008. "Decomposition of Total Factor Productivity Change in the U.S. Hog Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-13, April.
    18. MacDonald, James M. & O'Donoghue, Erik J. & McBride, William D. & Nehring, Richard F. & Sandretto, Carmen L. & Mosheim, Roberto, 2007. "Profits, Costs, and the Changing Structure of Dairy Farming," Economic Research Report 6704, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    19. David Fangueiro & Paula Alvarenga & Rita Fragoso, 2021. "Horticulture and Orchards as New Markets for Manure Valorisation with Less Environmental Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-28, January.
    20. Johansson, Robert & Peters, Mark & House, Robert, 2007. "Regional Environment and Agriculture Programming Model," Technical Bulletins 184314, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:187:y:2021:i:c:s0308521x2030857x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.