IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i22p15987-d1281078.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Ammonia and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Livestock Manure Storage: Comparison of Measurements with Dynamic and Static Chambers

Author

Listed:
  • Martina Cattaneo

    (Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Carlota Tayà

    (Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (IRTA), Torre Marimon, 08140 Caldes de Montbui, Barcelona, Spain)

  • Laura Burgos

    (Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (IRTA), Torre Marimon, 08140 Caldes de Montbui, Barcelona, Spain)

  • Lluis Morey

    (Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (IRTA), Torre Marimon, 08140 Caldes de Montbui, Barcelona, Spain)

  • Joan Noguerol

    (Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (IRTA), Torre Marimon, 08140 Caldes de Montbui, Barcelona, Spain)

  • Giorgio Provolo

    (Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Míriam Cerrillo

    (Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (IRTA), Torre Marimon, 08140 Caldes de Montbui, Barcelona, Spain)

  • August Bonmatí

    (Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (IRTA), Torre Marimon, 08140 Caldes de Montbui, Barcelona, Spain)

Abstract

Emission quantification from the agricultural sector, and especially from livestock manure management, is relevant for assessing mitigation strategies and for inventory purposes. There are different direct techniques used to monitor emissions from quiescent surfaces. Common techniques include the closed static chamber and the open dynamic chamber. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare different direct methods, two dynamic hoods and one static hood, for monitoring NH 3 and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (N 2 O, CO 2 , and CH 4 ) from different emission sources. These sources are ammonia solutions and different by-products of manure (compost, liquid fraction of digestate, and solid fraction of pig slurry). The use of dynamic hoods, despite their differences in size, operation, and applied air flux, presents comparable emission rates for all emissions and compounds assayed. These rates are always higher than those obtained using static hoods. Therefore, it can be concluded that the use of dynamic hoods is a valuable technique for refining the indirect estimation of emissions.

Suggested Citation

  • Martina Cattaneo & Carlota Tayà & Laura Burgos & Lluis Morey & Joan Noguerol & Giorgio Provolo & Míriam Cerrillo & August Bonmatí, 2023. "Assessing Ammonia and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Livestock Manure Storage: Comparison of Measurements with Dynamic and Static Chambers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-14, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:22:p:15987-:d:1281078
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/22/15987/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/22/15987/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Prakash Thangavel & Duckshin Park & Young-Chul Lee, 2022. "Recent Insights into Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 )-Mediated Toxicity in Humans: An Overview," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-22, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mushtaq Ahmad & Jing Chen & Qing Yu & Muhammad Tariq Khan & Syed Weqas Ali & Asim Nawab & Worradorn Phairuang & Sirima Panyametheekul, 2023. "Characteristics and Risk Assessment of Environmentally Persistent Free Radicals (EPFRs) of PM 2.5 in Lahore, Pakistan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Yaxuan Xie & Kejian Shi & Yuncong Yuan & Meijia Gu & Shihan Zhang & Kai Wang & Liangying Fu & Chao Shen & Zhanpeng Yuan, 2023. "Bibliometric Analysis Reveals the Progress of PM 2.5 in Health Research, Especially in Cancer Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-12, January.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:22:p:15987-:d:1281078. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.