Mitigating Carbon Emissions: The Impact of Peat Moss Feeding on CH4 and CO2 Emissions during Pig Slurry Storage
-
Published:2023-09-20
Issue:18
Volume:13
Page:10492
-
ISSN:2076-3417
-
Container-title:Applied Sciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Applied Sciences
Author:
Lee Joonhee1ORCID, Ahn Heekwon2
Affiliation:
1. Livestock Environmental Management Institute, Sejong 30127, Republic of Korea 2. Division of Animal and Dairy Science, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Republic of Korea
Abstract
The present study investigated the impact of peat moss as a feed additive on the emission of methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) from piggery slurry stored in slurry pits. There is no well-known study on the relationship between pig manure generated after feeding peat moss as a feed additive and CH4 and CO2 released during the storage period. A lab-scale experiment was conducted for two months using a slurry pit simulator composed of six vessels—three for pig slurry collected after feeding 3.0% peat moss as a feed additive (PFS) and three for pig slurry without feeding peat moss (CTL). PFS reduced CO2 and CH4 emissions (p < 0.05) from stored pig slurry by approximately 23% and 44%, respectively. PFS exhibits substantially elevated concentrations of humic substance (HS) such as humic acid, fulvic acid, and humin compared with CTL, with fold differences of 2.3, 1.8, and 1.1, respectively. Elevated HS levels in the PFS seemed to limit hydrolysis, resulting in lower total volatile fatty acid concentrations compared with CTL. A dominance of CH4 in total carbon emissions was observed (p < 0.05), with CH4 accounting for approximately 93% and 95% of total carbon emissions in PFS and CTL, respectively. PFS had a roughly 43% lower impact on cumulative carbon emissions than CTL, primarily due to decreased CH4 emissions. These findings suggest that PFS may be a promising approach for mitigating carbon emissions and potentially impacting environmental sustainability and climate change mitigation efforts.
Funder
Cargill Agri Purina, Inc.
Subject
Fluid Flow and Transfer Processes,Computer Science Applications,Process Chemistry and Technology,General Engineering,Instrumentation,General Materials Science
Reference52 articles.
1. Climate and Clean Air Coalition, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2021). Global Methane Assessment: Benefits and Costs of Mitigating Methane Emissions, United Nations Environment Programme. 2. Ratcheting of climate pledges needed to limit peak global warming;Iyer;Nat. Clim. Chang.,2022 3. Phylogenetic diversity of methanogenic archaea in swine waste storage pits;Whitehead;FEMS Microbiol. Lett.,1999 4. Van der Meer, H.G., Sommer, S.G., Smith, K., Matsunaka, T., and Ong, H.K. (2008). Guidelines for Sustainable Manure Management in Asian Livestock Production Systems, International Atomic Energy Agency. 5. Wi, J., Lee, S., Kim, E., Lee, M., Koziel, J.A., and Ahn, H. (2019). Evaluation of semi-continuous pit manure recharge system performance on mitigation of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide emissions from a swine finishing barn. Atmosphere, 10.
|
|