/
Blog Posts
Page History
| HTML |
|---|
<div class="banner_general_fiche"><div class="table-wrap"><table class="ficheTable" style="width: 99.1985%;"><colgroup><col style="width: 60%;"><col style="width: 20%;"></colgroup><tbody><tr><td class="confluenceTd"><h1 style="text-align: center;" title="" id="banner_title"></h1></td></tr></tbody></table></div></div>
<script>
var title = $('#title-text').find('a').text();
var mytitle = title.replace('_',' ');
$('#banner_title').text(mytitle + ' Fiche');
</script>
<style>
.banner_general_fiche {
height: 194px;
padding-right: 20px;
background-color: #00afef;
}
.banner_general_fiche h1 {
position: relative;
font-size: 1.7 !important;
font-family: corbel;
color: #ffffff !important;
letter-spacing: -0.01em;
font-weight: normal;
line-height: 1.25;
top: 64px;
font-weight: bold;
margin-left: 30px;
}
#banner_title {
text-transform: uppercase;
}
.table-wrap {
overflow-x: hidden;
overflow-y: hidden;
}
.banner_general_fiche td {
border: 0px !important;
height: 170px;
width: 100%;
}
.content-wrapper {
font-family: corbel;
position: relative;
}
</style>
<style>
.highlight-green {
color: #000000;
background-color: #92d050 !important;
}
table.confluenceTable td.confluenceTd.highlight-green>p {
background-color: #92d050 !important;
}
.highlight-red {
color: #000000 !important;
background-color: #ff0000 !important;
}
table.confluenceTable td.confluenceTd.highlight-red>p {
background-color: #ff0000 !important;
}
.highlight-yellow {
color: #000000;
background-color: #ffc000 !important;
}
table.confluenceTable td.confluenceTd.highlight-yellow>p {
background-color: #ffc000 !important;
}
.highlight-grey {
color: #000000 !important;
background-color: #a4a4a4 !important;
}
table.confluenceTable td.confluenceTd.highlight-grey>p {
background-color: #a4a4a4 !important;
}
#Agroforestry_GENERAL-GENERALFICHE-AGROFORESTRY {
color: #F8F8FF !important;
}
#main-content { font-family: corbel; }
.wiki-content img.confluence-embedded-image { cursor: default !important;}
</style> |
Data extracted in June 2021 July 2021
Fiche created in February 2024
Note to the reader: This general fiche summarises all the environmental and climate impacts of IMPROVED MANURE STORAGE TECHNIQUES found in a systematic review of 14 synthesis research papers papers[1]. These papers were selected from an initial number of 277 yielded by obtained through a systematic literature search strategy, according to the inclusion criteria reported in section 4. The impacts reported here are those for which there is scientific evidence available in published synthesis papers, what does not preclude the farming practice to have other impacts on the environment and climate still not covered by primary studies or by synthesis papers.
The synthesis papers review a number of primary studies ranging from 7 to 172. Therefore, the assessment of impacts As each synthesis research paper involves a number of primary research papers ranging from 7 to 172, the assessment of impacts relies on a large number of results from the primary studies, obtained mainly in field experiments (carried out in situations close to real farming environment), and conditions, or sometimes in lab experiments or from model simulations.
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE FARMING PRACTICE
...
- Description:
- Improved manure storage techniques are used to avoid nutrients losses and emissions release from manure storage facilities (storage tanks, solid manure heaps, etc.)[2
...
- Key descriptors
...
- :
- This
...
- review includes the following improved manure storage techniques:
- Additives: Physical (e.g.
...
- zeolite, biochar, medical stone, grape seeds and physical mixtures), chemical (e.g.
...
- acidic substances, metal salts, phosphogypsum, Mg-P salts, Ca-superphosphate and chemical mixtures) or microbial (e.g.
...
- nitrite oxidizing bacteria, nitrogen turnover bacteria and other compound microbial agents).
- Covers of either solid or liquid manure storage facilities, including plastic membranes, floating biomass or inert materials, natural crusts.
- Storage with biofilters (intercepting and treating air emissions from storage facilities).
- Manure acidification during storage.
- Manure cooling during storage.
- Compaction of solid manure heaps.
- Periodical cleaning of storage
...
- tanks
- Please, note that this is not an exhaustive list of improved manure storage techniques but of those found in the literature that meet the requirements to be included in our review.
- This
...
- review does not
...
- include techniques related to manure processing (e.g.
...
- anaerobic digestion, improved composting, solid-liquid separation, etc.), which are included in another group of fiches (Manure processing techniques).
- anaerobic digestion, improved composting, solid-liquid separation, etc.), which are included in another group of fiches (Manure processing techniques).
2.
...
EFFECTS OF THE FARMING PRACTICE ON CLIMATE AND
...
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(table 1)
...
We reviewed the impacts of improved manure storage techniques compared to conventional storage techniques.
The table below shows the number of synthesis papers with statistical tests reporting positive, negative or no effect, based on the statistical comparison of the intervention and the controli) a significant difference between the Intervention and the Comparator, that is to say, a significant statistical effect, which can be positive or negative; or ii) a non-statistically significant difference between the Intervention and the Comparator. In addition, we include, if any, the number of synthesis papers reporting relevant results , but without statistical test of the effects (uncertain). The numbers between parentheses indicate the number of synthesis papers with a quality score of at least 50%. Details on quality criteria . Details on the quality assessment of the synthesis papers can be found in the methodology section of this WIKI.
All selected Out of the 14 synthesis papers selected, 11 reported included studies conducted in Europe , and 11 have a quality score higher than 50%. Some synthesis papers reported more than one impact.
...
Impact
...
Metric
...
Intervention
...
Positive
...
Negative
...
No effect
...
Uncertain*
...
Decrease air pollutants emissions
...
Storage with additives
...
7 (7)
...
0
...
1 (1)
...
1 (0)
...
Storage with microbial inocula
...
3 (3)
...
0
...
0
...
0
...
Storage covers
...
7 (7)
...
0
...
2 (2)
...
3 (2)
...
Storage with biofilters
...
3 (3)
...
0
...
0
...
0
...
Acidification during storage
...
4 (4)
...
0
...
0
...
1 (0)
...
Compaction during storage
...
0
...
0
...
1 (1)
...
0
...
Decrease GHG emissions
...
CH4 **
...
Storage with additives
...
3 (3)
...
0
...
2 (2)
...
2 (1)
...
Storage with microbial inocula
...
0
...
0
...
1 (1)
...
0
...
Storage covers
...
0
...
2 (2)
...
4 (4)
...
2 (1)
...
Acidification during storage
...
2 (2)
...
0
...
1 (1)
...
1 (0)
...
Cooling during storage
...
1 (1)
...
0
...
1 (1)
...
0
...
Compaction during storage
...
0
...
0
...
1 (1)
...
0
...
N2O **
...
Storage with additives
...
3 (3)
...
0
...
3 (3)
...
1 (0)
...
Storage with microbial inocula
...
2 (2)
...
0
...
1 (1)
...
0
...
Storage covers
...
1 (1)
...
3 (3)
...
7 (7)
...
2 (1)
...
Acidification during storage
...
1 (1)
...
0
...
0
...
1 (0)
...
Compaction during storage
...
0
...
0
...
1 (1)
...
0
...
Global warming potential (CO2-eq)***
...
Storage with additives
...
1 (1)
...
0
...
0
...
0
...
Cleaning storage tanks
...
0
...
0
...
0
...
1 (0)
...
Storage covers
...
0
...
0
...
0
...
1 (0)
...
Decrease nutrient leaching and run-off
...
Storage with additives
...
3 (3)
...
0
...
0
...
0
...
Storage covers
...
2 (2)
...
0
...
0
...
0
...
Storage with microbial inocula
...
2 (2)
...
0
...
0
...
0
...
Compaction during storage
...
0
...
0
...
1 (1)
...
0
.
Table 1: Summary of effects. Number of synthesis papers reporting positive, negative or non-statistically significant effects on environmental and climate impacts. The number of synthesis papers reporting relevant results but without statistical test of the effects are also provided. When not all the synthesis papers reporting an effect are of high quality, the number of synthesis papers with a quality score of at least 50% is indicated in parentheses. Some synthesis papers may report effects for more than one impact, or more than one effect for the same impact.
|
|
|
| Statistically tested | Non-statistically tested | ||
Impact | Metric | Intervention | Comparator | Significantly positive | Significantly negative | Non-significant | |
Decrease Air pollutants emissions | NH3 | Compaction during storage | Conventional management | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Storage covers | Conventional management | 8 | 0 | 2 | 3 (2) | ||
Storage with acidification | Conventional management | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) | ||
Storage with additives | Conventional management | 7 | 0 | 1 | 1 (0) | ||
Storage with biofilters | Conventional management | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Storage with microbial inocula | Conventional management | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Decrease GHG emissions | CH4 | Compaction during storage | Conventional management | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Storage covers | Conventional management | 0 | 2 | 5 | 2 (1) | ||
Storage with acidification | Conventional management | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 (0) | ||
Storage with additives | Conventional management | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 (1) | ||
Storage with cooling | Conventional management | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Storage with microbial inocula | Conventional management | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
Decrease GHG emissions | Global warming potential (CO2-eq) | Cleaning storage tanks | Conventional management | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) |
Storage covers | Conventional management | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) | ||
Storage with additives | Conventional management | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Decrease GHG emissions | N2O | Compaction during storage | Conventional management | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Storage covers | Conventional management | 1 | 3 | 7 | 2 (1) | ||
Storage with acidification | Conventional management | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) | ||
Storage with additives | Conventional management | 3 | 0 | 4 | 1 (0) | ||
Storage with microbial inocula | Conventional management | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Increase Nutrients recovery | Total nitrogen loss | Compaction during storage | Conventional management | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Storage covers | Conventional management | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Storage with additives | Conventional management | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Storage with microbial inocula | Conventional management | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
3. FACTORS INFLUENCING THE EFFECTS ON CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The factors significantly influencing the size and/or direction of the effects on the impacts, according to the synthesis papers included in this review, are reported below. Details about the factors can be found in the summaries of the meta-analyses available in this WIKI.
Table 2: List of factors reported to significantly affect the size and/or direction of the effects on environmental and climate impacts, according to the synthesis papers reviewed. The reference number of the synthesis papers where those factors are explored is given in parentheses.
Impact | Factors |
Air pollutants emissions | Additive type (Ref6), Application dosage (Ref6), Bulk density (Ref14), Initial C/N ratio (Ref6), Initial moisture content (Ref6), Initial pH (Ref6), Livestock type (Ref7), Manure characteristics (Ref8), NA (Ref1, Ref1, Ref1, Ref1, Ref1, Ref1, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref7, Ref7, Ref7, Ref7, Ref7, Ref7, Ref7, Ref8, Ref8, Ref8, Ref8, Ref8, Ref8, Ref8, Ref6, Ref6, Ref6, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14), Temperature in the heap (Ref14), Type of additive (Ref1) and Type of technology (Ref1) |
GHG emissions | Additive properties (Ref6), Additive type (Ref6), Bulk density (Ref14), Initial moisture content (Ref6), Moisture content (Ref14), NA (Ref1, Ref1, Ref1, Ref1, Ref1, Ref1, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref2, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref3, Ref6, Ref6, Ref6, Ref6, Ref6, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref5, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref9, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref10, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref11, Ref12, Ref12, Ref12, Ref12, Ref12, Ref12, Ref12, Ref12, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref13, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14), Type of additive (Ref1) and Type of technology (Ref1) |
Nutrients recovery | Additive properties (Ref6), Additive type (Ref6), Application dosage (Ref6), Initial C/N ratio (Ref6), Initial moisture content (Ref6) and NA (Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref4, Ref6, Ref6, Ref6, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14, Ref14) |
4. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW SEARCH STRATEGY
Table 3: Systematic review search strategy - methodology and search parameters.
Parameter | Details |
Keywords | WOS: |
* Number of synthesis papers that report relevant results but without statistical test comparison of the intervention and the control.
** accounting only for emissions on site.
***Accounting for the contribution of all GHGs (N2O, CH4, CO2), each one with its specific global warming potential, expressed as CO2-equivalents
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE KEY FACTORS INFLUENCING THE SIZE OF THE EFFECT
Only the factors explicitly studied in the reviewed synthesis papers with a significant effect are reported below. Details regarding the factors can be found in the summaries of the meta-analyses.
...
Impact
...
Factors
...
Decrease air pollutants emissions
...
Type of technology (ref 1), Type of additive (ref 1, ref 7), Livestock type (ref 5), Manure characteristics (ref 6), Application dosage (ref 7), Initial moisture content (ref 7), Initial pH (ref 7), Initial C/N ratio (ref 7), Temperature in the heap (ref 14), Bulk density (ref 14)
...
Decrease GHG emissions
...
Type of technology (ref 1), Type of additive (ref 1, ref 7), Initial moisture content (ref 7, ref 14), Additive properties (ref 7), Bulk density (ref 14)
...
Decrease nutrients leaching and run-off
...
Additive type (ref 7), Additive properties (ref 7), Application dosage (ref 7), Initial moisture content (ref 7), Initial C/N ratio (ref 7)
4. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW SEARCH STRATEGY
Keywords
TOPIC: (manure OR slurry OR digestate OR (digested near/3 manure)) AND TOPIC: (management OR storage OR lagoon* OR "anaerobic digest*" OR tank* OR treatment OR process* OR technolog* OR techni* OR (soil near/3 application) OR (soil near/3 distribution) OR (soil near/3 amend*) OR biogas OR precision) AND TOPIC: ("meta-analy*" OR "systematic* review*" OR "evidence map" OR "global synthesis" OR "evidence synthesis" OR "research synthesis") |
|
_ABS |
_KEY: (manure OR slurry OR digestate OR (digested |
near/3 manure)) AND TITLE |
_ABS |
_KEY: (management OR storage OR lagoon* OR "anaerobic digest*" OR tank* OR treatment OR process* OR technolog* OR techni* OR (soil |
near/3 application) OR (soil |
near/3 distribution) OR (soil |
near/3 amend*) OR biogas OR precision) AND TITLE |
_ABS |
_KEY: ("meta-analy*" OR "systematic* review*" OR "evidence map" OR "global synthesis" OR "evidence synthesis" OR "research synthesis") |
Time reference | No time |
restriction. |
Databases |
Web of Science and Scopus |
: run |
on 01 July 2021 |
Exclusion criteria |
The main criteria that led to the exclusion of a synthesis paper |
are: |
of this review., 2) The paper is neither a systematic review nor a meta-analysis of primary research., 3) The analysis is not based on pairwise comparisons, 4) The paper is not written in English., 5) The full text is not available, 6) The analysis did not deal with improved manure storage techniques or dealt with other stages of manure management (e.g. processing, land application, animal housing techniques) and 7) The paper reported studies with absolute values of emission factors, without comparing storage techniques with a reference management scenario. |
263 synthesis papers from WOS and SCOPUS on Manure storage techniques plus other 14 retrieved in the search of other farming practices, potentially relevant for the practice object of our fiche. |
|
96 were excluded after reading the title and abstract, and 40 after reading the full text according to the above-mentioned criteria. Finally, |
7. LIST OF SYNTHESIS PAPERS INCLUDED IN THE REVIEW
14 synthesis papers were selected. |
5. SYNTHESIS PAPERS INCLUDED IN THE REVIEW
Table 4: List of synthesis papers included in this review. More details can be found in the summaries of the meta-analyses.
Ref Num | Author(s) | Year | Title | Journal | DOI |
Ref1 | Zhang Z., Liu D., Qiao Y., Li S., Chen Y., Hu C. | 2021 | Mitigation of carbon and nitrogen losses during pig manure composting: A meta-analysis | Science of the Total Environment 783 147103 |
Ref. Num
Authors
Year
Title
Reference
DOI
1
Zhang Z., Liu D., Qiao Y., Li S., Chen Y., Hu C.
2021
Mitigation of carbon and nitrogen losses during pig manure composting: A meta-analysis
Science of the Total Environment 783 147103
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147103
2
Zhao, SX; Schmidt, S; Qin, W; Li, J; Li, GX; Zhang, WF
2020
Towards the circular nitrogen economy - A global meta-analysis of composting technologies reveals much potential for mitigating nitrogen losses
10.1016/j.scitotenv. |
2021. |
147103 |
Ref2 | Ba, SD; Qu, QB; Zhang, KQ; Groot, JCJ |
2020 |
Meta-analysis of greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions from dairy manure composting |
Biosystems engineering |
10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2020.02.015 |
Ref3 | Emmerling, C; Krein, A; Junk, J |
2020 |
Meta-Analysis of Strategies to Reduce NH3 Emissions from Slurries in European Agriculture and Consequences for Greenhouse Gas Emissions |
Agronomy 10, 1633 |
10.3390/agronomy10111633
5
Ti, CP; Xia, LL; Chang, SX; Yan, XY
2019
Potential for mitigating global agricultural ammonia emission: A meta-analysis
10. |
6
Wang, Y; Xue, W; Zhu, Z; Yang, J; Li, X; Tian, Z;Dong, H; Zou, G;
2019
Mitigating ammonia emissions from typical broiler and layer manure management - A system analysis
3390/agronomy10111633 | |||||
Ref4 | Zhao, SX; Schmidt, S; Qin, W; Li, J; Li, GX; Zhang, WF | 2020 | Towards the circular nitrogen economy - A global meta-analysis of composting technologies reveals much potential for mitigating nitrogen losses | Sci. Total Environ. 704, 135401 | 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135401 |
Ref5 | Akdeniz, N | 2019 | A systematic review of biochar use in animal waste composting | Waste Management |
10.1016/j.wasman.2019. |
03. |
054 |
Ref6 | Cao Y, Wang X, Bai Z, Chadwick D, Misselbrook T, Sommer SG, Qin W, Ma L |
2019 |
Mitigation of ammonia, nitrous oxide and methane emissions during solid waste composting with different additives: A meta-analysis |
Journal of Cleaner Production | 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.288 | |||
Ref7 | Ti, CP; Xia, LL; Chang, SX; Yan, XY | 2019 | Potential for mitigating global agricultural ammonia emission: A meta-analysis | Environ. Pollut. 245, 141–148 |
10.1016/j. |
envpol. |
2018. |
10. |
124 |
8
Akdeniz, N
2019
A systematic review of biochar use in animal waste composting
Ref8 | Wang, Y; Xue, W; Zhu, Z; Yang, J; Li, X; Tian, Z;Dong, H; Zou, G; | 2019 | Mitigating ammonia emissions from typical broiler and layer manure management - A system analysis | Waste Management |
10.1016/j.wasman.2019. |
05. |
019 |
Ref9 | Sajeev, EPM; Winiwarter, W; Amon, B |
2018 |
Greenhouse Gas and Ammonia Emissions from Different Stages of Liquid Manure Management Chains: Abatement Options and Emission Interactions |
Journal of environmental quality |
10.2134/jeq2017.05.0199 |
Ref10 | Wang, Y; Li, XR; Yang, JF; Tian, Z; Sun, QP; Xue, WT; Dong, HM |
2018 |
Mitigating Greenhouse Gas and Ammonia Emissions from Beef Cattle Feedlot Production: A System Meta-Analysis |
Environmental Science & Technology |
10.1021/acs.est.8b02475 |
Ref11 | Wang, Y; Dong, HM; Zhu, ZP; Gerber, PJ; Xin, HW; Smith, P; Opio, C; Steinfeld, H; Chadwick, D |
2017 |
Mitigating Greenhouse Gas and Ammonia Emissions from Swine Manure Management: A System Analysis |
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY |
10.1021/acs.est.6b06430 |
Ref12 | Jayasundara, S; Appuhamy, JADRN; Kebreab, E; Wagner-Riddle, C |
2016 |
Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from Canadian dairy farms and mitigation options: An updated review |
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE |
10.1139/cjas-2015-0111 |
Ref13 | Hou, Y; Velthof, GL; Oenema, O |
2015 |
Mitigation of ammonia, nitrous oxide and methane emissions from manure management chains: a meta-analysis and integrated assessment |
Glob. Chang. Biol. 21, 1293–1312 |
10.1111/gcb.12767 |
Ref14 | Pardo, G; Moral, R; Aguilera, E; del Prado |
2015
Gaseous emissions from management of solid waste: a systematic review
Glob. Chang. Biol. 21, 1313–1327
, A | 2015 | Gaseous emissions from management of solid waste: a systematic review | Glob. Chang. Biol. 21, 1313–1327 | 10.1111/gcb.12806 |
Disclaimer: These fiches present a large amount of scientific knowledge synthesised to assess farming practices impacts on the environment, climate and productivity. The European Commission maintains this WIKI to enhance public access to information about its initiatives. Our goal is to keep this information timely and accurate. If errors are brought to our attention, we will try to correct them. However, the Commission accepts no responsibility or liability whatsoever with regard to the information on these fiches and WIKI.
[1] Synthesis research papers include either meta-analysis or systematic reviews with quantitative results. Details can be found in the methodology section of the WIKI.-analysis or systematic reviews with quantitative results. Details can be found in the methodology section of the WIKI.
[2] AMEC – Environment & infrastructure UK limited, in partnership with BIO intelligence service. Collection and analysis of data for the control of emissions from the spreading of manure - Final report 2014 for The European Commission. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/pdf/Final%20Report.pdf