dana olijhoek and peter lund department of animal...

57
AARHUS UNIVERSITY Methane – Dana Olijhoek March 2017 Methane production by ruminants Dana Olijhoek and Peter Lund Department of Animal Science AU-Foulum

Upload: dangmien

Post on 20-Nov-2018

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Methane production by ruminantsDana Olijhoek and Peter LundDepartment of Animal ScienceAU-Foulum

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Outline

    Methane emission numbers Methanogenesis: why? By who? Measurement techniques Mitigation strategies

    2

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    CLIMATE CHANGE ??

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Global methane (CH4) trends

    Increase in world population!14% of the increase was in only 23 years!!

    4

  • NO GREENHOUSE GASSES !!

    5

    -18 C

  • CO2-EQ

    1 kg Carbondioxide (CO2) = 1 kg CO2-eq. Fossile fuels

    1 kg Methane (CH4) = 25 kg CO2-eq. Digestion Manure

    1 kg Nitrous oxide (N2O) = 298 kg CO2-eq. N metabolism in manure and soil

    6

    (100-years timespan, IPCC)

  • THE COST OF PRODUCING MILK

    7

    02468

    1012141618

    Mio

    . To

    n C

    O2e

    CO2

    Metan

    Lattergas

    Bligaard (2017)

  • COWS AND METHANE IS HOT

    8

  • 9

    SPIN!!

  • 10

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Global greenhouse gas sources

    Sinks: Atmosphere: CH4 + OH CH3 + H2O ... (83%) Microbial uptake in soil (~5%)

    Excess: 12%11

    Moss et al., 2000

    Natural wetlands; 37%

    Rice growing; 16%

    Oil industry; 14%

    Livestock, enteric; 11%

    Livestock, manure; 4%

    Combustion; 6%

    Garbage; 6%

    Coal mines; 5% Sea and lakes; 1%

    ~70% anthropogenic source~30% natural source

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Enteric methane production Denmark

    12Nielsen et al. 2014

    Dairy cattle; 56.9

    Non dairy cattle; 29.5

    Sheep and goats; 1,2

    Horses; 2,4

    Swine; 9,8

    Poultry; 0.04

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Comparison of countries

    13

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Yield level is important

    14

    ad

    0.00

    2.00

    4.00

    6.00

    8.00

    10.00

    12.00

    0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000

    Output per cow, kg FPCM per year

    kg C

    O2-

    eq. p

    er k

    g FP

    CM

    Gerber et al., 2011

    Intensive

    Multipurpose

    Extensive

    Kg ECM per cow

    Kg

    CO

    2-eq

    . per

    kg

    ECM

    1 symbol = 1 country

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Emission of methane

    12

    1-5%

    13% intestine89% via lungs

    11% via rectum 95-99%

    87% rumen

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Why is it a problem?

    Global warming potential: 28 (IPCC, 2014) 2-12% loss of gross energy (feed)

    CH4 GE value: 55 MJ/kg (e.g. glucose 15.6, fat 39.3)

    16

    Gross energy

    Faecal energy

    Digestible energy

    Urine + methane energy

    Metabolizable energy

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Why do cows produce CH4...?

    17

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Hydrogen!

    18

    H2CO2 + 4H2 CH4 + 2H2O

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Why do cows produce CH4...?

    Surplus H2 needs to be removed (excreted or oxidized) Inhibits fermentation processes

    CHO fermentation:

    C6H12O6 + 2H2O 2CH3COOH + 2CO2 + 4H2 acetic acid

    C6H12O6 + 2H2 2CH3CH2COOH + 2H2O propionic acid

    C6H12O6 CH3CH2CH2COOH + 2CO2 + 2H2 butyric acid

    19

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Diversity in the rumen

    Microbes (1012 microbes mL-1 in the rumen fluid)

    Bacteria

    Protozoa

    Fungi

    Archaea

    Viruses

    20

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Diversity in the rumen

    Microbes

    Bacteria

    Protozoa

    Fungi

    Archaea

    Viruses

    Digest feed CHO (fibre, starch and sugar) and protein

    Mainly fibre rich diets

    Mainly methanogens

    Do not contribute to any fermentation

    Produce hydrogen

    Protozoa foraging on organic material including fungi

    21

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Microbial community

    22

    Feed Cow

    Microbial diversity is more related to the cow than to the feed

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Animal variation

    HIGH METHANE

    LOW METHANE

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Where does H2 goes to?

    24

    CHO acetate CHO butyrate

    CHO propionateBiohydrogenation of fatty acids

    Acetogenebacteria

    S-reducingbacteria MethanogensH2

    N-reducing microbes AA VFA

    Microbial matter

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Energy efficiency

    The fermentation pathways differ in their energetic efficiency G is the difference in free energy with a chemical reaction, i.e. a reaction is

    favourable when G is low G = Gibbs free energy change

    25

    Reaction G Substrate availability

    CO2 + 4H2 CH4 + 2H2O -67.4 High

    CO2 + 4H2 CH3COO- + H+ + 2H2O -8.8 High

    SO42- + 4H2 + H+ HS- + 4H2O -84.4 Low

    NO3- + H2 + 2H+ NO2- + 2H2O -130 Low

    NO2- + 3H2 + 2H+ NH4+ + 2H2O -371 Low(Ungerfeld & Kohn, 2006)

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Nitrate (NO3-) as mitigation strategy

    4 cows, Latin Square design Calcium nitrate (Bolifor CNF) Treatments with nitrate dose (g NO3-/kg DM):

    Control: 0 Low: 5 Medium: 14 High: 21

    26

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Nitrate study: results

    27

    26.5a 24.9a,b 23.0b

    20.3c

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    25

    30

    Control Low Medium High

    CH4

    prod

    uctio

    n (L

    /kg

    DMI)

    Treatment

    CH4

    -6% -13% -23%

    SEM 1.79P

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Nitrate study: results

    Hemoglobin (Fe2+)

    NO2- (absorbed from rumen)

    Methemoglobin (Fe3+)

    Clinical signs of methemoglobinemia: methemoglobin at 30-40% of Hb

    28

    Olijhoek et al., 2016

    1.30a 1.31a1.50a 1.57b

    0,00,20,40,60,81,01,21,41,61,8

    Control Low Medium High

    Met

    hem

    oglo

    bin

    (% o

    f Hb)

    Treatments

    Methemoglobin (% of Hb)SEM 0.08P

  • Met-haemoglobin

    1,25 1,25 1,49 1,58

    30

    70

    0

    20

    40

    60

    80

    100

    Kontrol Lavt Medium Hjt Klinisk 1960

    Met-HB (% of HB)

    Control Low Medium High Clinical 1960exp

  • Nitrate i milk (mg/kg)

    0,11

    0,38

    1,351,53

    0,00,20,40,60,81,01,21,41,61,8

    Kontrol Lavt Medium Hjt

    P < 0,001

    Control Low Medium High

  • 0,11 0,38 1,35 1,53

    50

    150

    0

    20

    40

    60

    80

    100

    120

    140

    160

    Kontrol Lavt Medium Hjt Drikkevand OstemlkControl Low Medium High Water Cheesemilk

    NITRATE IN MILK (MG/KG)

  • N2O (256 X CO2)

    Petersen et al. (2015)

    N2O

    co

    nce

    ntra

    tion

    (uL/

    L)

    Fee

    dinta

    ke(kg

    DM

    / 15 min)

    Control

    Low

    Medium

    High

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Measurement techniques

    33

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Measurement techniques

    34

    SF6 tracerOpen circuit chambers GreenFeed

    http://www.google.dk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=8nloMss12XeJCM&tbnid=iFRi4jj5cvyhsM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.electronicproducts.com/Sensors_and_Transducers/Sensors/Researchers_develop_sensors_that_measure_cow_39_s_flatulence_and_other_bathroom_habits.aspx&ei=Nz08UpKNG8TF0QXCmYGgBQ&psig=AFQjCNEAuq7mJu9tySouuK8KM3whO1JNdg&ust=1379765937450323

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Respiration chambers

    Considered as a reference method Animals are kept in closed chambers (slight under-pressure) Continuous air flow Gas flow rate (L/min) measured Gases measured: CO2, O2, CH4, H2, H2S

    Concentration in inflow and outflow air

    35

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Welfare is important

    36

    Feed

    inta

    ke (

    kg fe

    ed) D

    UR

    ING

    EX

    PER

    IMEN

    T

    Feed intake (kg feed) BEFORE EXPERIMENT

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    GreenFeed

    37

    C-Lock

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    SF6 (sulphur hexafluoride) technique

    38Storm et al. 2012

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Reducing (mitigating) methane emission

    39

    Mitigation strategies:1. Inhibit the methanogens specifically2. Reduce the substrate (H2) source3. Promote other H2 consuming processes/organisms4. Increase productivity5. Combination of 1-3

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Reducing (mitigating) methane emission

    40

    1. Inhibit the methanogens specifically: 2-bromoethanesulphonate (BES) Plant secondary metabolites: condensed tannins, essential oils Vaccination Long chained (unsaturated) fatty acids (see further later on)

    Inhibitor sensitivity differs among methanogens!

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Reducing methane emission

    41

    2. Reduce the H2 source Inhibit H2 producing protozoa (defaunation) Antibiotic treatment:

    E.g. monensin (ionophore): targets H2 producing Gram+ bacteria and protozoa

    Works but controversial approach...!

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Reducing methane emission (1)3. Promote other H2 consuming processes

    More dietary starch (concentrate) and less cellulose-rich roughage

    Less H2 production Risk of increased lactate production (rumen acidosis)

    42

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Reducing methane emission (2)

    3. Promote other H2 consuming processes

    Promote reductive acetogenesis: CO2 + 4H2 CH3COO- + H+ + 2H2O The process is thermodynamically less favorable than methanogenesis Acetogens have lower H2 affinity than methanogens An enigma why the process can dominate in e.g. Kangaroos

    Dietary nitrate/sulphate (electron acceptors) addition

    Works but problematic?!? Production/emission of N2O (greenhouse gas) Production of hydrogensulphide (H2S; toxic and odorous compound) and

    nitrite (NO2- ; toxic)

    43

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Reducing methane emission

    4. Increase productivity of the animal By higher feed quality, management, genetics Less CH4/kg product (meat or milk) Dilution of maintenance

    5. Dietary fat (combining strategies)

    44

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Methane reduction through fat

    45

    Beauchemin (2007)

    Methane reduced 5-6% per 1% fat addedPotential: 10-25% reduction

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Effects of dietary fat on CH4 production

    Long-chained fatty acids are not fermented in the rumen; no substrate input for

    the methanogens

    Bio-hydrogenation (saturation) of unsaturated fatty acids is an alternative H2 sink

    Can inhibit methanogens directly, especially medium-chained fatty acids

    Reduces the number of protozoa (H2 producers)

    Rapeseed plant

    Rapeseed oil

    Extruding processWhole seeds46

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Effects of dietary fat on CH4 production

    But:

    Unsaturated fatty acids are also toxic for cellulolytic bacteria reduced fibre

    digestion!?!

    Reduction in DMI?

    What about milk composition and quality?!?

    47

  • FAT X FORAGE COW

    24

    25

    26

    27

    28

    29

    30

    31

    32

    33

    Early grass-fat

    Early grass+fat

    Late grass-fat

    Late grass+fat

    Maize-fat

    Maize+fat

    CH4/kg DM

    -5%

    -3%

    -5%

    Brask (2013)

  • 0

    50

    100

    150

    200

    250

    300

    350

    grass silage early

    grass silage early +

    rapeseed

    grass silage late

    grass silage late +

    rapeseed

    mais silage mais silage + rapeseed

    Lite

    r met

    ane/

    kg V

    S

    90 days

    60 days

    30 days

    FAT X FORAGE BIOGAS POTENTIAL

    +17%+17%

    +9%

    Mller (2013)

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    GHG from feed + CH4 from cow, kg CO2/kg ECM

    -0,2 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1

    Grass ration

    Maize ration

    Growing Processing Transport LUC C in soil CH4 cow

    + 16 %

    More from feed Less CH4 from cowDue to C in soil

    Mogensen (2013)

  • FORAGE: CONCENTRATE RATIO

    500

    550

    600

    650

    700

    750

    800

    50:50 80:20

    Methane L/d

    500

    550

    600

    650

    700

    750

    800

    50:50 80:20

    Methane L/d

    High quality GS Low quality GS

    Hellwing (2012)51

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    GHG from feed + CH4 from cow, kg CO2/kg ECM

    0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1 1,2

    80% roughage

    50% roughage

    Growing Processing Transport LUC C in soil CH4 cow

    + 13%

    More from feed Less from CH4 cow

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    WUNDERDRUGS

    Nitrate

    Oregano

    Garlic

    Essential oils

    3 NitroOxyPropanol

    Saponins

    Tanins

    Sea weed

    .

    25-32 % reduction

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    ORGANIC VS CONVENTIONAL

    Kristensen (2017)

    Chart1

    72554591

    53313241

    51703192

    12501434

    40273551

    konv

    ko

    CO2 eq per ha

    Produktion-tilgang

    kildeKristensen et al 2011Dourmad et al 2014Leinonen et al 2012Knudsen et al 2014DK

    produktmlksvingplante

    enhed1 kg EKM leveret1 kg tilv (levende)1 kg g produceret1 kg ts - hstetmlksvinekdgplante

    systemkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvkokonvkosumkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvko

    udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.21.272.923.162.923.420.4250.47LCA1.21.272.923.162.923.420.4250.47

    % i Dk87987492637570100DK-del1.0441.24462.16082.90721.83962.5650.29750.47

    DK udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.041.242.162.911.842.570.300.47

    1 mj=0,28 Kwh; 0,655 Co2 pr kwhenergiCO2 eq per enhed0.140.200.300.330.330.420.080.12

    DK landbrugCO2 eq per enhed0.901.041.862.581.512.150.220.35

    arealm2 per enhed1.782.374.139.1449.61.742.44

    % DK709680877370100100

    DK areal1.252.283.307.952.926.721.742.44

    DK landbrugCO2 eq kg / ha72554591563232415170319212501434

    kologi% af konv pr ha63%58%62%115%

    DKprodukt / ha80264395302712583425148857474098

    kologi% af konv pr ha55%42%43%71%

    kildeKristensen et al 2011Dourmad et al 2014Leinonen et al 2012Knudsen et al 2014DK

    produktmlksvingplante

    enhed1 kg EKM leveret1 kg tilv (levende)1 kg g produceret1 kg ts - hstet

    systemkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvkokonvkosum

    2015 DSproduktDK prouduktionmio kg sl180110

    mio kg FU-enhed478648323701322015

    ha596110783106410100949245317926322453179

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq4.330.504.410.030.330.031.260.0710.330.6410.97

    kologi% af konv6%

    DK landbrugCO2 eq kg / ha72554591563232415170319212501434421235724168

    produktionFU4786483237013220155799201

    526923832356000

    koko

    scenarierudviklingudvikling

    tilgang

    produkt44ha26744075242344086219619147182632

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq1.932.024.230.140.180.131.080.287.422.569.98

    kologi% af konv26%

    reduktion% af 2015reduktion% af 201545%400%96%400%53%400%85%400%72%400%9%

    produktproduktionFU21401932227553116604954803

    407223271765757

    77%98%75%96%

    Produktion-tilgang

    LCA

    DK-del

    CO2 eq per kg

    Areal-tilgang

    kildeKristensen et al 2011Dourmad et al 2014Leinonen et al 2012Knudsen et al 2014Beregninger

    produktmlksvingplanteDanmark

    enhed1 kg EKM leveret1 kg tilv (levende)1 kg g produceret1 kg ts - hstet

    systemkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvkokonvkosum

    udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.21.272.923.162.923.420.4250.47

    % i Dk87987492637570100

    DK udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.041.242.162.911.842.570.300.47

    1 mj=0,28 Kwh; 0,655 Co2 pr kwhenergiCO2 eq per enhed0.140.20.30.330.330.420.080.12

    DK landbrugCO2 eq per enhed0.901.041.862.581.512.150.220.35

    0.75333333330.8225196850.6372602740.81556962030.51698630140.62719298250.51176470590.7446808511

    arealm2 per enhed1.782.374.139.1449.61.742.44

    % DK709680877370100100

    DK areal1.252.283.307.952.926.721.742.44

    DK landbrugCO2 eq kg / ha725545915632324151703192125014344027.03015959073551.2975435062

    kologi% af konv pr ha63%58%62%115%

    DKprodukt / ha80264395302712583425148857474098

    kologi% af konv pr ha55%42%43%71%

    kildeKristensen et al 2011Dourmad et al 2014Leinonen et al 2012Knudsen et al 2014Beregninger

    produktmlksvingplanteDanmark

    enhed1 kg EKM leveret1 kg tilv (levende)1 kg g produceret1 kg ts - hstet

    systemkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvkokonvkosum

    areal2015Dk areal1000 ha651111615853811345224531792632

    kologi% af konv7%

    0.26538931920.62011173180.25071341210.04469273740.02160619650.04469273740.46229107220.2905027933

    GJ=10-9 kgUdledningGJ CO2 eq4.720.513.460.030.270.031.420.079.880.6410.514027.03015959073551.2975435062

    kologi% af konv6%

    produktionFU5224719.10112359487869186138010061181507119056517241213115

    571258818714411934126730356

    ko47864832369.736842105313.157894736822015

    scenarierudvikling

    tilgang

    areal44* arealha31844459132293297820819167162632

    27%

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq2.312.043.330.100.150.101.220.307.012.549.553657.65868477073551.2975435062

    kologi% af konv27%

    reduktion% af 20159%

    arealproduktionFU2552166.934189411951476.793248941788740.920096854024299315476195620690852459

    4503643.7274383518289831469346473149

    % af 201579%98%76%96%

    DK areal

    Resultatopgrelse for heltidsbedrifter efter tid, bedriftstype, rsvrk og regnskabsposter

    Enhed: -konvkoko stat

    2015heltid1. POPULATION, ANTAL BEDRIFTER2. STIKPRVE, ANTAL BEDRIFTER3. JORDBRUGSAREAL, HA, PRIMOha i alt

    Malkekvg, konventionel drift2860333154.4441584650977.154875576

    Malkekvg, kologisk drift32682197.664417.6111724.470144078

    Andet kvg, konventionel drift4423184.337260.654929.0721062287

    Andet kvg, kologisk drift6615118778813507.3360926529

    Svin, konventionel drift2520445165.6417312615195.701056733

    Svin, kologisk drift3014163.348998496.7179658329

    Fjerkr, konventionel drift24556147.736186.553345.6484268113

    Pelsdyr, konventionel drift12615576.596466.5142209.608388902

    Planteproduktion, konventionel drift2351306259608909897645.404720579

    Planteproduktion, kologisk drift9718273.926568.346079.475797436

    Potteplanter219994.91073.11581.9494929549

    Vksthusgrntsager56184.7263.2388.0058769413

    Frilandsgrntsager11141146.516261.523972.4831606425

    Frugt og br1773133.85982.68819.4679308096

    Planteskole1112724.92763.94074.5039638225

    1767735.82453139179808

    DK

    i alt1767735.8

    konv1664062.924531391.4741864625

    ko103672.91798081.7343780294

    DK2632947

    1.4894459907

    DK

    Enhed: -mio kg

    Mlk ab landmand i alt (mio. kg)Indvejet mlk p mejerier (mio. kg)kologisk mlk ab landmand (mio. kg)Konv

    20155348.585269.91483.354786.56

    9%

    Slagtninger og produktion af svin efter tid, kategori og enhed

    Enhed: -

    Slagtninger og eksport af levende dyr (1.000 stk.)Gennemsnitlig slagtet vgt (kg.)

    2015Svin, i alt30874..

    Polte9450%

    Ser533176.30%

    Orner9176.40%

    Slagtesvin1816484.31531225.285%

    For producent192.50%

    Kasserede36..

    Slagtninger hos Producent2484.32023.20%

    Eksport af levende svin i alt1213322.9277845.715%

    konvko

    DK1811094.11801014.110080

    1%

    gproduktion og produktionsformer efter tid og enhed

    Enhed: -mio kgproduktion

    Burg (mio kg)g fra fritgende hns (mio kg)Skrabeg (mio. kg)g fra volierehnsehold (mio. kg)kologiske g (mio. kg)

    20153141301524%

    Konv48

    Slagtninger og produktion af fjerkr efter enhed, tid og kategori

    Enhed: -1000 stk

    Slagtninger af kyllingerSlagtninger af hnsSlagtninger af nderSlagtninger af gsSlagtninger af kalkuner

    Slagtninger og eksport af levende dyr (1.000 stk.)201595681.411.839.186.7

    korrigeret til mio g"172.22652

    g + kyllunger konv220.22652mio kg

    6%

    Ren ko

    kildeKristensen et al 2011Dourmad et al 2014Leinonen et al 2012Knudsen et al 2014DK

    produktmlksvingplante

    enhed1 kg EKM leveret1 kg tilv (levende)1 kg g produceret1 kg ts - hstet

    systemkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvkokonvkosum

    udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.21.272.923.162.923.420.4250.47

    % i Dk87987492637570100

    DK udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.0441.24462.16082.90721.83962.5650.29750.47

    1 mj=0,28 Kwh; 0,655 Co2 pr kwhenergiCO2 eq per enhed0.140.20.30.330.330.420.080.12

    DK landbrugCO2 eq per enhed0.9041.04461.86082.57721.50962.1450.21750.35

    arealm2 per enhed1.782.374.139.1449.61.742.44

    % DK709680877370100100

    DK areal1.2462.27523.3047.95182.926.721.742.44

    DK landbrugCO2 eq kg / ha7255.21669341894591.24472573845631.96125907993241.02718881265169.86301369863191.964285714312501434.4262295082

    kologi% af konv pr ha0.6328197930.57547043380.61741757511.1475409836

    DKprodukt / ha8025.68218298554395.21800281293026.63438256661257.57690082753424.65753424661488.09523809525747.12643678164098.3606557377

    kologi% af konv pr ha0.54764416320.4155034080.43452380950.7131147541

    2015 DSproduktDK prouduktionmio kg sl180110

    mio kg FU-enhed47864832369.736842105313.157894736817215

    ha596.3356109.89216782.961052631610.462894736850.22410.081023492452.5206526316179.43505473682631.95570736842453179

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq4.3265440.50454184.40960631580.03391052630.25965120.0321751.278750.070286885210.27455151580.640914211610.9154657274

    kologi% af konv0.0587161581

    produktionFU47860004830002369736.8421052613157.8947368421172000150005879310.34482759200819.672131148

    52690002382894.736842111870006080130.01695873

    arealDk areal1000 ha651111615853811345224531792632

    kologi% af konv0.0680091185

    GJ=10-9 kgUdledningGJ CO2 eq4.72314606740.50962816463.46365617430.02592821750.27400273970.02553571431.41750.07459016399.87830498150.635682260310.5139872418

    kologi% af konv0.0604606269

    produktionFU5224719.10112359487869.1983122361861380.1452784510060.6152066199181506.84931506811904.76190476196517241.37931035213114.754098361

    5712588.299435831871440.76048507193411.611219836730356.13340871

    ko

    scenarierudvikling

    tilgang

    produkt7ha65111154332453278854320277182745

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq4.72314606740.50962816463.05815496370.103712870.23264383560.10214285710.9850.77889344268.99894486671.494377334410.4933222011

    kologi% af konv0.14241222230.9613261095

    produktproduktionFU5224719.10112359487869.1983122361643462.4697336640242.4608264795154109.58904109647619.04761904764528735.632183912225409.83606557

    5712588.299435831683704.93056014201728.6366601446754145.46824948

    1.08418832780.70657965061.07876276291.1108554339

    Figurer

    mlksvinfjerkrplantegennemsnit

    systemkonvkokonvkokonvkokonvkokonvko

    DK landbrugCO2 eq kg / ha7255.21669341894591.24472573845631.96125907993241.02718881265169.86301369863191.964285714312501434.42622950824027.03015959073551.2975435062

    7255.21669341895631.96125907995169.863013698612504027.0301595907

    4591.24472573843241.02718881263191.96428571431434.42622950823551.2975435062

    DK prouduktionmio kg sl180110

    mio kg FU-enhed47864832369.736842105313.157894736822015

    ha596.3356109.89216782.961052631610.462894736864.2410.081009492452.5366526316179.4350547368

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq4.3265440.50454184.40960631580.03391052630.3321120.0321751.261250.064262295110.32951231580.6348896214

    42%79%43%5%3%5%12%10%

    0.41885268810.79469215280.42689395020.05341168790.03215175990.05067810040.12210160180.1012180589

    7255.21669341894591.24472573845631.96125907993241.02718881265169.86301369863191.964285714312501311.4754098361

    konvkoKonvko

    mlk725545917255.2166934189mlk4279

    svin533132414591.2447257384svin435

    fjerkr517031925631.9612590799fjerkr35

    plante125014343241.0271888126plante1210

    gennemsnit402735515169.8630136986

    3191.9642857143

    1250

    1311.4754098361

    Figurer

    mlk

    svin

    fjerkr

    plante

    Metan+lattergas

    Udledning af metan og lattergas ved konventionelt og kologisk jordbrug opdelt efter driftsgrene og i gennemsnit, kg CO2 eq pr ha

    konv

    ko

    CO2 eq per ha

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    ORGANIC VS CONVENTIONAL

    Kristensen (2017)

    Chart1

    1.21.044

    1.271.2446

    2.922.1608

    3.162.9072

    2.921.8396

    3.422.565

    0.4250.2975

    0.470.47

    LCA

    DK-del

    CO2 eq per kg

    Produktion-tilgang

    kildeKristensen et al 2011Dourmad et al 2014Leinonen et al 2012Knudsen et al 2014DK

    produktmlksvingplante

    enhed1 kg EKM leveret1 kg tilv (levende)1 kg g produceret1 kg ts - hstetmlksvinekdgplante

    systemkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvkokonvkosumkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvko

    udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.21.272.923.162.923.420.4250.47LCA1.21.272.923.162.923.420.4250.47

    % i Dk87987492637570100DK-del1.0441.24462.16082.90721.83962.5650.29750.47

    DK udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.041.242.162.911.842.570.300.47

    1 mj=0,28 Kwh; 0,655 Co2 pr kwhenergiCO2 eq per enhed0.140.200.300.330.330.420.080.12

    DK landbrugCO2 eq per enhed0.901.041.862.581.512.150.220.35

    arealm2 per enhed1.782.374.139.1449.61.742.44

    % DK709680877370100100

    DK areal1.252.283.307.952.926.721.742.44

    DK landbrugCO2 eq kg / ha72554591563232415170319212501434

    kologi% af konv pr ha63%58%62%115%

    DKprodukt / ha80264395302712583425148857474098

    kologi% af konv pr ha55%42%43%71%

    kildeKristensen et al 2011Dourmad et al 2014Leinonen et al 2012Knudsen et al 2014DK

    produktmlksvingplante

    enhed1 kg EKM leveret1 kg tilv (levende)1 kg g produceret1 kg ts - hstet

    systemkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvkokonvkosum

    2015 DSproduktDK prouduktionmio kg sl180110

    mio kg FU-enhed478648323701322015

    ha596110783106410100949245317926322453179

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq4.330.504.410.030.330.031.260.0710.330.6410.97

    kologi% af konv6%

    DK landbrugCO2 eq kg / ha72554591563232415170319212501434421235724168

    produktionFU4786483237013220155799201

    526923832356000

    koko

    scenarierudviklingudvikling

    tilgang

    produkt44ha26744075242344086219619147182632

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq1.932.024.230.140.180.131.080.287.422.569.98

    kologi% af konv26%

    reduktion% af 2015reduktion% af 201545%400%96%400%53%400%85%400%72%400%9%

    produktproduktionFU21401932227553116604954803

    407223271765757

    77%98%75%96%

    Produktion-tilgang

    Areal-tilgang

    kildeKristensen et al 2011Dourmad et al 2014Leinonen et al 2012Knudsen et al 2014Beregninger

    produktmlksvingplanteDanmark

    enhed1 kg EKM leveret1 kg tilv (levende)1 kg g produceret1 kg ts - hstet

    systemkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvkokonvkosum

    udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.21.272.923.162.923.420.4250.47

    % i Dk87987492637570100

    DK udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.041.242.162.911.842.570.300.47

    1 mj=0,28 Kwh; 0,655 Co2 pr kwhenergiCO2 eq per enhed0.140.20.30.330.330.420.080.12

    DK landbrugCO2 eq per enhed0.901.041.862.581.512.150.220.35

    0.75333333330.8225196850.6372602740.81556962030.51698630140.62719298250.51176470590.7446808511

    arealm2 per enhed1.782.374.139.1449.61.742.44

    % DK709680877370100100

    DK areal1.252.283.307.952.926.721.742.44

    DK landbrugCO2 eq kg / ha725545915632324151703192125014344027.03015959073551.2975435062

    kologi% af konv pr ha63%58%62%115%

    DKprodukt / ha80264395302712583425148857474098

    kologi% af konv pr ha55%42%43%71%

    kildeKristensen et al 2011Dourmad et al 2014Leinonen et al 2012Knudsen et al 2014Beregninger

    produktmlksvingplanteDanmark

    enhed1 kg EKM leveret1 kg tilv (levende)1 kg g produceret1 kg ts - hstet

    systemkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvkokonvkosum

    areal2015Dk areal1000 ha651111615853811345224531792632

    kologi% af konv7%

    0.26538931920.62011173180.25071341210.04469273740.02160619650.04469273740.46229107220.2905027933

    GJ=10-9 kgUdledningGJ CO2 eq4.720.513.460.030.270.031.420.079.880.6410.514027.03015959073551.2975435062

    kologi% af konv6%

    produktionFU5224719.10112359487869186138010061181507119056517241213115

    571258818714411934126730356

    ko47864832369.736842105313.157894736822015

    scenarierudvikling

    tilgang

    areal44* arealha31844459132293297820819167162632

    27%

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq2.312.043.330.100.150.101.220.307.012.549.553657.65868477073551.2975435062

    kologi% af konv27%

    reduktion% af 20159%

    arealproduktionFU2552166.934189411951476.793248941788740.920096854024299315476195620690852459

    4503643.7274383518289831469346473149

    % af 201579%98%76%96%

    LCA

    DK-del

    CO2 eq per kg

    DK areal

    Resultatopgrelse for heltidsbedrifter efter tid, bedriftstype, rsvrk og regnskabsposter

    Enhed: -konvkoko stat

    2015heltid1. POPULATION, ANTAL BEDRIFTER2. STIKPRVE, ANTAL BEDRIFTER3. JORDBRUGSAREAL, HA, PRIMOha i alt

    Malkekvg, konventionel drift2860333154.4441584650977.154875576

    Malkekvg, kologisk drift32682197.664417.6111724.470144078

    Andet kvg, konventionel drift4423184.337260.654929.0721062287

    Andet kvg, kologisk drift6615118778813507.3360926529

    Svin, konventionel drift2520445165.6417312615195.701056733

    Svin, kologisk drift3014163.348998496.7179658329

    Fjerkr, konventionel drift24556147.736186.553345.6484268113

    Pelsdyr, konventionel drift12615576.596466.5142209.608388902

    Planteproduktion, konventionel drift2351306259608909897645.404720579

    Planteproduktion, kologisk drift9718273.926568.346079.475797436

    Potteplanter219994.91073.11581.9494929549

    Vksthusgrntsager56184.7263.2388.0058769413

    Frilandsgrntsager11141146.516261.523972.4831606425

    Frugt og br1773133.85982.68819.4679308096

    Planteskole1112724.92763.94074.5039638225

    1767735.82453139179808

    DK

    i alt1767735.8

    konv1664062.924531391.4741864625

    ko103672.91798081.7343780294

    DK2632947

    1.4894459907

    DK

    Enhed: -mio kg

    Mlk ab landmand i alt (mio. kg)Indvejet mlk p mejerier (mio. kg)kologisk mlk ab landmand (mio. kg)Konv

    20155348.585269.91483.354786.56

    9%

    Slagtninger og produktion af svin efter tid, kategori og enhed

    Enhed: -

    Slagtninger og eksport af levende dyr (1.000 stk.)Gennemsnitlig slagtet vgt (kg.)

    2015Svin, i alt30874..

    Polte9450%

    Ser533176.30%

    Orner9176.40%

    Slagtesvin1816484.31531225.285%

    For producent192.50%

    Kasserede36..

    Slagtninger hos Producent2484.32023.20%

    Eksport af levende svin i alt1213322.9277845.715%

    konvko

    DK1811094.11801014.110080

    1%

    gproduktion og produktionsformer efter tid og enhed

    Enhed: -mio kgproduktion

    Burg (mio kg)g fra fritgende hns (mio kg)Skrabeg (mio. kg)g fra volierehnsehold (mio. kg)kologiske g (mio. kg)

    20153141301524%

    Konv48

    Slagtninger og produktion af fjerkr efter enhed, tid og kategori

    Enhed: -1000 stk

    Slagtninger af kyllingerSlagtninger af hnsSlagtninger af nderSlagtninger af gsSlagtninger af kalkuner

    Slagtninger og eksport af levende dyr (1.000 stk.)201595681.411.839.186.7

    korrigeret til mio g"172.22652

    g + kyllunger konv220.22652mio kg

    6%

    Ren ko

    kildeKristensen et al 2011Dourmad et al 2014Leinonen et al 2012Knudsen et al 2014DK

    produktmlksvingplante

    enhed1 kg EKM leveret1 kg tilv (levende)1 kg g produceret1 kg ts - hstet

    systemkonvkokonvkokonv-burkokonvkokonvkosum

    udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.21.272.923.162.923.420.4250.47

    % i Dk87987492637570100

    DK udledningCO2 eq per enhed1.0441.24462.16082.90721.83962.5650.29750.47

    1 mj=0,28 Kwh; 0,655 Co2 pr kwhenergiCO2 eq per enhed0.140.20.30.330.330.420.080.12

    DK landbrugCO2 eq per enhed0.9041.04461.86082.57721.50962.1450.21750.35

    arealm2 per enhed1.782.374.139.1449.61.742.44

    % DK709680877370100100

    DK areal1.2462.27523.3047.95182.926.721.742.44

    DK landbrugCO2 eq kg / ha7255.21669341894591.24472573845631.96125907993241.02718881265169.86301369863191.964285714312501434.4262295082

    kologi% af konv pr ha0.6328197930.57547043380.61741757511.1475409836

    DKprodukt / ha8025.68218298554395.21800281293026.63438256661257.57690082753424.65753424661488.09523809525747.12643678164098.3606557377

    kologi% af konv pr ha0.54764416320.4155034080.43452380950.7131147541

    2015 DSproduktDK prouduktionmio kg sl180110

    mio kg FU-enhed47864832369.736842105313.157894736817215

    ha596.3356109.89216782.961052631610.462894736850.22410.081023492452.5206526316179.43505473682631.95570736842453179

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq4.3265440.50454184.40960631580.03391052630.25965120.0321751.278750.070286885210.27455151580.640914211610.9154657274

    kologi% af konv0.0587161581

    produktionFU47860004830002369736.8421052613157.8947368421172000150005879310.34482759200819.672131148

    52690002382894.736842111870006080130.01695873

    arealDk areal1000 ha651111615853811345224531792632

    kologi% af konv0.0680091185

    GJ=10-9 kgUdledningGJ CO2 eq4.72314606740.50962816463.46365617430.02592821750.27400273970.02553571431.41750.07459016399.87830498150.635682260310.5139872418

    kologi% af konv0.0604606269

    produktionFU5224719.10112359487869.1983122361861380.1452784510060.6152066199181506.84931506811904.76190476196517241.37931035213114.754098361

    5712588.299435831871440.76048507193411.611219836730356.13340871

    ko

    scenarierudvikling

    tilgang

    produkt7ha65111154332453278854320277182745

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq4.72314606740.50962816463.05815496370.103712870.23264383560.10214285710.9850.77889344268.99894486671.494377334410.4933222011

    kologi% af konv0.14241222230.9613261095

    produktproduktionFU5224719.10112359487869.1983122361643462.4697336640242.4608264795154109.58904109647619.04761904764528735.632183912225409.83606557

    5712588.299435831683704.93056014201728.6366601446754145.46824948

    1.08418832780.70657965061.07876276291.1108554339

    Figurer

    mlksvinfjerkrplantegennemsnit

    systemkonvkokonvkokonvkokonvkokonvko

    DK landbrugCO2 eq kg / ha7255.21669341894591.24472573845631.96125907993241.02718881265169.86301369863191.964285714312501434.42622950824027.03015959073551.2975435062

    7255.21669341895631.96125907995169.863013698612504027.0301595907

    4591.24472573843241.02718881263191.96428571431434.42622950823551.2975435062

    DK prouduktionmio kg sl180110

    mio kg FU-enhed47864832369.736842105313.157894736822015

    ha596.3356109.89216782.961052631610.462894736864.2410.081009492452.5366526316179.4350547368

    UdledningGJ CO2 eq4.3265440.50454184.40960631580.03391052630.3321120.0321751.261250.064262295110.32951231580.6348896214

    42%79%43%5%3%5%12%10%

    0.41885268810.79469215280.42689395020.05341168790.03215175990.05067810040.12210160180.1012180589

    7255.21669341894591.24472573845631.96125907993241.02718881265169.86301369863191.964285714312501311.4754098361

    konvkoKonvko

    mlk725545917255.2166934189mlk4279

    svin533132414591.2447257384svin435

    fjerkr517031925631.9612590799fjerkr35

    plante125014343241.0271888126plante1210

    gennemsnit402735515169.8630136986

    3191.9642857143

    1250

    1311.4754098361

    Figurer

    mlk

    svin

    fjerkr

    plante

    Andel af udledning af metan+lattergas i Danmark indenfor konventionelt og kologisk jordbrugopdelt efter driftsgrene

    Udledning af metan og lattergas ved konventionelt og kologisk jordbrug opdelt efter driftsgrene og i gennemsnit, kg CO2 eq pr ha

    konv

    ko

    Udledning af metan + lattergas ved konventionelt og kologisk jordbrug opdelt efter driftsgrene og i gennemsnit, kg CO2 eq pr ha

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    The future

    -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10

    Same milk production in DK

    Same # of cows in DK (12500 EKM)

    Biogas

    Manure

    Management

    Breeding

    Feeding

    Tech

    nolo

    gy

    Change in methane in 2030 (% of 2015)

    Lund & Kristensen (2017)

  • AARHUSUNIVERSITY

    Methane Dana Olijhoek March 2017

    Thank you for your attention!

    57

    Methane production by ruminantsOutlineCLIMATE CHANGE ??Global methane (CH4) trendsNo greenhouse gasses !!CO2-EQTHE COST OF PRODUCING MILKCOWS AND METHANE IS HOTSPIN!!Slide Number 10Global greenhouse gas sourcesEnteric methane production DenmarkComparison of countriesYield level is importantEmission of methaneWhy is it a problem?Why do cows produce CH4...?Hydrogen!Why do cows produce CH4...?Diversity in the rumenDiversity in the rumenMicrobial communityAnimal variationWhere does H2 goes to?Energy efficiencyNitrate (NO3-) as mitigation strategyNitrate study: resultsNitrate study: resultsSlide Number 29Slide Number 30Nitrate in milk (mg/kg)N2O (256 x CO2)Measurement techniquesMeasurement techniquesRespiration chambersWelfare is importantGreenFeedSF6 (sulphur hexafluoride) techniqueReducing (mitigating) methane emissionReducing (mitigating) methane emissionReducing methane emissionReducing methane emission (1)Reducing methane emission (2)Reducing methane emissionMethane reduction through fatEffects of dietary fat on CH4 productionEffects of dietary fat on CH4 productionFat x forage cowFat x forage biogas potentialGHG from feed + CH4 from cow, kg CO2/kg ECMFORAGE: CONCENTRATE RATIOGHG from feed + CH4 from cow, kg CO2/kg ECMWUNDERDRUGSORGANIC VS CONVENTIONALORGANIC VS CONVENTIONALThe futureThank you for your attention!