Evaluating Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Methods for Methane Emission Estimate From Lagoon-Based Swine Manure Management Systems

IF 1.5 Q4 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
Clement D. D. Sohoulande, Matias B. Vanotti, Ariel A. Szogi
{"title":"Evaluating Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Methods for Methane Emission Estimate From Lagoon-Based Swine Manure Management Systems","authors":"Clement D. D. Sohoulande,&nbsp;Matias B. Vanotti,&nbsp;Ariel A. Szogi","doi":"10.1002/tqem.70079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>To support national estimates of methane (CH<sub>4</sub>) emissions from manure management systems, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) proposed guidelines that include three tiers, of which Tier 1 and Tier 2 methodologies are the most used. The choice of each methodology is often driven by data availability. The application of the IPCC Tier 1 approach uses default emission factors and requires less data compared to IPCC Tier 2, which is considered a more advanced methodology. Nevertheless, no study has addressed the implications of the methodology choice on the estimation of CH<sub>4</sub> emissions from swine manure management systems. Subsequently, there is barely any quantitative information on the discrepancies to expect when using the IPCC Tier 1 or Tier 2 approach for estimating CH<sub>4</sub> emissions from significant sources such as open-air swine waste treatment lagoons. Hence, this study used the IPCC Tier 1 and Tier 2 methodologies to estimate CH<sub>4</sub> emissions from feeder-to-finish swine waste treatment lagoons across the North Carolina region. Precisely, updated IPCC guidelines were applied to farm, county, and state level data of feeder-to-finish swine farms to quantify CH<sub>4</sub> emissions from open-air anaerobic swine waste treatment lagoons. Results show that IPCC Tier 2's estimates of CH<sub>4</sub> emissions are higher, sustaining a discrepancy of 6.7% between the two IPCC Tiers’ methodologies. Quantitatively, the differences between the two IPCC tiers’ estimates totaled 7320 Mg CH<sub>4</sub>/year (197640 Mg CO<sub>2</sub> equivalent/year) at the state level and were unequally distributed among counties and farms. Nevertheless, a comparative analysis highlighted a meaningful contrast between the IPCC Tiers estimation per swine head or unit animal weight and direct measurements of swine lagoons’ CH<sub>4</sub> emissions in North Carolina. The discrepancies are likely due in large part to sources of errors in the direct measurements, suggesting the need for advanced techniques for in situ CH<sub>4</sub> emission measurements. The study highlights the trade-off related to the emission estimation approaches, and the information reported could be useful to better understand CH<sub>4</sub> emission inventories.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":35327,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Quality Management","volume":"34 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Quality Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tqem.70079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To support national estimates of methane (CH4) emissions from manure management systems, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) proposed guidelines that include three tiers, of which Tier 1 and Tier 2 methodologies are the most used. The choice of each methodology is often driven by data availability. The application of the IPCC Tier 1 approach uses default emission factors and requires less data compared to IPCC Tier 2, which is considered a more advanced methodology. Nevertheless, no study has addressed the implications of the methodology choice on the estimation of CH4 emissions from swine manure management systems. Subsequently, there is barely any quantitative information on the discrepancies to expect when using the IPCC Tier 1 or Tier 2 approach for estimating CH4 emissions from significant sources such as open-air swine waste treatment lagoons. Hence, this study used the IPCC Tier 1 and Tier 2 methodologies to estimate CH4 emissions from feeder-to-finish swine waste treatment lagoons across the North Carolina region. Precisely, updated IPCC guidelines were applied to farm, county, and state level data of feeder-to-finish swine farms to quantify CH4 emissions from open-air anaerobic swine waste treatment lagoons. Results show that IPCC Tier 2's estimates of CH4 emissions are higher, sustaining a discrepancy of 6.7% between the two IPCC Tiers’ methodologies. Quantitatively, the differences between the two IPCC tiers’ estimates totaled 7320 Mg CH4/year (197640 Mg CO2 equivalent/year) at the state level and were unequally distributed among counties and farms. Nevertheless, a comparative analysis highlighted a meaningful contrast between the IPCC Tiers estimation per swine head or unit animal weight and direct measurements of swine lagoons’ CH4 emissions in North Carolina. The discrepancies are likely due in large part to sources of errors in the direct measurements, suggesting the need for advanced techniques for in situ CH4 emission measurements. The study highlights the trade-off related to the emission estimation approaches, and the information reported could be useful to better understand CH4 emission inventories.

评估政府间气候变化专门委员会估算泻湖式猪粪管理系统甲烷排放量的方法
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Quality Management
Environmental Quality Management Environmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
期刊介绍: Four times a year, this practical journal shows you how to improve environmental performance and exceed voluntary standards such as ISO 14000. In each issue, you"ll find in-depth articles and the most current case studies of successful environmental quality improvement efforts -- and guidance on how you can apply these goals to your organization. Written by leading industry experts and practitioners, Environmental Quality Management brings you innovative practices in Performance Measurement...Life-Cycle Assessments...Safety Management... Environmental Auditing...ISO 14000 Standards and Certification..."Green Accounting"...Environmental Communication...Sustainable Development Issues...Environmental Benchmarking...Global Environmental Law and Regulation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信