Emissions of carbon dioxide and methane from fields fertilized with digestate from an agricultural biogas plant

Open access


Digestate from biogas plants can play important role in agriculture by providing nutrients, improving soil structure and reducing the use of mineral fertilizers. Still, less is known about greenhouse gas emissions from soil during and after digestate application. The aim of the study was to estimate the emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) from a field which was fertilized with digestate. The gas fluxes were measured with the eddy covariance system. Each day, the eddy covariance system was installed in various places of the field, depending on the dominant wind direction, so that each time the results were obtained from an area where the digestate was distributed. The results showed the relatively low impact of the studied gases emissions on total greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Maximum values of the CO2 and CH4 fluxes, 79.62 and 3.049 µmol s−1 m−2, respectively, were observed during digestate spreading on the surface of the field. On the same day, the digestate was mixed with the topsoil layer using a disc harrow. This resulted in increased CO2 emissions the following day. Intense mineralization of digestate, observed after fertilization may not give the expected effects in terms of protection and enrichment of soil organic matter.

Agostini A., Battini F., Padella M., Giuntoli J., Baxter D., Marelli L., and Amaducci S., 2016. Economics of GHG emissions mitigation via biogas production from Sorghum, maize and dairy farm manure digestion in the Po valley. Biomass and Bioenergy, 89, 58-66.

Alburquerque J.A., de la Fuente C., and Bernal M.P., 2012. Chemical properties of anaerobic digestates affecting C and N dynamics in amended soils. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 160, 15-22.

Amon B., Kryvoruchko V., Amon T., and Zechmeister-Boltenstern S., 2006. Methane, nitrous oxide and ammonia emissions during storage and after application of dairy cattle slurry and influence of slurry treatment. Agriculture, Ecosystems Environ., 112, 153-162.

Amon B., Moitzi G., Schimpl M., Kryvoruchko V., and Wagner-Alt C., 2002. Methane, nitrous oxide and ammonia emissions from management of liquid manures, Final Report 2002. On behalf of “Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environmental and Water Management” and “Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture”, Vienna, Austria.

Anderson-Glenna M. and Morken J., 2013. Greenhouse gas emissions from on-farm digestate storage facilities. Tel-Tek report no. 2213040-1, Norway.

Baldé H., VanderZaag A.C., Burtt S.D., Wagner-Riddle C., Crolla A., Desjardins R.L., and MacDonald D.J., 2016. Methane emissions from digestate at an agricultural biogas plant. Bioresource Technol., 216, 914-922.

Braun R. and Wellinger A., 2003. Potential of Co-digestion. IEA Bioenergy, Task 37. Available from: http://www.iea-biogas.net/_download/publi-task37/Potential%20of%20Codigestion%20short%20Brosch221203.pdf

Chadwick D.R. and Pain B.F., 1997. Methane fluxes following slurry applications to grassland soils: laboratory experiments, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 63, 51-60.

Chadwick D.R., Pain B.F., and Brookman S.K.E., 2000. Nitrous oxide and methane emissions following application of animal manures to grassland, J. Environ. Qual., 29, 277-287.

Chadwick D., Sommer S., Thorman R., Fangueiro D., Cardenas L., Amon B., and Misselbrook T., 2011. Manure management: Implications for greenhouse gas emissions, Animal Feed Science and Technology, 166-167, 514-531.

Clemens J., Trimborn M., Weiland P., and Amon B., 2006. Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions by anaerobic digestion of cattle slurry. Agriculture, Ecosystems Environ., 112, 171-177.

Crolla A., Kinsley C., and Pattey E., 2013. Land application of digestate. in: The biogas handbook. Science, production and application. Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy: Number 52.

De la Fuente C., Alburquerque J.A., Clemente R., and Bernal M.P., 2013. Soil C and N mineralisation and agricultural value of the products of an anaerobic digestion system. Biol. Fertil. Soils, 49, 313-322.

De Nobili M., Contin M., Mondini C., and Brookes P.C., 2001. Soil microbial biomass is triggered into activity by trace amounts of substrate. Soil Biol. Biochem., 33, 1163-1170.

Eickenscheidt T., Freibauer A., Heinichen J., Augustin J., and Drösler M., 2014. Short-term effects of biogas digestate and cattle slurry application on greenhouse gas emissions affected by N availability from grasslands on drained fen peatlands and associated organic soils. Biogeosciences, 11, 6187-6207.

Eugster W. and Merbold L., 2015. Eddy covariance for quantifying trace gas fluxes from soils. Soil, 1, 187-205.

Fiedler S., Höll B.S., and Jungkunst H.F., 2005. Methane budget of a Black Forest spruce ecosystem considering soil pattern. Biogeochemistry, 76, 1-20.

Gerosa G., Finco A., Boschetti F., Brenna S., and Marzuoli R., 2014. Measurements of soil carbon dioxide emissions from two maize agroecosystems at harvest under different tillage conditions, The Scientific World Journal, Vol. 2014, 1-12.

Grandy A.S. and Robertson G., 2007. Land-use intensity effects on soil organic carbon accumulation rates and mechanisms. Ecosystems, 10, 59-74.

Johansen A., Carter M. S., Jensenc E. S., Hauggard-Nielsen H., and Ambus P., 2013. Effects of digestate from anaerobically digested cattle slurry and plant materials on soil microbial community and emission of CO2 and N2O. Applied Soil Ecol., 63, 36-44.

Kirchmannn H. and Lundvall A., 1993. Relationship between N immobilisation and volatile fatty acids in soil after application of pig and cattle slurry. Biol. Fertil. Soils, 15, 161-164.

Kljun N., Calanca P., Rotach M.W., and Schmid H.P., 2004. A simple parameterization for flux footprint predictions. Boundary Layer Meteorol., 112, 503-523.

Lovanh N., Warren J., and Sistani K., 2010. Determination of ammonia and greenhouse gas emissions from land application of swine slurry: A comparison of three application methods. Bioresource Technol., 101, 1662-1667.

Lukehurst C. T., Frost P., and Al Seadi T., 2010. Utilisation of digestate from biogas plants as biofertiliser. IEA Bioenergy, Task 37. Available from: http://task37.ieabioenergy.com/files/daten-redaktion/download/publi-task37/Digestate_Brochure_Revised_12-2010.pdf [Accessed 19 March 2017].

Moncrieff J.B., Masheder J.M., de Bruin H., Elbers J., Friborg T., Heusinkveld B., Kabat P., Scott S., Soegaard S., and Verhoef A., 1997. A system to measure surfaceflux momentum, sensible heat, water vapor and carbon dioxide. J. Hydrol., 188-189, 589-611.

Moncrieff J.B., Clement R., Finnigan J., and Meyers T., 2004. Averaging, detrending and filtering of eddy covariance time series. In: Handbook of Micrometeorology: A Guide for Surface Flux Measurements (Eds X. Lee, W.J. Massman, B.E. Law). Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

Möller K. and Stinner W., 2009. Effects of different manuring systems with and without biogas digestion on soil mineral nitrogen content and on gaseous nitrogen losses (ammonia, nitrous oxides). European J. Agronomy, 30, 1-16.

NCEM, 2016. Poland’s National Inventory Report 2016. Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 1988-2014. Available from:http://www.kobize.pl/uploads/materialy/materialy_do_pobrania/krajowa_inwenta-ryzacja_emisji/NIR_2016_POL_05.2016.pdf.

Nkoa R., 2014. Agricultural benefits and environmental risks of soil fertilization with anaerobic digestates: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. Springer Verlag/EDP Sciences/INRA, 34(2), 473-492.

Oertel C., Matschullat J., Zurbaa K., Zimmermanna F., and Erasmi S., 2016. Greenhouse gas emissions from soils – A review. Chemie der Erde, 76, 327-352.

Pezzolla D., Bol R., Gigliotti G., Sawamoto T., López A.L., Cardenas L., and Chadwick D., 2012. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from soils amended with digestate derived from anaerobic treatment of food waste. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom., 26, 2422-2430.

Riffaldi R., Saviozzi A., and Levi-Minzi R., 1996. Carbon mineralization kinetics as influenced by soil properties. Biol. Fertil. Soils, 22, 293-298.

Rodhe L.K.K., Ascue J., Willén A., Vegerfors Persson B., and Nordberg A., 2015. Greenhouse gas emissions from storage and field application of anaerobically digested and non-digested cattle slurry. Agriculture, Ecosystems Environ., 199, 358-368.

Severin M., Fuß R., Well R., Garlipp F., and Van den Weghe H., 2015. Soil, slurry and application effects on greenhouse gas emissions. Plant Soil Environ., 61, 8, 344-351.

Sommer S.G., Petersen S.O., and Sogaard H.T., 2000. Greenhouse gas emission from stored livestock slurry. J. Environ. Qual., 29, 744-751.

Sommer S.G., Sherlock R.R., and Khan R.Z., 1996. Nitrous oxide and methane emissions from pig slurry amended soils, Soil Biol. Biochem., 28, 1541-1544.

Stinner W., Möller K., and Leithold G., 2008. Effects of biogas digestion of clover/grassleys, cover crops and crop residues on nitrogen cycle and crop yield in organic stockless farming systems. European J. Agronomy, 29, 125-134.

Van Dijk A., Moene A.F., and de Bruin H.A.R., 2004. The Principles of Surface Flux Physics: Theory, Practice and Description of the ECPack Library. Meteorology and Air Quality Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Vickers D. and Mahrt L., 1997. Quality control and flux sampling problems for tower and aircraft data. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 14, 512-526.

Webb E.K., Pearman G.I., and Leuning R., 1980. Correction of flux measurements for density effects due to heat and water vapour transfer. Quat. J. R. Met. Soc., 106, 85-100.

WRB, 2015. World reference base for soil resources 2014. Update 2015. World soil resources reports No. 106, FAO, Rome.

Wulf S., Maeting M., and Clemens J., 2002. Application technique and slurry co-fermentation effects on ammonia, nitrous oxide, and methane emissions after spreading: II. Greenhouse gas emissions. J Environ Qual., 31(6), 1795-1801.

International Agrophysics

The Journal of Institute of Agrophysics of Polish Academy of Sciences

Journal Information

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 1.242
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.267

CiteScore 2018: 1.44

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.399
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.891

Cited By


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 468 347 46
PDF Downloads 235 188 20