Why is acidification only a success in Denmark? - regulation and economics

Transcription

1 Department of Food and Resource Economics Why is acidification only a success in Denmark? - regulation and economics Associated Prof. Brian H. Jacobsen Dept. of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen Denmark Manuresource Ghent

2 Department of Food and Resource Economics Content Danish background Acidification techniques Acidification costs Acidification effects Acidification in The Netherlands (NL) Conclusion Dias 2

3 Farming and Ammonia emissions in DK Danish farmers needs to reduce emissions by 24% until 2020 and 37% until 2030 (based on 2005) Feeding has been used but more is needed (GAINS!) The ammonia emission has to be 30% under reference technology when livestock is increased The technology has to be on the Technology list (BAT) High shadow value of N (sub optimal norms) Acidification is an alternative to injection (dairy) Acidification reduce need for cover => Regulation promote new technology

4 Technology list in DK Danish Environmental Protection Agency (DEPA) Four technology groups: Manure storage (solid cover) Land Applied manure Air cleaning Livestock housing systems Recommendation: VERA analysis (DK, NL and GER) In theory, but MELT expert recommendation DEPA own analysis

5 Technology list in DK reduction of NH3 and smell Area Technology NH3 effect Smell effect Buildings Cooling <30% 0% Infarm (acid in buildling) 50-70% 0% JH forsuring (acid in building) 50%-64% 0% Low emission floor 17-50% 0-30% Air cleaning Chemical cleaning 89% 0% Biological cleaning 85-90% 75-80% Tank Cover 50% 0% Ørum og Harsø (acid in tank) 25-85% 0% Application Injection (grass) >25% 25% Injection (soil) >85% >80% SyreN (acid application) 40-50% 0% Smellfighter? 40%?

6 Acidification The approach is to reduce the ph value to around 5.5 using Sulphur Acid (H2SO4) Acid is used in either buildings, tank or field No direct contact with the acid Acid application gives much foam (pre storage tank) Acid levels vary with dry matter 1-4 l acid per tonne slurry => kg S/ha kg S/ha is required (10 kg/ha from air) Higher yield in field kg/ha

7 Acidification : Buildings

8 Acidification : Buildings A tanked is placed outside the building on a weighing scale (no direct contact with the acid) Investment is 130,000 up to 220,000 Management 30 min per day Better working conditions, but more smell from storage tank (Smellfigter to reduce smell) Reduce N-loss by 29 kg N/ha, but N-leaching can go up by 10 kg N/ha Increase use of lime in the field

9 Acidification in the Field The acid is added just before application

10 Department of Food and Resource Economics Acidification in the field on a pig farm Farm: 300 Ha and 6000 m3 pig slurry 300 Ha winter wheat application 20 ton slurry per ha Costs : Acid: 6000 m3x1.5 liter acid x 2.50 Dkr. = - 22,500 DKr. (10 /ha ) Application : 4 DKK. x 6000 m3 = - 24,000 DKr. (10 /ha ) Lime? Increase in costs - 46,500 DKr. (21 /ha) Income : Higher yield Wheat : kg/ha*120 Dkr./kg*300 ha = 36,000-72,000 DKr. (S-fertiliser 15 kg x 300 Ha x 4 kr. = 18,000 DKr.) Increase in income 36-90,000 Dkr. (16 40 /ha) Yearly net income /ha Not always an economic gain on its own

11 Acidification with Sulfur acid overall effects Effect NH3 Reduced by 50-90% CO2 emission CH4 emission Unchanged Reduced N2O emission Increased by 20% Total N matter Increased Crop yields Increased kg /ha N-leaching Increased (pools) H2S Probably reduced Soluble P Biogas production Organic matter S in soils Working conditions Increased Increased when 0-25%, then decline Increased for solid fraction Increased Could be a problem (increase) Better (cleaner air) no effect on smell

12 Experiences from Denmark Acid is added to 18% of the slurry in 2014 (5 mio.m3) Building (20%), tank(42%), field(38%) Application of acid vary (l/ton) (required ph) Additional lime Costs of acid application is around 1,1 /ton and field application is 0,9 /ton (often contractor). Increased yield is kg /ha No problems with concrete in buildings (15 years) Better working environment Small overdose of S is not seen as a problem (effect on P loss is limited)

13 Ammonia emissions in EU countries towards 2030 (index 100 = year 1990) A need to use new technologies Clean Air Source : Iiasa and EU commission

14 Department of Food and Resource Economics Acidification of slurry in The Netherlands In the 1990 ties acidification based on Nitric acid which gave to much N Only additional costs for farmers Safety during handling was an issue S is needed but soil impacts unknown S losses are feared Not recommended in report from 2011 Dairy interest in 2008 replace trailing hose on peat and clay

15 Acidification of slurry in The Netherlands (today) VERA is not enough for acceptance Can use of acid be checked? So technology was not on the list Effects in has not shown same effects as in DK (lower yield increase) NH3 effects (Huismans) are found to be lower Fear of S-loss on low fields But also interest from Dutch farmers as well as Belgian and German farmers, but no test farms! Tests are expensive! Department of Food and Resource Economics

16 Department of Food and Resource Economics Conclusions Acidification decrease ammonia emission (stable, tank, application and feed) using sulfur acid Safe use Acidification enhances the yields No large economic gains in DK Regulation has promoted use in DK not in NL VERA tests are not enough in practice Acidification have positive impact on biogas production, but decrease with larger share A fear off the long-term impact of acidified slurry => More tests in GER, NL and BELGIUM

17 Department of Food and Resource Economics Thanks to Majbritt (University Århus) Anette Vestergård (SEGES) More information on Dias 17