LITHUANIAN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES INSTITUTE OF ANIMAL SCIENCE

Raimundas Matulaitis

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF IMPLEMENTS ON MITIGATION OF GREENHOUSE

GAS EMISSION AND POLLUTION REDUCTION FROM MANURE

Summary of Doctoral Dissertation Agricultural Sciences, Zootechny (03A)

Kaunas 2014

The Dissertation has been prepared at the Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Institute of Animal Science during the period of 2009–2013.

Scientific supervisor – Dr. Violeta JUŠKIENö (Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Institute of Animal Science, Agricultural Sciences, Zootechny – 03A).

The Dissertation is defended at the Council for Zootechnics Research of Veterinary Academy of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences.

Council of Zootechnics Sciences: Chairman – Prof. Habil. Dr. Romas GRUŽAUSKAS (Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Veterinary Academy, Agricultural Sciences, Zootechny – 03A).

Members: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Česlovas BOBINAS (Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture

and Forestry, Institute of Horticulture, Agricultural Sciences, Agronomy – 01A); Assoc. Prof. Dr. Agila DAUKŠIENö (Lithuanian University of Health Sciences,

Veterinary Academy, Agricultural Sciences, Zootechny – 03A). Dr. Violeta RAZMAITö (Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Institute of

Animal Science, Agricultural Sciences, Zootechny – 03A); Assoc. Prof. Dr. Antanas ŠARKINAS (Food Institute of Kaunas University of

Technology, Technological Sciences, Chemical Engineering – 05T). Opponents: Prof. Dr. Arūnas JUOZAITIS (Lithuanian University of Health Sciences,

Veterinary Academy, Agricultural sciences, Zootechny – 03A); Assoc. Prof. Dr. Vytautas RUZGAS (Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture

and Forestry, Institute of Agriculture, Agricultural Sciences, Agronomy – 01A).

The public defense of the Dissertation will take place at the Council of Zootechnics Science of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Veterinary Academy in Dr. S. Jankauskas Auditorium 1 p. m. on 22th of December 2014.

Address: Tilž÷s St. 18, LT-47181, Kaunas, Lithuania.

The summary of the Doctoral Dissertation was sent out on 18th of November 2014 following the approved list of addresses.

The Dissertation and the summary are available at the libraries of the Veterinary

Academy of LUHS.

LIETUVOS SVEIKATOS MOKSLŲ UNIVERSITETAS GYVULININKYST öS INSTITUTAS

Raimundas Matulaitis

KLIMATO KAIT Ą SKATINAN ČIŲ IR APLINK Ą TERŠIANČIŲ DUJŲ EMISIJŲ

IŠ MöŠLO MAŽINIMO PRIEMONI Ų EFEKTYVUMAS

Daktaro disertacijos santrauka Žem÷s ūkio mokslai, zootechnika (03A)

Kaunas 2014

Disertacija rengta 2009–2013 metais Lietuvos sveikatos mokslų universiteto Gyvulininkyst÷s institute.

Mokslin÷ vadov÷ – dr. Violeta JUŠKIENö (Lietuvos sveikatos mokslų

universiteto Gyvulininkyst÷s institutas, žem÷s ūkio mokslai, zootechnika – 03A). Zootechnikos mokslo krypties taryba: Pirmininkas – prof. habil. dr. Romas GRUŽAUSKAS (Lietuvos sveikatos mokslų

universiteto Veterinarijos akademija, žem÷s ūkio mokslai, zootechnika – 03A).

Nariai: doc. dr. Česlovas BOBINAS (Lietuvos agrarinių ir miškų mokslų centro

Sodininkyst÷s ir daržininkyst÷s institutas, žem÷s ūkio mokslai, agronomija – 01A); doc. dr. Agila DAUKŠIENö (Lietuvos sveikatos mokslų universiteto Veterinarijos

akademija, žem÷s ūkio mokslai, zootechnika – 03A); dr. Violeta RAZMAITö (Lietuvos sveikatos mokslų universiteto Gyvulininkyst÷s

institutas, žem÷s ūkio mokslai, zootechnika – 03A); doc. dr. Antanas ŠARKINAS (Kauno technologijos universiteto Maisto institutas,

technologijos mokslai, chemijos inžinerija – 05T). Oponentai: prof. dr. Arūnas JUOZAITIS (Lietuvos sveikatos mokslų universiteto Veterinarijos

akademija, žem÷s ūkio mokslai, zootechnika – 03A); doc. dr. Vytautas RUZGAS (Lietuvos agrarinių ir miškų mokslų centro

Žemdirbyst÷s institutas, žem÷s ūkio mokslai, agronomija – 01A). Disertacija bus ginama viešame Zootechnikos mokslo krypties tarybos pos÷dyje

2014 m. gruodžio 22 d. 13 val. Lietuvos sveikatos mokslų universiteto (LSMU) Veterinarijos akademijos dr. S. Jankausko auditorijoje.

Adresas: Tilž÷s g. 18, LT-47181, Kaunas, Lietuva.

Disertacijos santrauka išsiųsta 2014 m. lapkričio 18 d. pagal patvirtintą adresų sąrašą.

Disertaciją galima peržiūr÷ti LSMU Veterinarijos akademijos bibliotekoje.

5

INTRODUCTION Manure is one of the secondary matter that originates during stock-

raising. It can be used as a valuable organic fertilizer. However, huge amounts of biogenic material can be lost if inappropriate manure management technology is used, consequently, the environment can be polluted.

Manure is an easily biodegradable material. Therefore, different gases, that are partial or ultimate products of the decomposition of manure organic matter, escape to the atmosphere. The gas emission arises during all steps of manure management (from its origination, to utilization, i. e., spreading in the field). Some of those gases act as polluting substances, others – cause unpleasant odour. Such substances as methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), ammonia (NH3) cause regional or global problems after escape to the atmosphere. The amount of gases that originate from stock-raising can be so huge that it constitutes one of the main or even the main part of total anthropogenic gas emission. The most serious problems are associated with emissions of ammonia and methane. It was estimated, that 80 % of the total ammonia emission and 5 % of the total emission of methane arise from livestock manure. Ammonia is involved in formation of acid rains. The deposition of acid rains causes the acidification of aqueous and terrestrial ecosystems, contributes to eutrophication and the decrease in species diversity, also it decreases the productivity of forests and soils. Methane and nitrous oxide contribute to global warming, i. e. those gases are greenhouse gases.

The concern in welfare of the environment and humans, led in search of the possibilities of reduction of gas emissions. The European Union pays great attention to the environment protection. The legislation of Lithuania also demands that the implements would be used to reduce gas emissions from manure. It is possible to reduce gas emissions from manure by numerous measures. However, the techniques are diverse in effectiveness, cost, practicality, resistance to climatic effect. Besides, it was found that many factors can influence gas emissions, starting with the ration and consequently, the chemical composition of manure, and ending with climatic conditions. Therefore, for a separate location the effectiveness of emission reduction by the same implement can be highly different.

Numerous research studies about biogas production from manure were conducted in Lithuania. In Lithuania, studies were carried out on the measurements of the concentrations of ammonia and carbon dioxide (CO2)

6

and the effect of the straw litter and microclimatic factors, i. e. air temperature and the intensity of ventilation rate in cowsheds, on the emission of those gases from cattle manure. However, until now, the effectiveness of implements on the reduction of pollution and emission of greenhouse gases from manure have been rarely studied in Lithuania. Only the effect of peat, straw and diatomite, on the emissions of ammonia and carbon dioxide from cattle manure was estimated.

The additives and different floating covers are among the cheapest, most practical and simplest to operate implements that can reduce gas emissions. However, the effect of different additives and floating covers on separate gas emissions from pig and cattle manure under the conditions of Lithuania have been rarely studied.

1.1. The aim of the present study

To study the ultimate (Bo) and theoretical (Bu) methane yield from pig

and cattle manure, and to investigate the effectiveness of implements on the emission reduction of polluting and greenhouse gases from manure.

1.2. Tasks of the present study

1. To measure the ultimate methane yield from pig and cattle manure. 2. To investigate the effect of the additives on the reduction of

emission of the NH3, CO2, CH4, H2S, NO and CO gases from liquid and semi-liquid manure of cattle and pigs.

3. To determine the effect of different floating covers on the reduction of emission of the NH3, CO2, CH4, H2S, NO and CO gases from liquid and semi-liquid manure during the storage.

4. To investigate the effect of the complex of additives and floating covers on the reduction of emission of the NH3, CO2, CH4, H2S, NO and CO gases from liquid and semi-liquid manure of cattle and pigs.

1.3. Novelty of the present study

The ultimate (Bo) and theoretical (Bu) methane yield from pig and

cattle manure was determined in Lithuania. The effect of floating covers, such as leca, oil and plastic film on the

NH3, CO2, CH4, H2S, NO and CO gas emission from pig and cattle manure was investigated under the conditions of Lithuania.

7

The effect of microbial-based product and sulphuric acid additives on the NH3, CO2, CH4, H2S, NO and CO gas emission from pig and cattle manure and the complex use of these additives together with the plastic film cover have been investigated under the conditions of Lithuania.

1.4. Practical importance

The value of the ultimate methane yield from pig and cattle manure (Bo)

can be used in calculations of the national emission of greenhouse gases from manure management systems in livestock sector. Our measurements indicated that ultimate methane yield value was lower than the recommended standard value in guidelines of the Intergovernmental panel on climate change. Consequently, if the measured value were used instead of the standard, the national emission would be calculated more accurately during the preparation of Greenhouse Gas emission inventory report.

In our study, the effect of additives and different floating covers on the emissions of polluting and greenhouse gases from manure was investigated, consequenty, the specialists of livestock breeding will have the possibility to choose the most effective implements for the reduction of ammonia and other gases emissions.

The results of the analysis of Lithuanian pig and cattle manure characteristics can be used to perform annual calculations of the soil area needed for manure and slurry spreading.

1.5. Volume and structure of dissertation

The dissertation consists of the abbreviations, introduction, literature

survey, methods, results, their analysis and generalization, conclusions and recommendations, list of publication and references. The volume comprises 146 pages and 245 references. The dissertation has also 3 formulas, 28 tables and 19 figures.

8

MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. The scheme of the research work The research work was performed at the Institute of Animal Science of

Lithuanian University of Health Sciences (LUHS) during 2009–2013, according to the given scheme (Figure 2.1.).

Research

Analysis of manure characteristics

Determination of ultimate methane yield from manure (Bo, Bu)

Investigation of the effect of additives on gas emission

Investigation of the effect of covers on

gas emission

Investigation of the effect of the complex of additives and

cover on gas emission

Methods: •Chemical analytical methods for manure analysis;•Standard method for Bo determination;•The passive chamber method for gas emission measurements;•The dynamic chamber method for gas emission measurements.

Investigation of the microbial-based

product

Investigation of the H2SO4 acid

Investigation of the leca cover

Investigation of the peat cover

Investigation of the oil cover

Investigation of the sawdust cover

Investigation of the straw cover

Investigation of the plastic film cover

Investigation of the microbial based product and

plastic film cover

Investigation of the H2SO4 acid and plastic

film cover

Figure 2.1. The scheme of the research work

2.2. Materials and implements

The investigations were performed in animal houses and laboratory. To

make experiments in laboratory, the cattle and pig manure were collected from 23 and 5 farms of Lithuania, respectively, including the farms of the Institute of Animal Science. The manure were collected from animal barns and manure storages.

9

During the investigation period, two types of additives were used: a microbial-based additive and sulphuric acid (H2SO4). Also the following floating covers were tested: leca (light expanded clay aggregate), peat, sunflower oil, sawdust, straw and plastic film. The thickness of the oil cover was 2 mm. The thickness of the plastic film cover was 0.1 mm, this cover has 4 slots each 2 mm diameter for gas escape. All the other covers were 4 cm in thickness.

During the investigation period, the concentrations of 6 gases were measured: methane (CH4), hydrogen sulphide (H2S), ammonia (NH3), nitric oxide (NO), carbon monoxide (CO) and carbon dioxide (CO2). Gas concentrations were measured two times per day at the beginning of the experiment and once per week during all the following measurements. The concentrations of gases were measured by gas measuring devices – Dräger X-am 7000, Dräger Pac III, M40 and Almemo 2890-9. During the investigation period, the atmosphere parameters were measured by use of Almemo 2890-9, i. e. air temperature, relative air humidity, atmospheric pressure and air velocity.

Manure samples were stored in chambers. Three types of chambers were used: 1, 2 and 39 litres capacity. All chambers were plastic, cylindrical and hermetically sealed. Also an open bottom chamber of three litre capacity was used.

2.3. Analysis of manure

Manure characteristics were analyzed at the laboratory of the Institute

of Animal Science. Manure samples were analyzed for pH, density, total solids (TS), volatile solids (VS), total Kjeldhal nitrogen (TKN) and ammonium nitrogen (TAN), also protein, volatile fatty acids (VFA), lipids, lignine and crude fiber. The manure pH was measured with a pH meter (HI 98128). The density was calculated according to weight and volume. The content of total solids was determined after drying in an electric oven at 105±2°C for 24 h. Volatile solids and ash content were determined after burning TS in a muffle furnace at 550oC for 4 h. The total nitrogen was measured by the Kjeldahl method, the total ammonium nitrogen in the manure by distillation and a FOSS Tecator™ device. The sum of volatile fatty acids concentration was determined using steam distillation apparatus (Markham apparatus). The lipids were analyzed by measuring the amount of material that can be extracted with petrol ether in a special lipid extraction system – “Gerhardt Soxtherm Extraction system“. The content

10

of protein was determined by multiplying the difference between TKN and TAN with the factor 6.25. The lignine was determined by using special filtration bags – “ANKOM Technology F57 Filter Bags“, and ANKOM220 Fiber Analyzer apparatus. The crude fibers were analyzed using Ceramic Fiber Filter Method.

2.4. Determination of ultimate methane yield from manure (Bo, Bu) The theoretical methane production (Bu) was calculated from

Bushwell’s formula, according to the chemical composition of manure used in our experiments. The ultimate methane yield (Bo) was determined in a batch experiment that was repeated five times. The method used is described in the international standard ISO 11734. The manure and inoculum bacteria were diluted with a dilution medium and incubated at 35±1oC in sealed vessels after purge of the bottles with pure nitrogen (N2). The measurement period extended for up to 70 days, unless the biodegradation curve, from the pressure measurement, has reached a plateau phase. The volume of biogas produced was calculated by measuring pressure and by connecting the vessels to a syringe. The gas samples were collected periodically by syringe and immediately analyzed for the content of gases CH4, CO2, H2S, NH3, NO, CO.

One experiment was carried out to investigate the effect of the additives on Bo. The same method as for Bo determination was used. The following additives were tested: oil, a microbial-based additive and sulphuric acid.

2.5. Passive chamber method for measurement of gaseous emissions The passive chamber method was adjusted for 3 and 39 litre chambers.

The 3 litre chamber has an open bootom and a gas measuring device instaled inside the chamber. This chamber was used to make measurements in animal houses.

Manure samples were stored in chambers with a capacity of 39 litres. During gas concentration measurements, the chambers were periodically hermetically sealed with a gas measuring device instaled inside the chamber. Gas concentration was measured for five minutes. After each measurement, the chambers were left open. The gas emission rate was calculated according to the equation:

11

F= V M p (C1-C0)/R (T+273) A l h (2.1),

where, F (mg/(m2 l h)) – gas emission rate; V (m3) – headspase capacity in the chamber; M (g/mol) – gas molar mass; p (kPa) – gas pressure; C1 (ppm) – gas concentration in the chamber at the fifth minute of measurement; C0 (ppm) – gas concentration in the chamber at the beginning of measurement; R (8.314 J/K · mol) – gas constanta; T (oC) – gas temperature; A (m2) – the surface area of manure; l (l) – the amount of manure; h (0.08 h) – the extension of gas measuring period.

2.6. Dynamic chamber method for measurement of gaseous emissions

The dynamic chamber method was adjusted for 1 and 2 litre chambers.

Those chambers have two openings with valves at the top for gas collection purpose. During gas concentration measurements, the chambers were periodically hermetically sealed. One of the openings was connected with the gas measuring device, gas pump and a flowmeter. The gas emission rate was calculated using the equation:

F= Q M p (C1-C0)/(R (T+273) A) (2.2),

where, F (mg/(m2 h)) – gas emission rate; Q (m3/h) – gas flow rate; M

(g/mol) – gas molar mass; p (kPa) – gas pressure; C0 (ppm) – gas concentration in the air that enter the chamber; C1 (ppm) – gas concentration in the exhaust air; R (8.314 J/K mol) – gas constanta; T (oC) – gas temperature; A (m2) – the surface area of manure.

2.7. Investigation of the effect of additives

The investigations of the effect of a microbial-based additive on

gaseous emissions from manure were performed in animal houses, laboratory and in the laboratory by applying different temperature regimes. The investigations of the effect of sulphuric acid additive on gaseous emissions from manure were performed in the laboratory by applying different temperature regimes.

The experimentation was made in two piggeries. The solution of 1:50 of a microbial-based additive concentrate sprayed on one side of the piggery floor. The gas concentrations were measured in the air. In addition, the intensity of the gas emission from floors, polluted with manure, were measured. The measurements were made in both piggeries, i. e. in the

12

whole building of each piggery. The measurements were compared between the two piggeries and between the both sides of the piggery.

During experimentation under conditions of laboratory, 18 chambers of 39 litre capacity and the passive chamber method were used. The chambers were filled with pig manure. In a half of the chambers the microbial-based additive was injected at the beginning and after 8 days of the experiment. The measurement period lasted for 133 days.

Other experiments were performed in the laboratory by applying three temperature conditions – 5oC, 15oC and 25oC. In those experiments the microbial-based additive and sulphuric acid additive were used. Those experiments were performed with pig and cattle manure by the use of the dynamic chamber method. Each additive was tested by the use of 24 chambers of 2 liter capacity. Each of the 12 chambers were filled with 1 liter of pig manure. The other 12 chambers were filled with 1 liter of cattle manure. Only in half of those chambers the additive was injected. The other half were used for comparison purposes. 50 ml of the microbial-based additive was injected. During another experiment, 50 ml of 10 % H2SO4 was injected at the beginning of the experiment. Each experiment lasted for a month. The chambers with manure were weighed during each measurement.

2.8. Investigation of the effect of covers

The investigations of the effect of covers on gaseous emissions from

manure were performed in the laboratory by applying three temperature regimes – 5oC, 15oC, 25oC. In those experiments 6 types of covers were tested. Those experiments were performed with pig and cattle manure by the dynamic chamber method. Each cover was tested using 24 chambers of 2 liter capacity. Each of the 12 chambers were filled with 1 liter of pig manure. The other 12 chambers were filled with 1 liter of cattle manure. Only in half of those chambers the manure was covered at the beginning of experiment. The other half were used for comparison purposes. Each experiment lasted for a month. The chambers with manure were weighed during each measurement.

2.9. Investigation of the effect of the complex of additives and cover The investigations of the effect of the complex of additives and cover

on gaseous emissions from manure were performed in the laboratory by

13

applying three temperature regimes – 5oC, 15oC, 25oC. In those experiments, the complex of microbial-based additive and sulphuric acid additive with the plastic film were tested. The experiments were performed with pig and cattle manure by the dynamic chamber method. Each complex was tested using 24 chambers of 2 liter capacity. Each of the 12 chambers were filled with 1 liter of pig and other 12 with cattle manure. Only in half of those chambers 50 ml of the microbial-based additive or 50 ml of 10 % H2SO4 additive was injected and manure was covered by plastic film cover at the beginning of the experiment. The other half were used for comparison purposes. Each experiment lasted for a month. The chambers with manure were weighed during each measurement.

2.10. Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was carried out by using the software package

Statistica (version 7.1). Significant differences in the results were estimated by using the Stjudent criterion (t-test). For all the statistics, a significance level of P≤0.05 was applied. The significance level 0.05<P<0.10 indicated a tendency. The relationship between variables was appreciated according to the coefficient of correlation. The influence of several factors on gas emissions was determined by the use of ANOVA procedures. The assumption of equal variance of different groups was tested using Bartlett’s test prior to analysis.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

3.1. Determination of ultimate methane yield from manure (Bo, Bu) The results of our study showed that the yield of CH4 from pig manure

could be higher than that from cattle manure because of differences in manure characteristics (Table 3.1.). Easily degradable parts of manure – proteins and lipids were 7.66 % (P<0.01) and 1.11 % (P<0.01) higher, respectively, in pig liquid manure than in cattle. In opposition, hard degradable part of manure – crude fibre – was higher by 4.67 % (P<0.05) in cattle manure than in pig manure.

During the manure incubation period, the plateau phase for manure was reached after 20–40 days. The highest cumulative amount of methane was produced by pig liquid manure – up to 411 litres methane from kg volatile solids. Methane was the predominant gas in the biogas for all samples. The

14

average methane content of the biogas for liquid manure was in range of 55.5 % and 77.8 %.

Table 3.1. Characteristics of manure used for determination of methane

(CH4) yield

Pig Dairy cattle Non dairy cattle

Liquid manure

Solid fraction of

manure

Liquid fraction of

manure

Liquid manure

Solid manure Slurry Solid

manure

Characteristics

SNx ±

pH 7.43 ±0.45

7.65 ±0.01

7.60 ±0.27

7.40 ±0.42

7.35 ±0.33

7.27 ±0.51

8.13 ±0.07

Total solids (%)

13.46 ±2.91

20.28 ±0.03

0.88 ±0.57

7.91 ±2.86

13.05 ±2.72

2.16 ±1.08

12.09 ±4.55

Ash (% TS)

14.88 ±1.16

21.13 ±0.14

48.48 ±18.50

16.67 ±2.98

18.73 ±3.93

34.08 ±4.38

36.28 ±16.50

Volatile solids (% TS)

84.92 ±1.07

78.87 ±0.14

51.52 ±18.50

83.56 ±2.94

81.27 ±3.93

65.92 ±4.38

63.72 ±16.50

Total nitrogen (% TS)

5.13 ±0.62

2.99 ±0.24

10.42 ±7.36

4.02 ±2.14

2.95 ±0.83

4.73 ±1.28

3.63 ±1.02

Ammonium nitrogen (% TS)

2.30 ±0.56

0.35 ±0.01

8.23 ±7.61

1.88 ±0.65

1.27 ±0.62

3.55 ±0.25

1.33 ±0.67

Protein (% TS)

17.83 ±0.76

16.49 ±1.50

13.69 ±2.09

10.17 ±3.78

10.53 ±2.85

4.37 ±3.98

14.36 ±3.32

Lipids (% TS)

2.65 ±0.59

0.25 <±0.00

0.28 ±0.22

1.54 ±0.38

1.03 ±0.27

1.16 ±0.21

1.47 ±0.15

Crude fibre (% TS)

22.04 ±1.05

22.09 ±0.80

0.53 <±0.00

26.71 ±4.41

26.82 ±2.79

10.19 ±3.36

25.27 ±6.63

Lignin (% TS)

7.44 ±0.56

16.34 ±4.09

0.47 <±0.00

12.18 ±3.58

14.73 ±2.52

9.22 ±2.87

20.06 ±1.45

Volatile fatty acids (% TS)

2.87 ±2.33

0.27 ±0.19

25.44 ±19.00

4.42 ±2.44

3.54 ±2.66

12.37 ±3.61

0.76 ±0.35

Density (kg/m3)

1107.37 ±109.72

459.75 ±129.75

990.90 ±11.57

1046.01 ±40.79

931.99 ±147.73

1012.75 ±16.65

729.13 ±280.99

The maximum value of the ultimate methane yield (Bo) was detected

for pig liquid manure and it was higher by 7.3 % (P<0.05) than the maximum value detected for cattle manure (Table 3.2).

15

Table 3.2. Ultimate and theoretical methane production from pig manure Theoretical CH4 production – Bu (m3 CH4 kg-1 VS)

Biodegradability (Bo Bu-1)

Ultimate CH4

production – Bo (m3 CH4 kg-1

VS)

From total VS

From easily degradable

VS

From total VS

From easily degradable

VS

Manure Samples

SNx ±

Liquid manure 0.29 ±0.06

0.45 ±0.01

0.35 ±0.01

0.64 ±0.12

0.83 ±0.16

Solid fraction of manure

0.12 ±0.02

0.43 <±0.00

0.32 <±0.00

0.28 ±0.04

0.39 ±0.06

Pig

Liquid fraction of manure

0.18 ±0.15

0.42 ±0.02

0.40 ±0.03

0.43 ±0.37

0.45 ±0.40

Liquid manure 0.20 ±0.06

0.44 ±0.01

0.31 ±0.02

0.45 ±0.14

0.65 ±0.17

Solid manure 0.21 ±0.04

0.43 <±0.00

0.29 ±0.01

0.49 ±0.09

0.71 ±0.13

Dairy cattle

Slurry 0.05 ±0.02

0.42 ±0.01

0.36 ±0.02

0.13 ±0.05

0.15 ±0.07

Non dairy cattle

Solid manure 0.21 ±0.02

0.44 ±0.02

0.30 ±0.09

0.47 ±0.07

0.89 ±0.15

Up to 64 % of total volatile solids and up to 89 % of easily degradable

volatile solids biodegraded during 70 days of storage period. As in the case with the ultimate methane yield (Bo), the theoretical CH4 production (Bu) from total volatile solids or easily degradable volatile solids was higher by 2.2-4.4 % (P<0.01) and 11.4-17.1 % (P<0.01) for pig liquid manure than for dairy cattle manure, respectively.

The results of our study showed that oil, a microbial-based additive and a sulphuric acid additive did not have a statistically significant effect on CH4 production from pig manure. However, the use of a sulphuric acid additive decreased CH4 yield from cattle manure up to 26.3 % (P<0.05).

3.2. The effect of additives on gaseous emissions

3.2.1. The effect of a microbial-based additive investigated in animal houses

The results of our study showed that after spraying the microbial-based additive in the piggery, the decrease in NH3 and CO2 concentrations and

16

the increase of H2S concentration was up to 2.6 times higher than that in the piggery without the additive. However, these differences were not statistically significant.

More significant results were achieved after comparisons of the concentrations between the two sides of the same piggery. On that side, where the microbial-based additive was sprayed, the concentration of NH3

was 44.3 % (0.05<P<0.10) lower in comparison with the side without the additive.

3.2.2. The effect of a microbial-based additive on ammonia emission from pig manure under conditions of laboratory

In our experiment, after the first addition of microbial-based additive to

pig manure (at the beginning of the experiment), the emission of NH3 decreased and all week remained 17.3 % (0.05<P<0.10) lower than that of the manure without the additive. After the second injection of the additive, the emission of NH3 decreased by 54.5 % (0.05<P<0.10) in comparison with the manure without the additive. However, during all the next measurements, the microbial-based additive had lower effect on NH3 emission. Within 133 days of the experiment, the average reduction of NH3 emission from pig manure was 16.52 % (P<0.05) in comparison with the manure without the additive.

3.2.3. The effect of a microbial-based additive investigated in the laboratory by applying different temperature regimes

The results of our study showed that the microbial-based additive had no

significant effect on the manure characteristics. Moreover, the effect on gaseous emissions from manure, in most cases, was unfavourable (Table 3.3). Table 3.3. The effect of microbial-based additive on gaseous emissions

Gas emission, mg m-2 h-1 Manure Manure storage CH4 NO H2S NH3 CO CO2

Without additive 498.73 5.53 50.89 17.93 3.62 1095.99 Pig

With additive 684.30 5.88 51.29 16.17 4.87 1138.31 Without additive 589.96 0.87 5.67 7.91 0.93 916.45

Cattle With additive 713.40 1.21 9.02 10.60 1.25 897.91

Note: *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001

17

After injecting the microbial-based additive to pig and cattle manures, emissions of CO, NO, CH4 and H2S increased by up to 58.9 % in comparison with the manure without an additive. Only the emission of NH3 decreased by up to 34.1 %. However, the all above mentioned differences were insignificant. 3.2.4. The effect of sulphuric acid additive

The results of our study showed that the sulphuric acid additive had an effect on manure characteristics. The pH of pig and cattle manures with the additive was lower by 0.63 (P<0.01) and 0.69 pH (P<0.01), respectively, in comparison with the manure without the additive. At the end of the experiment, the content of total nitrogen in pig and cattle manures with the additive was by 1.65 (P<0.01) and 0.98 % (P<0.01) higher, respectively, than that in the manure without the additive. Also, the content of ammonia nitrogen in pig and cattle manures with the additive was by 0.45 (P<0.05) and 0.48 % (P<0.01) higher, respectively, than in the manure without the additive.

The results of our study showed that the sulphuric acid additive had an effect on gaseous emissions from manure (Table 3.4). The sulphuric acid additive increased the emissions of CO and NO from pig and cattle manures up to 19.5 (0.05<P<0.10) and 15.8 times (P<0.05), respectively, in comparison with the manure without the additive. Moreower, our study indicated that the H2S emission from pig and cattle manures was higher by 32.3 (P<0.05) and 94.8 times (P<0.05) respectively, in comparison with the manure without the additive. The differences in NH3 and CO2

emissions from pig and cattle manures with the additive in comparison with the manure without the additive were insignificant. Table 3.4. The effect of sulphuric acid additive on gaseous emissions

Gas emission, mg m-2 h-1 Manure Manure storage CH4 NO H2S NH3 CO CO2

Without additive 220.48 0.42 1.24 8.83 0.16 10739.33 Pig

With additive 80.54* 4.60** 40.18* 15.27 3.03 8509.14 Without additive 70.87 0.20 0.31 5.55 0.46 5048.90

Cattle With additive 34.64 3.15* 29.43* 12.20 3.93 7284.69

Note: *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001

The sulphuric acid additive reduced CH4 emission from pig manure most effectively, i. e. by 63.5 % (P<0.05) in comparison with the manure

18

without the additive. However, the effect of additive to CH4 emission from cattle manure was insignificant.

3.3. The effect of covers on gaseous emissions 3.3.1. The effect of leca cover

Water evaporation from pig and cattle manures covered by leca was 4.47 (0.05<P<0.10) and 4.13 % (0.05<P<0.10) slower, respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. After covering manure, the pH of cattle manure was lower by 1.9 % (P<0.05) in comparison with the uncovered manure. Also, the content of ammonia nitrogen in the covered pig and cattle manures was higher by 0.33 (P<0.01) and 0.43 % (P<0.01), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure.

The results of our study showed that leca cover had an effect on gaseous emissions from manure (Table 3.5). Table 3.5. The effect of leca cover on gaseous emissions

Gas emission, mg m-2 h-1 Manure Manure storage CH4 NO H2S NH3 CO CO2

Uncovered 133.51 0.84 1.24 3.53 0.68 9584.36 Pig

Covered 76.40 0.74 0.32* 2.31 0.29* 5713.02* Uncovered 221.08 0.21 0.43 2.98 0.20 5874.01

Cattle Covered 214.06 0.10 0.35 3.14 0.07 3476.25

Note: *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001

The most effective reduction after the use of leca cover was found on H2S emission from pig manure. In this instance, the H2S emission from the covered manure was by 74.0 % (P<0.05) lower in comparison with the uncovered manure. However, the differences of H2S emission between the covered and uncovered cattle manure were insignificant. During the storage period, the emission of CO2 from the covered pig manure was lower by 40.4 % (P<0.05) in comparison with the uncovered manure. Also, the CO emission from the covered pig and cattle manures was lower by 57.1 (P<0.05) and 65.9 % (0.05<P<0.10), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. However, the differences of CH4, NO and NH3 emissions between the covered and uncovered pig or cattle manure were insignificant.

19

3.3.2. The effect of peat cover

Water evaporation from pig manure covered by peat was 6.26 % (P<0.05) slower, in comparison with uncovered manure. The pH of the covered cattle manure was lower by 0.49 pH (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered manure. Also, the content of ammonia nitrogen in the covered cattle manure was lower by 0.83 % (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered manure.

The results of our study showed that peat cover had an effect on gaseous emissions from manure (Table 3.6). Table 3.6. The effect of peat cover on gaseous emissions

Gas emission, mg m-2 h-1 Manure Manure storage CH4 NO H2S NH3 CO CO2

Uncovered 236.33 2.46 5.35 11.60 0.30 11105.63 Pig

Covered 27.22** 4.29 2.90 6.52* 1.80** 7774.16 Uncovered 181.00 0.70 0.43 3.84 0.97 10768.56

Cattle Covered 31.46** 1.71 0.98 3.45 1.50 7413.45

Note: *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001

The most effective reduction after the use of peat cover was found on CH4 emission. In this instance, the emission of CH4 from the covered pig and cattle manures was lower by 88.5 (P<0.01) and 82.6 % (P<0.01) respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. Also, during the storage period, the CO2 emission from the covered pig and cattle manures was lower by 30.0 (0.05<P<0.10) and 31.2 % respectively, in comparison with uncovered manure. But only for pig manure the difference was statistically significant. Also, the NH3 emission from the covered pig manure was lower by 43.8 % (P<0.05) in comparison with the uncovered manure. The differences of H2S emission from the covered pig or cattle manure in comparison with uncovered manure were insignificant. It was found that after covering pig manure, the CO emission increased by 6 times (P<0.01). Moreover, the NO emission from covered pig and cattle manure was higher in comparison with uncovered manure, however the differences were insignificant. 3.3.3. The effect of oil cover

During the storage period, water evaporation from pig and cattle manures covered by oil was 3.67 (P<0.01) and 1.60 % (0.05<P<0.10)

20

slower, respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. The pH of the covered cattle manure was lower by 0.88 pH (P<0.01) in comparison with uncovered manure. Also it was found that in the covered pig and cattle manure, the degradation of volatile solids was slower by 6.81 (P<0.05) and 7.09 % (P<0.01) respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure.

The results of our study showed that oil cover had an effect on gaseous emissions from manure (Table 3.7). Table 3.7. The effect of oil cover on gaseous emissions

Gas emission, mg m-2 h-1 Manure Manure storage CH4 NO H2S NH3 CO CO2

Uncovered 178.69 3.10 17.87 27.21 0.22 4907.20 Pig

Covered 193.10 1.54 8.91 14.72* 1.05** 4757.55 Uncovered 55.89 0.57 0.87 7.19 0.03 2703.14

Cattle Covered 91.61 0.32 0.82 5.13 0.42* 3608.23

Note: *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001

The most effective reduction after the use of oil cover was found on NO emission. In this instance, the NO emission from the covered pig manure was lower by 50.3 % (0.05<P<0.10) in comparison with the uncovered manure. Also, the NO emission from the covered cattle manure was lower in comparison with the uncovered manure, but the difference was insignificant. Moreover, during the storage period, the emission of NH3 from the covered pig and cattle manures was lower by 45.9 (P<0.05) and 28.6 % (0.05<P<0.10) respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. Also, it was found that after covering pig and cattle manures, the CO emission inreased by 4.8 (P<0.01) and 12 times (P<0.05), respectively. However, the differences of CH4, H2S and CO2 between the covered and uncovered pig or cattle manures were insignificant. 3.3.4. The effect of sawdust cover

Water evaporation from pig and cattle manures covered by sawdust was 3.93 (P<0.01) and 2.31 % (P<0.01) slower respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. Our study also has shown that the mineralization of the covered pig and cattle manures was lower by 2.24 (P<0.01) and 1.22 % (P<0.01), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure.

21

The results of our study showed that sawdust cover had an effect on gaseous emissions from manure (Table 3.8). Table 3.8. The effect of sawdust cover on gaseous emissions

Gas emission, mg m-2 h-1 Manure Manure storage CH4 NO H2S NH3 CO CO2

Uncovered 72.80 2.98 13.86 21.70 0.32 4305.41 Pig

Covered <0.00** 3.42 1.72* 5.77** 0.99 1222.04** Uncovered 32.81 0.58 0.96 6.46 0.03 2139.31

Cattle Covered 120.84 0.51 0.11** 3.94* 0.04 1195.22*

Note: *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001

The most effective reduction after the use of sawdust cover was found on CH4 emission from pig manure, i. e. the emision was lower by 100 % (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered manure. However, for cattle manure, the effect of covering on CH4 emission was insignificant. Also, it was found that during the storage period, the emission of H2S from the covered pig and cattle manures was lower by 87.6 (P<0.05) and 88.4 % (P<0.01), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. Besides, the emission of NH3 from the covered pig and cattle manures was lower by 73.4 (P<0.01) and 39.0 % (P<0.05), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. Also, our study indicated that after covering pig and cattle manures the emission of CO2 decreased by 71.6 (P<0.01) and 44.1 % (P<0.05), respectively. However, the differences of CO and NO between the covered and uncovered pig or cattle manure was insignificant. 3.3.5. The effect of straw cover

The results of our study showed that straw cover had an effect on manure characteristics. Water evaporation from pig and cattle manures covered by straw was 4.60 (P<0.01) and 5.78 % (P<0.01) slower, respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. The pH of the covered cattle manure was lower by 0.39 pH (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered manure. Also it has been found that the concentration of ammonia nitrogen in covered pig and cattle manure was lower by 0.32 (P<0.05) and 0.31 % (P<0.01), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure.

The results of our study showed that straw cover had an effect on gaseous emissions from manure (Table 3.9).

22

Table 3.9. The effect of straw cover on gaseous emissions Gas emission, mg m-2 h-1 Manure Manure

storage CH4 NO H2S NH3 CO CO2 Uncovered 180.40 1.88 11.58 23.70 0.06 5387.44

Pig Covered 171.25 0.93 0.91** 8.43** 0.62** 3238.66

Uncovered 244.95 0.22 0.11 4.95 0.06 1949.50 Cattle

Covered 236.05 1.68* 0.70 3.06* 0.54* 2384.34 Note: *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001

During the storage period, the CO2 emission from pig manure covered with straw was lower by 39.9 % (0.05<P<0.10) in comparison with the uncovered manure. However, the CO emission increased after covering manure, i. e. for pig and cattle manure it was higher by 10.8 (P<0.01) and 8.8 times (P<0.05), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. Also, the NO emission from cattle manure increased by 7.8 times (P<0.05) after manure coverage with straw. The most effective reduction after the use of straw cover was found on H2S emission from pig manure, i. e. the emision was lower by 92.1 % (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered manure. However, for cattle manure, the effect of covering was opposite – the emision increased by 6.3 times (0.05<P<0.10). Also our study indicated that the straw cover was most effective for reduction of NH3 emission for cattle manure. In this instance, the emision from the covered manure was lower by 38.2 % (P<0.05) in comparison with the uncovered manure. However, the differences of CH4 between the covered and uncovered pig or cattle manures was insignificant. 3.3.6. The effect of plastic film cover

The results of our study showed that water evaporation from pig and cattle manures covered by a plastic film cover was 16.4 (P<0.01) and 16.8 % (P<0.01) slower, respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. The pH of the covered pig and cattle manures was lower by 0.61 (P<0.01) and 0.55 pH (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered manure. Also it has been found that the degradation of the covered manure was lower than that of the uncovered. Besides, the study showed that the concentration of ammonia nitrogen in the covered pig and cattle manures was higher by 0.70 (P<0.01) and 1.98 % (P<0.01), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure.

The results of our study showed that the plastic film cover had an effect on gaseous emissions from manure (Table 3.10).

23

Table 3.10. The effect of plastic film cover on gaseous emissions Gas emission, mg m-2 h-1 Manure Manure

storage CH4 NO H2S NH3 CO CO2 Uncovered 95.88 1.38 0.83 4.76 0.45 9277.63

Pig Covered 8.15** 0.11* 0.18* 2.16** 0.01* 3056.86**

Uncovered 50.90 0.21 0.47 4.14 0.07 5047.45 Cattle

Covered 62.87 0.07* 0.16* 2.11* <0.00 4038.64 Note: *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001

During the storage period, the emission of CO2 from pig manure covered with a plastic film was lower by 67.1 % (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered manure. The decrease in CO emission was the highest, after manure coverage, in comparison with other gases. The emission of CO from the covered pig and cattle manures was lower by 98.4 (P<0.05) and 100 % (0.05<P<0.10) in comparison with the uncovered manure. The emissions of other gases also decreased after manure coverage. The emission of NO from the covered pig and cattle manures was lower by 92.0 (P<0.05) and 67.5 % (P<0.05), H2S – 78.1 (P<0.05) and 64.6 % (P<0.05), NH3 – 54.7 (P<0.01) and 48.9 % (P<0.05), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered manure. The emission of CH4 from the covered pig manure was lower by 91.5 % (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered manure. However, the effect of a plastic film on CH4 and CO2

emissions from cattle manure was insignificant.

3.4. The effect of the complex use of additives and cover on gaseous emissions

3.4.1. The effect of the complex use of a microbial-based additive and a plastic film cover

The results of our study showed that water evaporation from pig and cattle manures with a microbial-based additive and covered with a plastic film cover was 6.87 (P<0.01) and 3.27 % (P<0.01) slower, respectively, in comparison with the uncovered and without additive manure. The pH of the covered and with an additive pig and cattle manure was lower by 0.30 (0.05<P<0.10) and 1.04 pH (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered and without additive manure. Also it has been found that the mineralization of the covered and with an additive pig and cattle manure was 0.94 (P<0.05) and 0.41 % (0.05<P<0.10) slower, than that of the uncovered and without additive manure.

24

The results of our study showed that the complex use of a microbial-based additive and a plastic film cover had an effect on gaseous emissions from manure (Table 3.11). Table 3.11. The effect of complex use of microbial-based additive and plastic film cover on gaseous emissions

Gas emission, mg m-2 h-1 Manure Manure storage CH4 NO H2S NH3 CO CO2

Uncovered 122.59 1.62 11.65 17.02 0.15 2797.90 Pig

Covered 121.03 0.84 4.35 6.25** 0.01 5220.60 Uncovered 137.30 0.38 0.66 5.18 0.02 2136.60

Cattle Covered 67.27 0.16 0.08** 1.59** <0.00 2638.41

Note: *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001

The CO2 emission from the covered and with an additive pig manure was higher by 86.6 % (0.05<P<0.10) in comparison with the uncovered and without additive manure. Also NH3 emission from the covered and with an additive pig and cattle manure was lower by 63.3 (P<0.01) and 69.4 % (P<0.01), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered and without an additive manure. H2S emission from the covered and with an additive cattle manure was lower by 87.3 % (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered and without an additive manure. Moreover, it has been found that the emissions of other gases (CO, NO, CH4) decreased after covering the manure and using an additive, in comparison with the uncovered and without an additive manure, but these differences were insignificant. 3.4.2. The effect of the complex use of a sulphuric acid additive and a plastic film cover

The results of our study showed that water evaporation from pig and cattle manures with a sulphuric acid additive and covered by a plastic film cover was 11.2 (P<0.01) and 7.38 % (P<0.01) slower, respectively, in comparison with the uncovered and without additive manure. The pH of the covered and with an additive pig and cattle manure was lower by 0.40 (P<0.01) and 1.13 pH (P<0.01) in comparison with the uncovered and without additive manure. Also it has been found that the concentration of the total nitrogen in the covered and with an additive pig and cattle manure was higher by 0.60 (P<0.01) and 0.49 % (P<0.01) than in the uncovered and without additive manure.

25

The results of our study showed that the complex use of a sulphuric acid additive and a plastic film cover had an effect on gaseous emissions from manure (Table 3.12). Table 3.12. The effect of complex use of sulphuric acid additive and plastic film cover on gaseous emissions

Gas emission, mg m-2 h-1 Manure Manure storage CH4 NO H2S NH3 CO CO2

Uncovered 95.04 4.43 25.72 17.05 0.56 4358.57 Pig

Covered 7.41** 1.02 4.18* 6.78 0.04 2272.64 Uncovered 76.53 1.30 0.64 1.53 0.25 2455.40

Cattle Covered <0.00** 0.24 0.14* 0.82* 0.69 2292.34

Note: *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001

The emissions of CO2 and CO from the covered and with an additive pig manure was lower by 47.9 (0.05<P<0.10) and 92.3 % (0.05<P<0.10), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered and without additive manure. However, for cattle manure the differences were insignificant. The emission of CH4 from the covered and with an additive pig and cattle manure was lower by 92.2 (P<0.01) and 100 % (P<0.01), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered and without additive manure. Also our study indicated that emissions of other gases decreased after covering the manure and using an additive too. H2S emission from the covered and with an additive pig and cattle manure was lower by 83.7 (P<0.05) and 77.7 % (P<0.05), NH3 – 60.2 (0.05<P<0.10) and 46.3 % (P<0.05), NO – 76.9 (0.05<P<0.10) and 81.9 % (0.05<P<0.10), respectively, in comparison with the uncovered and with no additive manure.

CONCLUSIONS 1. The theoretical methane yield (Bu), calculated according to the

chemical composition of manure, from full volatile solids was quite similar for both pig and cattle manures, i. e. it was in the range of 0.41-0.46 m3 CH4/kg VS (P<0.05). The ultimate methane yield (Bo) from pig liquid manure was 0.29±0.06 m3 CH4/kg VS (P<0.05), from liquid cattle manure – 0.20±0.06 m3 CH4/kg VS (P<0.05), from solid cattle manure – 0.21±0.04 m3 CH4/kg VS (P<0.05). The ultimate methane yield mostly decreased after sulphuric acid addition. As this additive was used, the CH4 yield from cattle manure decreased 26.3 % (P<0.05).

26

2. There was no statistically significant effect on CO2, CO, NO, CH4 and H2S emissions found after the use of the microbial-based additive. Only NH3 emission from pig manure decreased, i. e. after addition to manure samples NH3 emission decreased up to 54.5 % (0.05<P<0.10), after spraying in the piggery the emission decreased 44.3 % (P<0.05). The sulphuric acid additive lowered CH4 emission from pig manure by 63.5 % (P<0.05), but the emission of NO increased by 10.8 times (P<0.01), H2S – 32.3 times (P<0.05), CO – 19.5 times (0.05<P<0.10). Also, the above additive increased NO emission from cattle manure by 15.8 times (P<0.05) and that of H2S – 94.8 times (P<0.05).

3. The results of our study showed that covers decreased the emissions of NH3, H2S and CO2. However, covers (except a plastic film and leca), increased CO emission from 4.8 (P<0.01) to 12 times (P<0.05). The most effective reduction of complex gaseous emissions from pig manure was achieved after manure covering by a plastic film, i. e. the emission of CH4 decreased by 91.5 % (P<0.01), NO – 92.0 % (P<0.05), H2S – 78.1 % (P<0.05), NH3 – 54.7 % (P<0.01), CO – 98.4 % (P<0.05), CO2 – 67.1 % (P<0.01). When cattle manure was covered by a plastic film, the emissions of NO, H2S, NH3 and CO were lowered in the range between 48.9 (P<0.05) to 100 % (0.05<P<0.10), but there was no statistically significant effect found on CH4 and CO2 emissions.

4. The most effective common reduction of gaseous emissions from pig and cattle manures was achieved after the use of the complex of sulphuric acid and a plastic film cover. In this instance, the emission of NH3 were lowered in the range between 46.3 (P<0.05) to 60.2 % (0.05<P<0.10), CH4 – 92.2 (P<0.01) to 100 % (P<0.01), H2S – 77.7 (P<0.05) to 83.7 % (P<0.05), CO2 – up to 47.9 % (0.05<P<0.10), NO –76.9 (0.05<P<0.10) to 81.9 % (0.05<P<0.10). However, the CO emission decreased only from pig manure, i. e. up to 92.3 % (0.05<P<0.10).

PROPOSALS

During the preparation of Greenhouse Gas (CH4) emission inventory

report and calculating the national emission of greenhouse gas (CH4) from livestock – manure management sector, we recommend to use the values of ultimate methane yield from pig and cattle manures (Bo) determined in our study.

27

We recommend to cover manure with a plastic film cover, because this implement was most effective on the reduction of complex emission of NH3, CH4, H2S, NO, CO and CO2.

We suggest to apply the results of the analysis of manure characteristics, determined in our study, during the preparation of annual calculations of the soil area, needed for manure and slurry spreading.

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS Publications reffered in the database of “Thomson Reuters Web of

Knoweledge“ with a citation index

1. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. Measurement of methane production from pig and cattle manure in Lithuania // Žemdirbyst÷=Agriculture. K÷dainiai: Institute of Agriculture. ISSN 1392-3196. 2015, vol. 00, no. 00, p. 00–00. [Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science); Conference Proceedings Citation Index; CAB Abstracts; VINITI; Scopus; Index Copernicus]. [Cit. index: 0.523]. In press.

Reviewed publications reffered in the other databases

1. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. Gaseous emissions from manure as affected by microbial-based additive and temperature // Veterinary Science and Zootechny. Kaunas: Veterinary Academy of Lithuania. ISSN 1392-2130. 2013, vol. 64(86), p. 55-64: fig., tab., Available at: <http://vetzoo.lva.lt/data/vols/2013/64/pdf/matulaitis.pdf> [Index Copernicus; Index Veterinarijus; Veterinary Bulletin; Animal Breeding Abstracts; EBSCO Publishing; IFIS Publishing; Scopus].

2. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. The effect of microbial-based additive on ammonia emission from pig manure // Animal Husbandry: Scientific Articles. Baisogala (Radviliškis dist.): LUHS Institute of Animal Science. ISSN 1392-6144. 2011, Vol. 58, p. 96-108: fig., tab., graph. [CAB Abstract; Index Copernicus].

28

Review and propagation of science

1. Juška, Remigijus; Juškien÷, Violeta; Ribikauskas Vytautas; Matulaitis Raimundas. The implements for Greenhouse Gas (CH4 and N2O) emission reduction from manure management // Recommendations for Animal Production 2011. [former Rasa Nainien÷; editors: Violeta Juškien÷ (chairman), Artūras Šiukščius, Virginijus Uchockis, [et all]. Baisogala: LSHU Institute of Animal Science, 2011. (III section. Keeping and maintenance). ISBN 978-609-455-003-4. p. 57-60.

Other publications

1. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. The effect of floating covers on GHG emission from liquid manure // The thesis of second conference of junior researchers “Junior researchers – for progress of agriculture“: [21th November 2013, Vilnius, Lithuania] / Lithuanian Academy of Sciences; [Organizer: Zenonas Dabkevičius (chairman) [et all]; Former: Reda Daukšien÷; editor: Aurika Bagdonavičien÷], 2013. (The thesis of presentation). p. 67.

ORAL PRESENTATIONS

1. Matulaitis, Raimundas. The possibilities for reduction of ammonia emission in swine breeding. Conference “Animal production studies for competitive and innovative development of farming”. Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Institute of Animal Science, Baisogala, 18th November 2010.

2. Matulaitis, Raimundas. The temperature effect on gas emission from manure. Conference “The topicality of animal production studies for stimulation of innovation in agriculture”. Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Institute of Animal Science, Baisogala, 23th November 2011.

3. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. The effect of floating covers on GHG emission from liquid manure. Second conference of junior researchers “Junior researchers – for progress of agriculture“. Lithuanian Academy of Sciences, Vilnius, 21th November 2013.

4. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. The effect of floating covers on gaseous emissions from liquid manure. Conference “Animal production studies for installation of innovations on

29

farms”. Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Institute of Animal Science, Baisogala, 4th December 2013.

TRAINEESHIP, SEMINARS

1. Attended at the traineeship of the project FP7-REGPOT-2007-3

FEED-TO-FOOD in Serbia at University of Novi Sad, Institute for Food Technology FINS, during 30 May – 30 June 2010.

2. Attended at the REDNEX symposium of the project EAAP-FP7 – ‘‘Energy and Protein Interaction in Dairy Cattle – Efficiency and Environmental Effect“ in Nitra, Slovakia, on 10-11 May, 2011.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Raimundas Matulaitis was born on 23th December 1983 in Radviliškis. In 2003, he finished Radviliškis Vaižgantas gymnasium. In 2007, he graduated from Šiauliai University, Faculty of Natural

Sciences with a B. Sc. degree in Ecology and Environmental Studies. In 2009, he graduated from Vilnius University, Faculty of Natural

Sciences with a M. Sc. degree in Ecology and Environmental Studies. In 2009-2013, he has been studying for his D. Sc. Degree at the LSHU

Institute of Animal Science, Department of Ecology.

30

REZIUM ö

Darbo tikslas – nustatyti kiaulių ir galvijų m÷šlui būdingas maksimalaus metano susidarymo (Bo), ir teorinio metano susidarymo (Bu) reikšmes, bei ištirti klimato kaitą skatinančių ir aplinką teršiančių dujų emisijų mažinimo iš m÷šlo priemonių taikymo efektyvumą.

Darbo uždaviniai: 1. nustatyti maksimalų metano dujų kiekį galintį išsiskirti iš kiaulių ir

galvijų m÷šlo. 2. ištirti priedų įtaką NH3, CO2, CH4, H2S, NO ir CO dujų emisijoms iš

skysto ir pusiau skysto galvijų ir kiaulių m÷šlo. 3. nustatyti įvairių plaukiojančių dangų poveikį NH3, CO2, CH4, H2S,

NO ir CO dujų emisijoms skysto ir pusiau skysto m÷šlo laikymo metu. 4. ištirti priedų ir plaukiojančių dangų kompleksinio naudojimo įtaką

NH3, CO2, CH4, H2S, NO ir CO dujų emisijoms iš skysto ir pusiau skysto galvijų ir kiaulių m÷šlo.

Darbo naujumas Išmatuotas mūsų šalies ūkių kiaulių ir galvijų m÷šlui būdingas

maksimalaus metano susidarymo (Bo) ir teorinis metano susidarymo (Bu) rodikliai.

Lietuvos sąlygomis nustatytas plaukiojančių dangų, t. y., keramzito, aliejaus, polietileno pl÷vel÷s poveikis NH3, CO2, CH4, H2S, NO ir CO dujų emisijoms.

Lietuvos sąlygomis ištirta mikrobiologinio ir rūgšties priedų įtaka NH3, CO2, CH4, H2S, NO ir CO dujų emisijoms iš kiaulių ir galvijų m÷šlo, bei nustatytas kompleksinis jų poveikis naudojant kartu su polietileno pl÷vel÷s danga.

Praktin ÷ darbo reikšm÷ Nustatytas Lietuvos kiaulių ir galvijų m÷šlui būdingas maksimalaus

metano susidarymo rodiklis (Bo) gali būti panaudotas skaičiuojant nacionalines šiltnamio efektą sukeliančių dujų emisijas iš m÷šlo tvarkymo sistemų gyvulininkyst÷s sektoriuje. Atliktame darbe nustatyta mažesn÷ Bo reikšm÷, nei yra pateikta standartin÷ reikšm÷ tarpvyriausybin÷s klimato kaitos specialistų komisijos gair÷se. Panaudojus nustatytą Bo reikšmę rengiant šalies šiltnamio efektą sukeliančių dujų inventorizacijos ataskaitą, išskiriamų dujų kiekiai bus apskaičiuoti tiksliau.

31

Atliki tyrimai, kuriuose įvertintas priedų bei įvairių plaukiojančių dangų poveikis skirtingų aplinką teršiančių ir klimato kaitą skatinančių dujų emisijoms iš m÷šlo, leis gyvulininkyst÷s ūkių specialistams pasirinkti efektyviausiai ne tik amoniako, bet ir kitų dujų emisijas mažinančias priemones.

Kiaulių ir galvijų m÷šlo chemin÷s sud÷ties tyrimų rezultatai gal÷s būti panaudoti ruošiant kasmetinius tręšimo planus, kuriuose yra apskaičiuojami tręšiamų laukų plotai, reikalingi Lietuvos ūkiuose susidarančiam m÷šlui bei srutoms paskleisti.

IŠVADOS 1. Pagal m÷šlo cheminę sud÷tį apskaičiuotas teorinis maksimalus

išsiskyrusio metano kiekis (Bu) iš viso organinių medžiagų kiekio kiaulių ir galvijų m÷šlui skyr÷si nežymiai, t. y. atitiko 0,41-0,46 m3 CH4/kg OM (P<0,05) ribas. Išmatuotas išsiskyrusio metano kiekis (Bo) iš kiaulių skystojo m÷šlo buvo 0,29±0,06 m3 CH4/kg OM (P<0,05), iš skystojo galvijų m÷šlo – 0,20±0,06 m3 CH4/kg OM, iš tirštojo galvijų m÷šlo – 0,21±0,04 m3 CH4/kg OM (P<0,05). Maksimalus iš m÷šlo išsiskyrusio metano kiekis labiausiai sumaž÷jo įterpus rūgšties priedo. Panaudojus šį priedą, išsiskyrusio CH4 kiekis iš galvijų m÷šlo sumaž÷jo 26,3 % (P<0,05).

2. Mikrobiologinis priedas statistiškai patikimo poveikio CO2, CO, NO, CH4 ir H2S emisijoms nedar÷. Šis priedas sumažino tik NH3 emisiją iš kiaulių m÷šlo, t. y. jo įterpus į m÷šlą, NH3 emisija sumaž÷jo iki 54,5 % (0,05<P<0,10); juo išpurškus kiaulių tvarte, emisija sumaž÷jo 44,3 % (P<0,05). Sieros rūgšties priedas iš kiaulių m÷šlo sumažino CH4 emisiją 63,5 % (P<0,05), tačiau NO emisiją padidino 10,8 karto (P<0,01), H2S – 32,3 karto (P<0,05), CO – 19,5 karto (0,05<P<0,10); iš galvijų m÷šlo NO emisiją padidino 15,8 karto (P<0,05), H2S – 94,8 karto (P<0,05).

3. Tyrimai parod÷, kad tirtos dangos sumažino NH3, H2S ir CO2 emisijas, o CO emisiją padidino nuo 4,8 karto (P<0,01) iki 12 kartų (P<0,05), išskyrus polietileno pl÷vel÷s ir keramzito dangos. Kompleksiškai visų dujų emisijas iš kiaulių m÷šlo efektyviausiai mažino polietileno pl÷vel÷s danga, t. y. CH4 emisija sumaž÷jo 91,5 % (P<0,01), NO – 92,0 % (P<0,05), H2S – 78,1 % (P<0,05), NH3 – 54,7 % (P<0,01), CO – 98,4 % (P<0,05), CO2 – 67,1 % (P<0,01). Galvijų m÷šlą uždengus polietileno pl÷vel÷s danga NO, H2S, NH3 ir CO emisijos sumaž÷jo 48,9 % (P<0,05) – 100 % (0,05<P<0,10), o CH4 ir CO2 dujoms statistiškai patikimo poveikio nenustatyta.

32

4. Panaudojus dangas ir priedus kompleksiškai, nustatyta, kad efektyviausiai emisijos sumaž÷jo į kiaulių ar galvijų m÷šlą įpylus sieros rūgšties priedo ir uždengus pl÷vele. Šiuo atveju NH3 emisija sumaž÷jo 46,3 % (P<0,05) – 60,2 % (0,05<P<0,10), CH4 emisija sumaž÷jo 92,2 % (P<0,01) – 100 % (P<0,01), H2S emisija sumaž÷jo 77,7 % (P<0,05) – 83,7 % (P<0,05), CO2 emisija sumaž÷jo iki 47,9 % (0,05<P<0,10), NO emisija sumaž÷jo 76,9 % (0,05<P<0,10) – 81,9 % (0,05<P<0,10), o CO emisija sumaž÷jo tik iš kiaulių m÷šlo iki 92,3 % (0,05<P<0,10).

PASIŪLYMAI

Rengiant šalies šiltnamio efektą sukeliančių dujų (CH4) inventorizacijos ataskaitas ir skaičiuojant nacionalines emisijas iš m÷šlo tvarkymo sistemų gyvulininkyst÷s sektoriuje, siūlome naudoti mūsų darbe nustatytas Lietuvos kiaulių ir galvijų m÷šlui būdingas maksimalaus metano susidarymo rodiklių (Bo) vertes.

Kaip efektyviausią, kompleksiškai NH3, CH4, H2S, NO, CO ir CO2 dujų emisijas iš m÷šlo mažinančią priemonę, rekomenduojame naudoti polietileno pl÷vel÷s dangą.

Ruošiant kasmetinius tręšimo m÷šlu planus, siūlome panaudoti ir mūsų darbe atliktų m÷šlo chemin÷s sud÷ties tyrimų rezultatus.

PASKELBTŲ STRAIPSNIŲ SĄRAŠAS

Leidiniuose, referuojamuose duomenų baz÷je ,,Thomson Reuters Web of Knoweledge“ ir turinčiuose citavimo rodiklį

1. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. Measurement of methane production from pig and cattle manure in Lithuania // Žemdirbyst÷=Agriculture. K÷dainiai: Lietuvos žemdirbyst÷s institutas. ISSN 1392-3196. 2015, vol. 00, no. 00, p. 00–00. [Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science); Conference Proceedings Citation Index; CAB Abstracts; VINITI; Scopus; Index Copernicus]. [Citav. rod.: 0.523] Spaudoje.

33

Recenzuojamuose mokslo leidiniuose, referuojamuose kitose duomenų baz÷se

1. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. Gaseous emissions from manure as affected by microbial-based additive and temperature / Raimundas Matulaitis, Violeta Juškien÷, Remigijus Juška // Veterinarija ir zootechnika. Kaunas: Lietuvos veterinarijos akademija. ISSN 1392-2130. 2013, t. 64(86), p. 55-64: pav., lent., Prieiga per internetą: <http://vetzoo.lva.lt/data/vols/2013/64/pdf/matulaitis.pdf>. [Index Copernicus; Index Veterinarijus; Veterinary Bulletin; Animal Breeding Abstracts; EBSCO Publishing; IFIS Publishing; Scopus].

2. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. Mikrobiologinio priedo poveikis amoniako emisijai iš kiaulių m÷šlo / Raimundas Matulaitis, Violeta Juškien÷, Remigijus Juška // Gyvulininkyst÷=Animal Husbandry: mokslo darbai. Baisogala (Radviliškio raj.): LSMU Gyvulininkyst÷s institutas. ISSN 1392-6144. 2011, t. 58, p. 96-108: pav., lent., graf. [CAB Abstract; Index Copernicus].

Parengtos mokslo darbų apžvalgos ir mokslo sklaidos publikacijos

1. Juška, Remigijus; Juškien÷, Violeta; Ribikauskas Vytautas; Matulaitis Raimundas. Šiltnamio efektą sukeliančių dujų (CH4 ir N2O) emisijų iš m÷šlo tvarkymo sistemų mažinimo priemon÷s / pareng÷: Remigijus Juška, Violeta Juškien÷, Vytautas Ribikauskas, Raimundas Matulaitis // Rekomendacijos gyvulininkystei 2011 / LSMU [Lietuvos sveikatos mokslų universiteto] Gyvulininkyst÷s institutas; [sudarytoja Rasa Nainien÷; redaktorių kolegija: Violeta Juškien÷ (pirminink÷), Artūras Šiukščius, Virginijus Uchockis, [ir kt.]. Baisogala: LSMU Gyvulininkyst÷s institutas, 2011. (III skyrius. Laikymas ir priežiūra). ISBN 978-609-455-003-4. p. 57-60.

Kitos publikacijos

1. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. Plaukiojančių dangų poveikis ŠES dujų emisijai iš skysto m÷šlo / Raimundas Matulaitis, Violeta Juškien÷, Remigijus Juška // Antrosios jaunųjų mokslininkų konferencijos ,,Jaunieji mokslininkai – žem÷s ūkio pažangai“ pranešimų tez÷s: [2013 m. lapkričio 21 d., Vilnius, Lietuva] / Lietuvos mokslų akademijos Žem÷s ūkio ir miškų mokslų skyrius;

34

[Konferencijos orgkomitetas: Zenonas Dabkevičius (pirm.) [ir kt.]; Leidinį sudar÷: Reda Daukšien÷; Redagavo: Aurika Bagdonavičien÷]. [Vilnius: Lietuvos mokslų akademijos Žem÷s ūkio ir miškų mokslų skyrius], 2013. (Pranešimų tez÷s). p. 67.

SKAITYTI PRANEŠIMAI

1. Matulaitis, Raimundas. Amoniako emisijos mažinimo galimyb÷s

kiaulininkyst÷je. Konferencija ,,Gyvulininkyst÷s moksliniai tyrimai konkurencingam inovatyviam ūkiui vystyti“. LSMU Gyvulininkyst÷s institutas, Baisogala, 2010 m. lapkričio 18 d.

2. Matulaitis, Raimundas. Temperatūros įtaka dujų emisijai iš m÷šlo. Konferencija ,,Gyvulininkyst÷s mokslinių tyrimų aktualijos inovacijų skatinimui žem÷s ūkyje“. LSMU Gyvulininkyst÷s institutas, Baisogala, 2011 m. lapkričio 23 d.

3. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. Plaukiojančių dangų poveikis ŠES dujų emisijai iš skysto m÷šlo. Antroji jaunųjų mokslininkų konferencija ,,Jaunieji mokslininkai – žem÷s ūkio pažangai“. Lietuvos mokslų akademija, Vilnius, 2013 m. lapkričio 21 d.

4. Matulaitis, Raimundas; Juškien÷, Violeta; Juška, Remigijus. Plaukiojančių dangų poveikis dujų emisijai iš skysto m÷šlo. Konferencija ,,Taikomieji tyrimai gyvulininkyst÷je inovacijų diegimui ūkininkų ūkiuose“. LSMU Gyvulininkyst÷s institutas, Baisogala, 2013 m. gruodžio 4 d.

DALYVAVIMAS MOKYMUOSE IR SEMINARUOSE

1. Dalyvavo FP7-REGPOT-2007-3 FEED-TO-FOOD projekto

stažuot÷je Serbijos Novi Sad universitete, Maisto technologijų institute FINS, 2010 metais nuo geguž÷s 30 d. iki birželio 30 d.

2. Dalyvavo EAAP-FP7 projekto REDNEX simpoziume – ‘‘Energy and Protein Interaction in Dairy Cattle – Efficiency and Environmental Effect“ Nitroje, Slovakijoje, 2011 m. geguž÷s 10-11 d.

TRUMPA INFORMACIJA APIE AUTORI Ų

Raimundas Matulaitis gim÷ 1983 m. gruodžio 23 d. Radviliškyje. 2003 m. baig÷ Radviliškio Vaižganto gimnaziją.

35

2007 m. baig÷ Šiaulių universiteto Gamtos mokslų fakultetą, įgijo ekologijos ir aplinkotyros bakalauro kvalifikacinį laipsnį.

2009 m. baig÷ Vilniaus universiteto Gamtos mokslų fakultetą, įgijo ekologijos ir aplinkotyros magistro kvalifikacinį laipsnį.

2009-2013 m. studijavo doktorantūroje Lietuvos sveikatos mokslų universiteto Gyvulininkyst÷s institute, Ekologijos skyriuje.