IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i7p2756-d339663.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technical, Economic, and Environmental Assessment of a Collective Integrated Treatment System for Energy Recovery and Nutrient Removal from Livestock Manure

Author

Listed:
  • Alberto Finzi

    (Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Milan, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Gabriele Mattachini

    (Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Milan, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Daniela Lovarelli

    (Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of Milan, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Elisabetta Riva

    (Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Milan, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Giorgio Provolo

    (Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Milan, 20133 Milan, Italy)

Abstract

The aim of this 5-year study was to evaluate the technical, economic, and environmental performances of a collective-based integrated treatment system for bioenergy production and nutrients removal to improve the utilization efficiency and reduce the environmental impact of land applied livestock manure. The study involved 12 livestock production units located in an intensive livestock area designated as nitrate vulnerable zone with large N surplus. The treatment system consisted of an anaerobic digestion unit, a solid–liquid separation system, and a biological N removal process. Atmospheric emissions and nutrient losses in water and soil were examined for the environmental assessment, while estimated crop removal and nutrient utilization efficiencies were used for the agronomic assessment. The integrated treatment system achieved 49% removal efficiency for total solids (TS), 40% for total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), and 41% for total phosphorous (TP). A surplus of 58kWh/t of treated manure was achieved considering the electricity produced by the biogas plant and consumed by the treatment plant and during transportation of raw and treated manure. A profit of 1.61 €/t manure treated and an average reduction of global warming potential by 70% was also achieved. The acidification potential was reduced by almost 50%. The agronomic use of treated manure eliminated the TKN surplus and reduced the TP surplus by 94%. This collective integrated treatment system can be an environmentally and economically sustainable solution for farms to reduce N surplus in intensive livestock production areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Alberto Finzi & Gabriele Mattachini & Daniela Lovarelli & Elisabetta Riva & Giorgio Provolo, 2020. "Technical, Economic, and Environmental Assessment of a Collective Integrated Treatment System for Energy Recovery and Nutrient Removal from Livestock Manure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2756-:d:339663
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2756/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2756/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zemo, Kahsay Haile & Termansen, Mette, 2018. "Farmers’ willingness to participate in collective biogas investment: A discrete choice experiment study," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 87-101.
    2. Asai, Masayasu & Langer, Vibeke & Frederiksen, Pia & Jacobsen, Brian H., 2014. "Livestock farmer perceptions of successful collaborative arrangements for manure exchange: A study in Denmark," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 55-65.
    3. Giorgio Provolo & Giulia Manuli & Alberto Finzi & Giorgio Lucchini & Elisabetta Riva & Gian Attilio Sacchi, 2018. "Effect of Pig and Cattle Slurry Application on Heavy Metal Composition of Maize Grown on Different Soils," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, July.
    4. Yiridoe, Emmanuel K. & Gordon, Robert & Brown, Bettina B., 2009. "Nonmarket cobenefits and economic feasibility of on-farm biogas energy production," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 1170-1179, March.
    5. De Vries, J.W. & Groenestein, C.M. & Schröder, J.J. & Hoogmoed, W.B. & Sukkel, W. & Groot Koerkamp, P.W.G. & De Boer, I.J.M., 2015. "Integrated manure management to reduce environmental impact: II. Environmental impact assessment of strategies," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 88-99.
    6. Giorgio Provolo & Gabriele Mattachini & Alberto Finzi & Martina Cattaneo & Viviana Guido & Elisabetta Riva, 2018. "Global Warming and Acidification Potential Assessment of a Collective Manure Management System for Bioenergy Production and Nitrogen Removal in Northern Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, October.
    7. Bacenetti, Jacopo & Sala, Cesare & Fusi, Alessandra & Fiala, Marco, 2016. "Agricultural anaerobic digestion plants: What LCA studies pointed out and what can be done to make them more environmentally sustainable," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 669-686.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Estévez, Sofía & Rebolledo-Leiva, Ricardo & Hernández, Diógenes & González-García, Sara & Feijoo, Gumersindo & Moreira, María Teresa, 2023. "Benchmarking composting, anaerobic digestion and dark fermentation for apple vinasse management as a strategy for sustainable energy production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 274(C).
    2. Köninger, Julia & Lugato, Emanuele & Panagos, Panos & Kochupillai, Mrinalini & Orgiazzi, Alberto & Briones, Maria J.I., 2021. "Manure management and soil biodiversity: Towards more sustainable food systems in the EU," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    3. Pietro De Marinis & Omar Ferrari & Erica Allisiardi & Chiara De Mattia & Giuliana Caliandro & Elio Dinuccio & Maurizio Borin & Paolo Ceccon & Guido Sali & Giorgio Provolo, 2021. "Insights about the Choice of Pig Manure Processing System in Three Italian Regions: Piemonte, Friuli Venezia Giulia, and Veneto," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    4. Aleksandr Briukhanov & Eduard Vasilev & Natalia Kozlova & Ekaterina Shalavina, 2021. "Assessment of Nitrogen Flows at Farm and Regional Level When Developing the Manure Management System for Large-Scale Livestock Enterprises in North-West Russia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Marcello Ermido Chiodini & Michele Costantini & Michele Zoli & Jacopo Bacenetti & Daniele Aspesi & Lorenzo Poggianella & Marco Acutis, 2023. "Real-Scale Study on Methane and Carbon Dioxide Emission Reduction from Dairy Liquid Manure with the Commercial Additive SOP LAGOON," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-13, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lauer, Markus & Hansen, Jason K. & Lamers, Patrick & Thrän, Daniela, 2018. "Making money from waste: The economic viability of producing biogas and biomethane in the Idaho dairy industry," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 621-636.
    2. Köninger, Julia & Lugato, Emanuele & Panagos, Panos & Kochupillai, Mrinalini & Orgiazzi, Alberto & Briones, Maria J.I., 2021. "Manure management and soil biodiversity: Towards more sustainable food systems in the EU," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    3. Iris Kral & Gerhard Piringer & Molly K. Saylor & Javier Lizasoain & Andreas Gronauer & Alexander Bauer, 2020. "Life Cycle Assessment of Biogas Production from Unused Grassland Biomass Pretreated by Steam Explosion Using a System Expansion Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Bangxi Zhang & Tianhong Fu & Chung-Yu Guan & Shihao Cui & Beibei Fan & Yi Tan & Wenhai Luo & Quanquan Wei & Guoxue Li & Yutao Peng, 2022. "Environmental Life Cycle Assessments of Chicken Manure Compost Using Tobacco Residue, Mushroom Bran, and Biochar as Additives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-10, April.
    5. Robert Czubaszek & Agnieszka Wysocka-Czubaszek & Wendelin Wichtmann & Grzegorz Zając & Piotr Banaszuk, 2023. "Common Reed and Maize Silage Co-Digestion as a Pathway towards Sustainable Biogas Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-25, January.
    6. Jianqiang Wu & Chenyan Sha & Min Wang & Chunmei Ye & Peng Li & Shenfa Huang, 2021. "Effect of Organic Fertilizer on Soil Bacteria in Maize Fields," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, March.
    7. Ryschawy, Julie & Tiffany, Sara & Gaudin, Amélie & Niles, Meredith T. & Garrett, Rachael D., 2021. "Moving niche agroecological initiatives to the mainstream: A case-study of sheep-vineyard integration in California," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    8. Elena Tamburini & Mattias Gaglio & Giuseppe Castaldelli & Elisa Anna Fano, 2020. "Is Bioenergy Truly Sustainable When Land-Use-Change (LUC) Emissions Are Accounted for? The Case-Study of Biogas from Agricultural Biomass in Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, April.
    9. Jacopo Bacenetti, 2020. "Economic and Environmental Impact Assessment of Renewable Energy from Biomass," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-5, July.
    10. Lechenet, Martin & Makowski, David & Py, Guillaume & Munier-Jolain, Nicolas, 2016. "Profiling farming management strategies with contrasting pesticide use in France," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 40-53.
    11. Robert Czubaszek & Agnieszka Wysocka-Czubaszek & Piotr Banaszuk, 2020. "GHG Emissions and Efficiency of Energy Generation through Anaerobic Fermentation of Wetland Biomass," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-25, December.
    12. D׳Souza, Clare & Yiridoe, Emmanuel K., 2014. "Social acceptance of wind energy development and planning in rural communities of Australia: A consumer analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 262-270.
    13. Avaci, Angelica Buzinaro & Melegari de Souza, Samuel Nelson & Werncke, Ivan & Chaves, Luiz Inácio, 2013. "Financial economic scenario for the microgeneration of electric energy from swine culture-originated biogas," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 272-276.
    14. Mudasser, Muhammad & Yiridoe, Emmanuel K. & Corscadden, Kenneth, 2015. "Cost-benefit analysis of grid-connected wind–biogas hybrid energy production, by turbine capacity and site," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 573-582.
    15. Erich von Stroheim & Dana Loyd Keske Hoag, 2021. "Valuing Cattle Manure as an Agricultural Resource for Efficiency and Environmental Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-21, August.
    16. Ingrao, Carlo & Bacenetti, Jacopo & Adamczyk, Janusz & Ferrante, Valentina & Messineo, Antonio & Huisingh, Donald, 2019. "Investigating energy and environmental issues of agro-biogas derived energy systems: A comprehensive review of Life Cycle Assessments," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 296-307.
    17. Cortez-Arriola, José & Groot, Jeroen C.J. & Rossing, Walter A.H. & Scholberg, Johannes M.S. & Améndola Massiotti, Ricardo D. & Tittonell, Pablo, 2016. "Alternative options for sustainable intensification of smallholder dairy farms in North-West Michoacán, Mexico," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 22-32.
    18. Rong Zhao & Xiaolu Qiu & Shaozhi Chen, 2021. "Empirical Study on the Effects of Technology Training on the Forest-Related Income of Rural Poverty-Stricken Households—Based on the PSM Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    19. Khanali, Majid & Akram, Asadollah & Behzadi, Javad & Mostashari-Rad, Fatemeh & Saber, Zahra & Chau, Kwok-wing & Nabavi-Pelesaraei, Ashkan, 2021. "Multi-objective optimization of energy use and environmental emissions for walnut production using imperialist competitive algorithm," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 284(C).
    20. Ali Heidarzadeh Vazifehkhoran & Alberto Finzi & Francesca Perazzolo & Elisabetta Riva & Omar Ferrari & Giorgio Provolo, 2022. "Nitrogen Recovery from Different Livestock Slurries with an Innovative Stripping Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-17, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2756-:d:339663. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.