Article

Differentiation of nitrous oxide emission factors for agricultural soils.

Alterra, Wageningen UR, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Environmental Pollution (Impact Factor: 3.73). 04/2011; 159(11):3215-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2011.04.001
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Nitrous oxide (N(2)O) direct soil emissions from agriculture are often estimated using the default IPCC emission factor (EF) of 1%. However, a large variation in EFs exists due to differences in environment, crops and management. We developed an approach to determine N(2)O EFs that depend on N-input sources and environmental factors. The starting point of the method was a monitoring study in which an EF of 1% was found. The conditions of this experiment were set as the reference from which the effects of 16 sources of N input, three soil types, two land-use types and annual precipitation on the N(2)O EF were estimated. The derived EF inference scheme performed on average better than the default IPCC EF. The use of differentiated EFs, including different regional conditions, allows accounting for the effects of more mitigation measures and offers European countries a possibility to use a Tier 2 approach.

1 Bookmark
 · 
275 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A series of environmental policies have been implemented in the European Union (EU) to decrease nitrogen (N) emissions from agriculture. The Nitrates Directive (ND) is one of the main policies; it aims to reduce nitrate leaching from agriculture through a number of measures. A study was carried out to quantify the effects of the ND in the EU-27 on the leaching and runoff of nitrate (NO3(-)) to groundwater and surface waters, and on the emissions of ammonia (NH3), nitrous oxide (N2O), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and dinitrogen (N2) to the atmosphere. We formulated a scenario with and a scenario without implementation of the ND. The model MITERRA-Europe was used to calculate N emissions on a regional level in the EU-27 for the period 2000-2008. The calculated total N loss from agriculture in the EU-27 was 13Mton N in 2008, with 53% as N2, 22% as NO3, 21% as NH3, 3% as N2O, and 1% as NOx. The N emissions and leaching in the EU-27 slightly decreased in the period 2000-2008. Total emissions in the EU in 2008 were smaller with implementation of the ND than without the ND, by 3% for NH3, 6% for N2O, 9% for NOx, and 16% for N leaching and runoff in 2008. However, regional differences were large. The lower emissions with ND were mainly due to the lower N inputs by fertilizers and manures. In conclusion, implementation of the ND decreased both N leaching losses to ground and surface waters, and gaseous emissions to the atmosphere. It is expected that the ND will result in a further decrease in N emissions in EU-27 in the near future, because the implementation of the measures for the ND is expected to become more strict.
    Science of The Total Environment 05/2013; · 3.26 Impact Factor
  • Source
    European Journal of Soil Biology 05/2013; · 1.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As part of a UK government funded research project to update the UK N2O inventory methodology, a systematic review of published nitrous oxide (N2O) emission factors was carried out of non-UK research, for future comparison and synthesis with the UK measurement based evidence base. The aim of the study is to assess how the UK IPCC default emission factor for N2O emissions derived from synthetic or organic fertiliser inputs (EF1) compares to international values reported in published literature. The availability of data for comparing and/or refining the UK IPCC default value and the possibility of analysing sufficient auxiliary data to propose a Tier 2 EF1 reporting strategy is evaluated. The review demonstrated a lack of consistency in reporting error bounds for fertiliser-derived EFs and N2O flux data with 8% and 44% of publications reporting EF and N2O flux error bounds respectively. There was also poor description of environmental (climate and soil) and experimental design auxiliary data. This is likely to be due to differences in study objectives, however potential improvements to soil parameter reporting are proposed. The review demonstrates that emission factors for agricultural-derived N2O emissions ranged -0.34% to 37% showing high variation compared to the UK Tier 1 IPCC EF1 default values of 1.25% (IPCC 1996) and 1% (IPPC 2006). However, the majority (83%) of EFs reported for UK-relevant soils fell within the UK IPCC EF1 uncertainty range of 0.03% to 3%. Residual maximum likelihood (REML) analysis of the data collated in the review showed that the type and rate of fertiliser N applied and soil type were significant factors influencing EFs reported. Country of emission, the length of the measurement period, the number of splits, the crop type, pH and SOC did not have a significant impact on N2O emissions. A subset of publications where sufficient data was reported for meta-analysis to be conducted was identified. Meta-analysis of effect sizes of 41 treatments demonstrated that the application of fertiliser has a significant effect on N2O emissions in comparison to control plots and that emission factors were significantly different to zero. However no significant relationships between the quantity of fertiliser applied and the effect size of the amount of N2O emitted from fertilised plots compared to control plots were found. Annual addition of fertiliser of 35 to 557kgN/ha gave a mean increase in emissions of 2.02±0.28g N2O/ha/day compared to control treatments (p<0.01). Emission factors were significantly different from zero, with a mean emission factor estimated directly from the meta analysis of 0.17±0.02%. This is lower than the IPCC 2006 Tier 1 EF1 value of 1% but falling within the uncertainty bound for the IPCC 2006 Tier 1 EF1 (0.03% to 3%). As only a small number of papers were viable for meta analysis to be conducted due to lack of reporting of the key controlling factors, the estimates of EF in this paper cannot include the true variability under conditions similar to the UK. Review-derived EFs of 0.34% to 37% and mean EF from meta-analysis of 0.17±0.02% highlight variability in reporting EFs depending on the method applied and sample size. A protocol of systematic reporting of N2O emissions and key auxiliary parameters in publications across disciplines is proposed. If adopted this would strengthen the community to inform IPCC Tier 2 reporting development and reduce the uncertainty surrounding reported UK N2O emissions.
    Science of The Total Environment 04/2014; 487C:164-172. · 3.26 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
779 Downloads
Available from
May 31, 2014