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: 4.14). 04/2011; 159(11):3215-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2011.04.001
Source: PubMed


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.

Download full-text


Available from: Wim de Vries, Oct 06, 2015
905 Reads
  • Source
    • "Differences in seasonal soil N 2 O emission across CRM treatments were expected, with changes in soil water content, soil temperature, and N rates. These are factors that influence soil N 2 O emissions through change in nitrification and denitrification process (Lesschen et al., 2011; Sainju et al., 2012; Al-Kaisi and Yin, 2005; Mosier et al., 2002). Differences in seasonal soil mineral N concentration, soil water content, and soil temperature were observed between two years (Figs. 2 and 3 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In-field management practices of corn cob and residue mix (CRM) as a feedstock source for ethanol production can have potential effects on soil greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of CRM piles, storage in-field, and subsequent removal on soil CO2 and N2O emissions. The study was conducted in 2010–2012 at the Iowa State University, Agronomy Research Farm located near Ames, Iowa (42.0°′N; 93.8°′W). The soil type at the site is Canisteo silty clay loam (fine-loamy, mixed, superactive, calcareous, mesic Typic Endoaquolls). The treatments for CRM consisted of control (no CRM applied and no residue removed after harvest), early spring complete removal (CR) of CRM after application of 7.5 cm depth of CRM in the fall, 2.5 cm, and 7.5 cm depth of CRM over two tillage systems of no-till (NT) and conventional tillage (CT) and three N rates (0, 180, and 270 kg N ha−1) of 32% liquid UAN (NH4NO3) in a randomized complete block design with split–split arrangements. The findings of the study suggest that soil CO2 and N2O emissions were affected by tillage, CRM treatments, and N rates. Most N2O and CO2 emissions peaks occurred as soil moisture or temperature increased with increase precipitation or air temperature. However, soil CO2 emissions were increased as the CRM amount increased. On the other hand, soil N2O emissions increased with high level of CRM as N rate increased. Also, it was observed that NT with 7.5 cm CRM produced higher CO2 emissions in drought condition as compared to CT. Additionally, no differences in N2O emissions were observed due to tillage system. In general, dry soil conditions caused a reduction in both CO2 and N2O emissions across all tillage, CRM treatments, and N rates.
    Applied Soil Ecology 05/2015; 89. DOI:10.1016/j.apsoil.2015.01.007 · 2.64 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The combined use of ammonium (NH + 4 )-based fertilizers and nitrification inhibitors can effectively alleviate the two main environmental problems associated with nitrogen fertilization, namely water pollution caused by nitrate leaching and gaseous emissions of nitrogenous compounds. As such, the use of NH + 4 has been proposed as a good alternative to nitrate-based fertilizers (Lesschen et al., 2011). Once nitrogen has been taken up and assimilated, it is transported throughout the plant as glutamine, asparagine, glutamate, aspartate , NO "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Genome scale metabolic modelling has traditionally been used to explore metabolism of individual cells or tissues. In higher organisms, the metabolism of individual tissues and organs is coordinated for the overall growth and well-being of the organism. Understanding the dependencies and rationale for multicellular metabolism is far from trivial. Here, we have advanced the use of AraGEM (a genome-scale reconstruction of Arabidopsis metabolism) in a multi-tissue context to understand how plants grow utilizing their leaf, stem and root systems across the day-night (diurnal) cycle. Six tissue compartments were created, each with their own distinct set of metabolic capabilities, and hence a reliance on other compartments for support. We used the multi-tissue framework to explore differences in the ‘division-of-labour’ between the sources and sink tissues in response to: (a) the energy demand for the translocation of C and N species in between tissues; and (b) the use of two distinct nitrogen sources (NO3- or NH4+). The ‘division-of-labour’ between compartments was investigated using a minimum energy (photon) objective function. Random sampling of the solution space was used to explore the flux distributions under different scenarios as well as to identify highly coupled reaction sets in different tissues and organelles. Efficient identification of these sets was achieved by casting this problem as a maximum clique enumeration problem. The framework also enabled assessing the impact of energetic constraints in resource (redox and ATP) allocation between leaf, stem and root tissues required for efficient carbon and nitrogen assimilation, including the diurnal cycle constraint forcing the plant to set aside resources during the day and defer metabolic processes that are more efficiently performed at night. This study is a first step towards autonomous modelling of whole plant metabolism.
    Frontiers in Plant Science 01/2015; 6(4). DOI:10.3389/fpls.2015.00004 · 3.95 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "We added a direct N 2 O emission factor (EF1) to FEAT for nitrogen from injected manure that was 50% greater than the IPCC tier 1 EF1 for nitrogen inputs from applied organic amendments, as suggested for manure injection (see Lesschen et al., 2011). We also reduced the indirect N 2 O emission factor for ammonia volatilization (FRAC GASM ; Klein et al., 2006) by 86% for injection of manure compared with broadcasting it on the soil surface, as suggested by the literature (Lesschen et al., 2011; Dell et al., 2012). We did not alter the proportion of manure N going to run-off/leaching (FRAC LEACH ; Klein et al., 2006) since in most cases, nitrate leaching did not differ between injecting and broadcasting manure over several years in another Pennsylvania study (Dell et al., 2012). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dairy farms in the northeast typically produce their own forage, import grain crops, and rely heavily on other inputs. Feed production inputs include fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, and fuel that require fossil energy and produce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during their manufacture and transport. This study uses the Farm Energy Analysis Tool (FEAT) to compare and contrast the fossil energy consumption, energy efficiency, and GHG emissions for three different Pennsylvania dairy cropping systems that vary in their reliance on imported grains and fuel, and thus, land area to produce the same quantity of milk. One novel cropping system, implemented at Penn State University, includes a diverse rotation designed to produce forage, grain, and fuel on-farm (NSVO). The ‘NSVO’ cropping system employs a number of best management practices, including manure injection, cover crops, and integrated pest management. The two modeled-systems require fewer hectares than ‘NSVO’ because they do not produce fuel on-farm but produce forage only (FOR), or forage and grain (FORGr), while producing the same amount of milk. Relative to the ‘FOR’ system, even while requiring larger land areas locally, we found that the ‘NSVO’ and ‘FORGr’ systems lowered total fossil energy inputs per Mg of milk produced by 18% and 15% respectively, largely by importing 77% and 71% less feed crops that would have been grown elsewhere. GHG emissions were similar among farms, on the order of 229 kg CO2e Mg-milk−1. On-farm fuel production in the ‘NSVO’ system lowered fossil energy inputs but required more land area and may not provide economic savings with current diesel fuel prices. To reduce the fossil energy impact of their operations, dairy farmers in the Northeast should consider growing more livestock grain on-farm.
    Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 11/2014; 204. DOI:10.1016/j.agee.2014.10.007 · 3.40 Impact Factor
Show more