meta data for this page
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionNext revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
sector:agriculture:start [2021/01/25 13:39] – doering | sector:agriculture:start [2021/12/23 08:10] – [Specific QA/QC procedures for the agriculture sector] doering | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== Chapter 5 - NFR 3 - Agriculture (OVERVIEW) ====== | ====== Chapter 5 - NFR 3 - Agriculture (OVERVIEW) ====== | ||
- | Emissions occurring in the agricultural sector in Germany derive from manure management (NFR 3.B), agricultural soils (NFR 3.D) and agriculture other (NFR 3.I). | + | Emissions occurring in the agricultural sector in Germany derive from manure management (NFR 3.B), agricultural soils (NFR 3.D) and agriculture other (NFR 3.I). Germany |
- | + | ||
- | Germany | + | |
^ NFR-Code | ^ NFR-Code | ||
Line 11: | Line 9: | ||
| 3.I | [[Sector: | | 3.I | [[Sector: | ||
- | ====== Short description | + | ===== Short description ===== |
Emissions occurring in the agricultural sector in Germany derive from manure management (NFR 3.B), agricultural soils (NFR 3.D) and agriculture other (NFR 3.I). | Emissions occurring in the agricultural sector in Germany derive from manure management (NFR 3.B), agricultural soils (NFR 3.D) and agriculture other (NFR 3.I). | ||
- | Germany | + | Germany |
The pollutants reported are: | The pollutants reported are: | ||
- | * ammonia (NH3), | + | * |
- | * | + | * |
* | * | ||
- | * | + | * |
* | * | ||
No heavy metal emissions are reported. | No heavy metal emissions are reported. | ||
- | In 2018 the agricultural sector emitted | + | In 2020 the agricultural sector emitted |
+ | |||
+ | As depicted in the diagram below, in 2020 95.4 % of Germany’s total NH< | ||
+ | HCB emissions of pesticide use contributed 22.1 % to the total German emissions. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ====Mitigation measures==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | The agricultural inventory model can represent several abatement measures for emissions of NH< | ||
+ | |||
+ | * changes in animal numbers and amount of applied fertilizers | ||
+ | |||
+ | * air scrubbing techniques: yearly updated data on frequencies of air scrubbing facilities and the removal efficiency are provided by KTBL (Kuratorium für Technik und Bauwesen in der Landwirtschaft / Association for Technology and Structures in Agriculture). The average removal efficiency of NH< | ||
+ | |||
+ | * reduced raw protein content in feeding of fattening pigs: the german animal nutrition association (DVT, Deutscher Verband Tiernahrung e.V.) provides data on the raw protein content of fattening pig feed, therefore enabling the inventory to depict the changes in N-excretions over the time series. The time series is calibrated using data from official and representative surveys conducted by the Federal Statistical Office. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * reduced raw protein content in feeding and feed conversion rates of broilers: the German animal nutrition association (DVT, Deutscher Verband Tiernahrung e.V.) provides data on the raw protein content of fattening broiler feed, and feed conversion rates of broilers. This makes it possible to model the changes in N-excretions over the time series. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * low emission spreading techniques of manure: official agricultural censuses survey the distribution of different manure spreading techniques and how fast organic fertilizers are incorporated into the soil. Germany uses distinct emission factors for different methods, techniques and incorporation durations. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * covering of slurry storage: agricultural censuses survey the distribution of different slurry covers. Germany uses distinct emission factors for the different covers. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * use of urease inhibitors: for urea fertilizer the German fertilizer ordinance prescribes the use of urease inhibitors or the direct incorporation into the soil from 2020 onwards. | ||
+ | |||
+ | The NH< | ||
- | As displayed in the diagram below, in 2018 95.3 % of Germany’s total NH3 emissions derived from the agricultural sector, while nitric oxides reported as NOx contributed 9.9 % and NMVOC 28.5 % to the total NOx and NMVOC emissions of Germany. Regarding the emissions of PM2.5, PM10 and TSP the agricultural sector contributed 4.6 % (PM2.5), 14.5 % and 15.7 %, respectively, | + | For NO< |
- | HCB emissions of pesticide use contributed 74 % to total German emissions. | + | |
- | ====== Recalculations and reasons ====== | ||
+ | ===== Reasons for recalculations ===== | ||
- | (see 8.1 Recalculations) | ||
- | In the following, the most important reasons for recalculations are summarized. The need for recalculations arose from improvements in input data and methodologies | + | (see [[general: |
- | 1. All Cattle: Following a reviewer recommendation | + | The following list summarizes the most important reasons for recalculations. Recalculations result from improvements in input data and methodologies |
- | 2. Dairy cows: Update | + | 1) Incorporation |
- | 3. Dairy cows, heifers, male beef cattle: Update of weight | + | 2) Dairy cows: Update of milk yield and slaughter |
- | 4. Suckler cows: Based on re-analysis | + | 3) Heifers: Minor changes in the nutrient content |
- | 5. Pigs: Update | + | 4) Suckler cows: modeling |
- | 6. Pigs: In the case of air scrubbing systems in pig housings, a distinction between certified and non-certified systems has been introduced in accordance with improved data availability for Submission 2020: For certified systems, removal of NH3 and particulate matter is taken into account, while non-certified systems are assumed to only remove particulate matter reliably. | + | 5) Male cattle > 2 years: Update |
- | 7. Laying hens and broilers: For the present submission 2020, air scrubbing | + | 6) Sows: Update of the number of piglets per sow in 2019. |
- | 8. Laying hens: Update | + | 7) Fattening pigs: New data on raw protein content, ash content and digestibility |
- | 9. Broilers: Update of the national gross production of broiler meat in 2017. | + | 8) Broilers: |
- | 10. Pullets: The calculation | + | 9) Turkeys: Update |
- | 11. Anaerobic digestion of animal manures: Update | + | 10) Geese: update (increase) of the amount of bedding material (straw) and update (increase) |
- | 12. Anaerobic digestion of energy crops: Update | + | 11) Laying hens: Improved interpolation |
+ | |||
+ | 12) Pullets: Improved interpolation | ||
- | 13. Application | + | 13) Anaerobic digestion |
+ | |||
+ | 14) Mineral fertilizers: | ||
- | 14. Starting with the present Submission 2020, the emission factors for spreading | + | 15) Application |
- | 15. The emissions | + | 16) Anaerobic digestion |
+ | |||
+ | 17) Soils: Minor corrections | ||
- | 16. Emissions | + | 18) Pesticides: Recalculations were made for the complete time series due to the changes and new information given by the BVL for the amount of domestic sales of the active substances Lindane (1990 – 1997), Chlorothalonil and Picloram (2019) and the maximum amount |
- | Visual overview | + | |
- | Chart showing emission trends for main pollutants in NFR 3 - Agriculture: | ||
- | 2018 emissions by sector | ||
- | Click to enlarge. | + | ===== Visual overview ===== |
+ | __Chart showing emission trends for main pollutants in //NFR 3 - Agriculture//: | ||
+ | [{{: | ||
+ | __Contribution of NFR categories | ||
+ | [{{: | ||
- | ====== Specific QA/QC procedures for the agriculture sector====== | + | ===== Specific QA/QC procedures for the agriculture sector===== |
Numerous input data were checked for errors resulting from erroneous transfer between data sources and the tabular database used for emission calculations. | Numerous input data were checked for errors resulting from erroneous transfer between data sources and the tabular database used for emission calculations. | ||
- | The German IEFs and other data used for the emission calculations were compared with EMEP default values and data of other countries (see Rösemann | + | The German IEFs and other data used for the emission calculations were compared with EMEP default values and data of other countries (see Vos et al. (2022)). |
- | Changes of data and methodologies are documented in detail (see | + | Changes of data and methodologies are documented in detail (see |
- | A comprehensive review of the emission calculations was carried out by comparisons with the results of Submission | + | A comprehensive review of the emission calculations was carried out by comparisons with the results of Submission |
- | Once emission calculations with the German inventory model GAS-EM are completed for a specific submission, activity data (AD) and implied emission factors (IEFs) are transferred to the CSE database (Central System of Emissions) to be used to calculate the respective emissions within the CSE. These CSE emission results are then cross-checked with the emission results obtained by GAS-EM. | + | Once emission calculations with the German inventory model Py-GAS-EM are completed for a specific submission, activity data (AD) and implied emission factors (IEFs) are transferred to the CSE database (Central System of Emissions) to be used to calculate the respective emissions within the CSE. These CSE emission results are then cross-checked with the emission results obtained by Py-GAS-EM. |
Model data have been verified in the context of a project by external experts (Zsolt Lengyel, Verico SCE). Results show that input data are consistent with other data sources (Eurostat, Statistisches Bundesamt / Federal Statistical Office) and that the performed calculations are consistently and correctly applied in line with the methodological requirements. | Model data have been verified in the context of a project by external experts (Zsolt Lengyel, Verico SCE). Results show that input data are consistent with other data sources (Eurostat, Statistisches Bundesamt / Federal Statistical Office) and that the performed calculations are consistently and correctly applied in line with the methodological requirements. | ||
- | Furthermore, | + | Furthermore, |