meta data for this page
  •  

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
sector:agriculture:start [2024/03/15 09:07] – [Short description] niebuhrsector:agriculture:start [2024/12/13 10:20] (current) – [Visual overview] kotzulla
Line 31: Line 31:
  
 ====Mitigation measures==== ====Mitigation measures====
- +The agricultural inventory model can represent several abatement measures for emissions of NH<sub>3</sub> and particles. The measures comprise: 
-The agricultural inventory model can represent several abatement measures for emissions of NH<sub>3</sub> and particles. The measures comprise:+
  
   * changes in animal numbers and amount of applied fertilizers    * changes in animal numbers and amount of applied fertilizers 
Line 38: Line 37:
   * 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) and from the agricultural census 2020. The average removal efficiency of NH<sub>3</sub> is 80 % for swine and 70 % for poultry, while for TSP and PM<sub>10</sub> the rates are set to 90 % and for PM<sub>2.5</sub> to 70 % for both animal categories. For swine two types of air scrubbers are distinguished: first class systems that remove both NH<sub>3</sub> and particles, and second class systems that remove only particles reliably and have an ammonia removal efficiency of 20%.   * 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) and from the agricultural census 2020. The average removal efficiency of NH<sub>3</sub> is 80 % for swine and 70 % for poultry, while for TSP and PM<sub>10</sub> the rates are set to 90 % and for PM<sub>2.5</sub> to 70 % for both animal categories. For swine two types of air scrubbers are distinguished: first class systems that remove both NH<sub>3</sub> and particles, and second class systems that remove only particles reliably and have an ammonia removal efficiency of 20%.
  
-  * 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 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.+  * 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 timeseries.
  
   * 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.   * 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.
Line 46: Line 45:
   * covering of slurry storage: agricultural censuses survey the distribution of different slurry covers. Germany uses distinct emission factors for the different covers.    * 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<sub>3</sub> emission factor for urea fertilizers is therefore reduced by 70% from 2020 onwards, according to Bittman et al. (2014, Table 15)((Bittman, S., Dedina, M., Howard C.M., Oenema, O., Sutton, M.A., (eds) (2014): Options for Ammonia Mitigation. Guidance from the UNECE task Force on Reactive Nitrogen. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Edinburgh, UK.)).+  * 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<sub>3</sub> emission factor for urea fertilizers is therefore reduced by 70% from 2020 onwards for the direct incorporation, according to Bittman et al. (2014, Table 15)((Bittman, S., Dedina, M., Howard C.M., Oenema, O., Sutton, M.A., (eds) (2014): Options for Ammonia Mitigation. Guidance from the UNECE task Force on Reactive Nitrogen. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Edinburgh, UK)). For the use of urease inhibitors the NH<sub>3</sub> emission factor is reduced by 60% from 2020 onwards, see Vos et al. (2024), Chapter 5.2.1.2. 
 + 
 +For NO<sub>x</sub> and NMVOC no mitigation measures are included. 
  
  
-For NO<sub>x</sub> and NMVOC no mitigation measures are included. 
  
  
Line 57: Line 57:
 (see [[general:recalculations:start|Chapter 8.1 - Recalculations]]) (see [[general:recalculations:start|Chapter 8.1 - Recalculations]])
  
-The following list summarizes the most important reasons for recalculations. Recalculations result from improvements in input data and methodologies (for details see Rösemann et al. (2023), Chapter 1.3).  +The following list summarizes the most important reasons for recalculations. Recalculations result from improvements in input data and methodologies (for details see Vos et al. (2024), Chapter 1.3). 
- +
-1) The results used from the 2020 agricultural census (LZ 2020) on the proportions of husbandry, storage or application methods and grazing were assumed to be true for the year 2019 and not for the year 2020 as in Submission 2022. This changes the data obtained by interpolation for the different proportions slightly, in some cases as far back as the year 2000.  +
- +
-2) Deep bedding systems: As of the submission at hand, it is assumed that the NH<sub>3</sub> emissions from deep litter systems are fully covered by the housing emissions and that the emission factor for storage emissions is 0.  This was done because it can be assumed that in case of deep bedding systems manure will be spread immediately after removing it from the stable. This reduces the emissions from manure management while the emissions from application of manure (3.D.a.2.a) increases as more N is available for application. +
- +
-3) Dairy cows: Milk yield and slaughter weights for 2020 have been slightly corrected in the official statistics.  +
- +
-4) Heifers: 2020 slaughter weights have been slightly corrected in the official statistics. +
- +
-5) Male beef cattle: In some years, slaughter ages and slaughter weights have been updated in the HIT database. +
- +
-6) Pigs: Air scrubbing techniques: From the 2020 agricultural census, for the first time official data on the number of air scrubbing systems were available. These data were used to derive a distinction between systems of “first” and “second” class (the latter having normal removal efficiency concerning TSP, PM<sub>10</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> +
-but reduced removal efficiency for NH<sub>3</sub>). The numbers of animal places equipped with “second class” systems were underestimated in previous submissions and therefore have a larger impact in the present submission. This influences mainly the emissions of TSP, PM<sub>10</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> from the year 2005 onwards. +
- +
-7) Sows: For Lower Saxony, the number of piglets per sow and year was corrected (reduced) for the years 2015-2020.  +
- +
-8) Fattening pigs: The results of the additional survey "Protein use in pig fattening" by the Federal Statistical Office for the year 2020 were available for the feed parameter crude protein content of fattening pig feed (Federal Statistical Office, 2022). Through interpolation, the crude protein content and thus also the N excretions of the fattening pigs decrease back to the year 2011. For Lower Saxony, the growth rates for the years 2018 and 2019 and the final weight for the year 2019 were corrected. +
- +
-9) Broilers: Update of the national gross production of broiler meat in 2020. +
- +
-10) Laying hens: Introduction of grazing emissions for laying hens, since the proportion of excrements from free-range laying hens on the pasture can now be estimated (Rösemann et al. 2023, Chapter 2.5). Based on the results of the LZ2020, a new NH<sub>3</sub> emission factor for floor housing was derived for 2020 (for the years 2011-2019, new emission factors result from linear interpolation). The NH<sub>3</sub> emission factor for free range housing systems is now equal to the NH<sub>3</sub>-EF for floor housing for the time not spent on pasture. +
- +
-11) Laying hens: Improved interpolation of start weights and final weights for the whole time series. +
-  +
-12) TSP, PM<sub>10</sub>, and PM<sub>2.5</sub> emissions from crop production: Emissions are now estimated using a Tier 2 methodology. +
- +
-13) Application of sewage sludge to soils: Replacement of extrapolated activity data in 2020 with data from the Federal Statistical Office.  +
- +
-14) Other organic fertilizers. As of the submission at hand, application emissions from digested waste, compost from biowaste, and compost from green waste are reported in the agriculture sector (3.D.a.2.c) for the first time. These emissions were included implicitly in the waste sector before. +
- +
-15) Anaerobic digestion of energy crops: Update of activity data in 2020. +
  
-16) 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 atrazine, simazine, propazine and quintozine.+  - New animal categories: In the present submission emissions from rabbits, ostrich, deer and fur-animals are reported for the first time. 
 +  - Imported manure: Emissions from spreading manure that was imported from The Netherlands is reported for the first time in the present submission.  
 +  - Dairy cows: Milk yield and slaughter weights for 2021 have been slightly corrected in the official statistics.  
 +  - Heifers: 2021 slaughter weights have been slightly corrected in the official statistics.  
 +  - Male beef cattle: In some years, slaughter ages and slaughter weights have been updated in the HIT database.  
 +  - Numbers of laying hens, pullets and broilers were corrected in the years before 2013. The numbers are higher than in earlier submissions..  
 +  - Sows: For several federal states, the number of piglets per sow and year was corrected for the year 2021.  
 +  - Fattening pigs: for several federal states the growth rates, start weights and final weights for the year 2021 were corrected. For Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt (no more recent data available than 2016 or 2017) the corresponding data from the neighboring federal state of Thuringia was adopted instead of keeping the last known value as was previously the case.  
 +  - Broilers: Update of the national gross production of broiler meat in 2021.  
 +  - Laying hens and pullets: due to new weight data for laying hens for 2021, the starting and final weights of laying hens have been recalculated for the entire timeseries. Since the initial weight of the laying hens corresponds to the final weight of the pullets, this also has (small) effects on the energy requirements and excretion of the pullets. 
 +  - Application of inorganic fertilizers: The mitigating factor for urea emissions if applied with urease inhibitor (since the year 2020) was reduced from 70 % to 60 %. Correction of amounts applied in some years before 2008 due to a mistake in calculation of the mean value of the three years going into the moving average. 
 +  - Application of sewage sludge: Replacement of extrapolated activity data in 2021 with data from the Federal Statistical Office and corrections of activity data for  years after 2006. 
 +  - Anaerobic digestion: Update of activity data in all years due to new data about underlying substrate characteristics and storage data. This applies to both digested energy crops and digested animal manure. 
  
  
Line 100: Line 81:
 {{ :sector:iir_nfr3_from_2005.png?nolink&direct&700 |NFR 3 emission trends per category, from 2005 }} {{ :sector:iir_nfr3_from_2005.png?nolink&direct&700 |NFR 3 emission trends per category, from 2005 }}
  
-__Contribution of NFRs 1 to 6 to the National Totals, for 2021__+__Contribution of NFRs 1 to 6 to the National Totals, for 2022__
 {{ :sector:mainpollutants_sharesnfrs_incl_transport.png?direct&direct&700 | Percental contributions of NFRs 1 to 6 to the National Totals}} {{ :sector:mainpollutants_sharesnfrs_incl_transport.png?direct&direct&700 | Percental contributions of NFRs 1 to 6 to the National Totals}}
  
 ===== 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 Vos et al., 2024). Changes of data and methodologies are documented in detail (see Vos et al. 2024, Chapter 1.3). 
-The German IEFs and other data used for the emission calculations were compared with EMEP default values and data of other countries (see Rösemann et al., 2023). +
-Changes of data and methodologies are documented in detail (see  Rösemann et al. 2023, Chapter 1.3).+
  
-A comprehensive review of the emission calculations was carried out by comparisons with the results of Submission 2022 and by plausibility checks.+A comprehensive review of the emission calculations was carried out by comparisons with the results of Submission 2023 and by plausibility checks. 
  
-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.+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.+Furthermore, in addition to UNFCCC, UNECE and NEC reviews, the Py-GAS-EM model is continuously validated by experts of KTBL (Kuratorium für Technik und Bauwesen in der Landwirtschaft, Association for Technology and Structures in Agriculture) and the EAGER group (European Agricultural Gaseous Emissions Inventory Researchers Network). 
  
-Furthermore, in addition to UNFCCC, UNECE and NEC reviews, the Py-GAS-EM model is continuously validated by experts of KTBL (Kuratorium für Technik und Bauwesen in der Landwirtschaft, Association for Technology and Structures in Agriculture) and the EAGER group (European Agricultural Gaseous Emissions Inventory Researchers Network).