Senior Researcher Brian H Jacobsen Institute of Food and Resource Economics University of Copenhagen Email Brianfoidk Content Reducing ammonia in Europe until now Measures to reduce emissions in DK ID: 504210
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Reducing Ammonia Emissions in Europe –..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Reducing Ammonia Emissions in Europe – with focus on Denmark
Senior Researcher Brian H. Jacobsen
Institute of Food and Resource Economics
University of Copenhagen
E-mail: Brian@foi.dk
Slide2
Content
Reducing ammonia in Europe – until now
Measures to reduce emissions in DK
Regulation and limitations on farms (BAT)
Societal optimal levels of emissionsSlide3Slide4Slide5
Emissions in Europe
Reduction of 24% from 1990 to 2008
The 2010 emission will be under the NEC 2010 targetSlide6
Ammonia emissions in DK divided according to type of animal 2003-2007
Danish ammonia emission 2003-2007Slide7
Danish measures (1985- 2008)
Storage of slurry (natural cover or solid)
Higher N-utilization on application - from broad spreading to injection
- quicker incorporation
Improved feeding (lower N)
Ban on the use of ammonia in straw
Reduction is 29% from 2000 to 2008
Slide8
Future measures
Pigs :
Stables (slatted surface < 50%) Feeding (new and old stables) Cooling of slurry
Air cleaning
Acidification
Air cleaning with biological filter
Air cleaning with acid
Partly slatted floor
Tent as slurry coverSlide9
Future measures to reduce NH3-N
Dairy cows :
Type of stable Acidification
Starting point is the norms for 2005/06
Choice of reference technology is important
Technology assessment is required before you build
Prefabricated floorSlide10
Future Danish regulation
Choice of technology has to be BAT (best available technology)
Emission in 2010 should be 30% under reference technology Emission near protected area may not be increased or only relatively little
More difficult to find locations where production can be increased
Could reduce the total number of livestock
Application procedure still takes a long time
Slide11
Recommended NH3 emissions (finishing pigs)
Average emission
(kg NH3/pig)
Reduction
(%)
Cost per pig
(€/pig)
Env. Cost
(€/kg NH3)
Baseline
0.44
0
0
75-210 LU
0.29
34
0 - 0.67
0 – 4.4
210-500 LU
0.26
41
0.53 - 0.67
2.9 – 3.7
> 500 LU
0.16
63
0.8 - 1.07
2.9 – 3.8
-
Reduction increase with farm size
- Economics of size is counteracted
1 LU = 35 finishing pigsSlide12
Environmental regulation
Benefit >> costs
New regulation
Benefit ≈ costs
New regulation has to be analyzed more
Benefit << costs
No new regulationSlide13
Value of reducing emissions (damage cost)
€ per kg NH3
Belgium
30 – 87
Netherlands
22 - 64
Germany
18 - 51
UK
17 -
50
Denmark
8 – 23
Spain
4 – 13
Nec 2020 analysis (Ilasa)Slide14
Loss of lives in months due to PPM 2.5 emission
Year 2000
Minimum possible (MMR)Slide15
Ecosystem area with nitrogen deposition exceeding critical loads
Year 2000
Minimum possible (MMR)Slide16
Cost of implementation (selected measures) (€/kg NH3)
UK
US
NL
DK
Replace urea
0.25
Cheap
Injection /trailing shoe
0.4
6
0.25
Solid cover on slurry tanks
Expensive
Partly required
Feeding
13
5-9
0-5
Reduce slatted area
32
2-4Slide17
Future EU NH3 emission
- From 2010 and beyond (EU 27) (index 100 = year 2000) Slide18
Ecosystem area with nitrogen deposition exceeding critical loads (% of area after 2020 ranking)
2000
2020
Minimum
Germany
98
94
69
Belgium
95
88
63
Netherlands
94
87
76
France
98
87
50
Denmark
97
80
72
Spain
88
72
48
UK
28
17
11
EU 27
71
59
37
Nec 2020 analysis (Ilasa)Slide19
Conclusions
Ammonia emission has been reduced in EU by 28% from 1990 to 2008. Some countries (US) find it difficult to estimate the emission.
Technologies to reduce emissions further are available in DK, but they are more expensive than in previous regulation.
Cost of technologies seems to vary by country, indicating lower costs in countries with strict regulation.
Marginal damage costs are larger than the costs for the farmer, but there is a large variation between countries (cost
benefit).
Worldwide, the emission will probably increase towards 2020, but it will be reduced in EU.Slide20
Please
-
I am doing my very best