Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Pollution
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envpol

Developments in greenhouse gas emissions and net energy use in Danish

agriculture e How to achieve substantial CO2 reductions?
T. Dalgaard a, *, J.E. Olesen a, S.O. Petersen a, B.M. Petersen a, U. Jørgensen a, T. Kristensen a,
N.J. Hutchings a, S. Gyldenkærne b, J.E. Hermansen a
a
Aarhus University, Department of Agroecology, Blichers Allé 20, P.O. Box 50, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
b
Aarhus University, National Environmental Research Institute, Frederiksborgvej 399, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agriculture are a significant contributor to total Danish emissions.
Received 9 February 2011 Consequently, much effort is currently given to the exploration of potential strategies to reduce agri-
Accepted 13 February 2011 cultural emissions. This paper presents results from a study estimating agricultural GHG emissions in the
form of methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide (including carbon sources and sinks, and the impact
Keywords: of energy consumption/bioenergy production) from Danish agriculture in the years 1990e2010. An
Greenhouse gases
analysis of possible measures to reduce the GHG emissions indicated that a 50e70% reduction of agri-
Carbon sequestration
cultural emissions by 2050 relative to 1990 is achievable, including mitigation measures in relation to the
Mitigation measures
Fossil energy
handling of manure and fertilisers, optimization of animal feeding, cropping practices, and land use
Bioenergy changes with more organic farming, afforestation and energy crops. In addition, the bioenergy
Scenarios production may be increased significantly without reducing the food production, whereby Danish
agriculture could achieve a positive energy balance.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction significant agricultural production, agriculture will need to make

Agriculture, and especially livestock production, is globally one
of the main drivers of environmental pollution (Steinfeld et al.,
2006), and a major contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emis-
sions causing climate change (Johnson et al., 2007).
Mitigation options for agricultural GHG emissions are therefore
particularly relevant to facilitate a more sustainable development,
and to achieve the stabilised GHG emissions and global mean
temperature targets of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and the 2009
Copenhagen Accord. In this context, Denmark is committed to a 21%
reduction in GHG emissions from 1990 to 2012 (Houghton, 2004),
and has in addition agreed a national ambition of a society inde-
pendent of fossil fuels by 2050. Denmark is one of the world’s most
intensively farmed countries and a world-leading exporter of pig
and dairy products, accounting to an annual production of 25
million pigs, 4.6 million litres of milk, and a total agricultural
product export value of €8.7 billion in 2008 (Statistics Denmark,
2010). Consequently, in common with other countries that have
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: tommy.dalgaard@agrsci.dk (T. Dalgaard).
a contribution towards reaching these targets.
The annual GHG emissions from the primary agricultural sector
in Denmark in the form of nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4)
are currently about 10 Tg carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2-eq.)
compared to total emissions of 66 Tg CO2-eq. for Denmark in 2010
(Nielsen et al., 2009). To this agricultural contribution should be
added CO2 emissions from direct and indirect fossil energy use
amounting to around 5 Tg CO2-eq. (Dalgaard et al., 2002), and a net
mining of the soil carbon pools (DC) amounting to less than
1 Tg CO2-eq. (Gyldenkærne et al., 2007). Other GHG contributions
from agriculture are negligible. Together, agricultural emissions
account for about 24% of the total national GHG emissions.
Agriculture also has a significant potential for expanding bio-
energy production, which can substitute fossil fuels in other sectors
(Jørgensen et al., 2005). However, the value of this substitution to
reduce net GHG emissions is only relevant up until the point at
which the demand for energy can be wholly satisfied from
renewable sources. As the proportion of energy demand obtained
from renewable sources increases, there will be an increasing need
to focus on reductions in the GHG emissions associated with energy
production from these sources.
Therefore agricultural mitigation efforts should not only be
directed towards substituting fossil fuel emissions with bioenergy,

0269-7491/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2011.02.024
3194 T. Dalgaard et al. / Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203

but also at substantially reducing methane and nitrous oxide 4,5

emissions and maintaining soil carbon stocks.
Most studies focus on the mitigation of only one or a few of the 4
major types of GHG emissions from agriculture (for example CH4 by
Petersen et al., 2005, N2O by Dämmgen and Hutchings, 2008, DC by 3,5
Scott et al., 2002, CO2 from fossil energy by Dalgaard et al., 2001, or
3
mitigation options via bioenergy production by Jørgensen et al.,

Area (million ha)

2005). In contrast, the present paper aims to synthesise the
2,5
combined effect of all these elements in the form of scenarios for
the mitigation of agricultural GHG emissions in Denmark, and to 2
explore what mitigation measures would be preferable compared
to others. We hope these scenarios, and the associated catalogue of 1,5
mitigation options, will serve as inspiration for other countries that
find themselves in a similar situation, when tackling the challenge 1
of stabilising their GHG emissions and prevent further climate
changes. 0,5

1990
1995
2000

2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030

2035
2040
2045
2050
2. Materials and methods

2.1. Estimated development for Danish agriculture

Other areas (urban, roads, forests etc.)
Information about the development in land use, fertiliser use and livestock
production in Danish agriculture for the period 1990e2010 was collected from Conventional food production
Statistics Denmark (2010). For simplicity, and in accordance with the expected Organic food production
development trends towards 2020 estimated by the AGMEMOD model (Donnellan
and Hanrahan, 2007; Hanrahan et al., 2008; Dubgaard et al., 2009), it is for the Afforestation
period 2010e2050 assumed that the food production in the form of milk, meat and
Available for other biomass production
vegetable products will not change. Moreover, based on Nielsen et al. (2009), and the
biologically feasible increases in efficiency documented by Poulsen (2008), it is
assumed, that the significant increases in livestock production efficiency, experi- Fig. 1. Distribution of the in total 4.3 million ha of Danish land use from 1990 to 2010,
enced from 1990 to 2010 will continue in the period from 2010 to 2050 (see Table 1). and the projected land use in The Reference Scenario with a “frozen policy” and no
Based on developments in actual crop yields from 1990 to 2010 (Statistics additional measures implemented from 2010 to 2050.
Denmark, 2010), and the findings by Halsnæs et al. (2007), it is assumed that the
average food and fodder crop yields will increase by 0.7 percentage point per year
between 2010 and 2050. Although this might be a conservative estimated yield
1 Livestock Unit (LU) is defined as 100 kg N ex manure store; i.e. the N left in the
increase, in the scenarios we also test the effects of lower yield increases. Further-
manure ex animal after deduction of N losses in livestock houses and manure stores
more, based on Pedersen (2004, 2006, 2009) and Halberg and Kristensen (1997),
(European Commission, 2000). Finally, the use of synthetic N fertilisers is projected
organic cash-crop yield levels are set to 60% of the conventional yields, whereas no
to decrease proportionally to the reduction in the conventionally farmed area, and to
significant difference between organic and conventional milk yields is expected.
decline when measures to increase the N fertiliser value of animal manures are
There is no significant organic pig production in Denmark.
implemented in the scenarios (Fig. 2).
On this background, Fig. 1 shows the land use history for the period 1990e2010
and the assumed land use development in Denmark 2010e2050. This reference
scenario was made under the assumption of a “frozen policy” (Dubgaard et al.,
2009), where the decrease in the total agricultural area of the period 1990e2010
is set to continue at the same rate (1900 ha yr
1 afforested, and 7000 ha yr
1
converted to urban areas, roads, etc.). Environmental policies and regulations
(Danish Ministry of Economic and Business Affairs, 2009) are also assumed to
further decrease the area farmed by 5000 ha yr
1 until 2020 (via set-aside for new
nature protection areas, constructed wetlands, etc.), to double the organically
farmed area and milk production (whereas the total farm area may be reduced, and
the total organic and conventional milk production may be sustained), and to
increase the biogas production to utilise 50% of the total slurry production in 2050.
The development in manure production is derived from the key figures of
Table 1, and the number of cattle and pigs. Other types of livestock are converted to
cattle or pig units, according to the number of livestock units they represent, where

Table 1
Expected increased livestock production efficiencies from 2010 to 2050, based on
Poulsen (2008), Nielsen et al. (2009) and own calculations (1 SFU ¼ 1 Scandinavian
Feed Unit, equals 12 MJ metabolisable energy or 1 kg barley equivalent).

2010 2050
Dairy cows Milk yield (kg cow
1 yr
1) 8900 13,600
Efficiency (kg milk SFU
1) 1.36 1.54
Nitrogen-utilisation (%) 27 30
Sows Produced piglets (sow
1 yr
1) 25.5 35.0
Efficiency (SFU piglet
1) 58 51
Piglets (7e30 kg) Efficiency (SFU piglet
1) 58 51 Fig. 2. Nitrogen fertiliser use in Danish agriculture 1990e2010 (Statistics Denmark,
Nitrogen-utilisation (%) 48 58 2010), and for the reference scenario with no additional measures implemented
Porkers (30e100 kg) Efficiency (SFU pig produced
1) 215 198 from 2010 to 2050, under the assumption of a sustained animal and vegetable
Nitrogen-utilisation (%) 42 48 production and the resulting land use of Fig. 1. The nitrogen in livestock manure is
accounted ex animal; i.e. before losses from housing and storage.
 T. Dalgaard et al. / Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203
2.2. Calculation of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions
Based on The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change methodology (IPCC,
1997), the emissions of N2O and CH4 are calculated in accordance with the official
Danish IPCC reporting (Nielsen et al., 2009). Here the Global Warming Potentials
(GWPs) are set to 310 CO2-equivalents for N2O, and 21 CO2-eq. for CH4. In the future,
these GWPs will expectedly be revised to 298 CO2-eq. for N2O and 25 CO2-eq. for
CH4, corresponding to the climate effects estimated by IPCC (2007), whereby the
estimated effects of methane emissions may increase. However, for the present
study we stick to the presently used GWP standards, and consequently, the GHG
emission results presented in this paper do not differ significantly from the official
estimates by Nielsen et al. (2009) for the period 1990e2010. In contrast, the future
projections differ since the present study assumes a higher proportion of biogas
production from slurry (50% in 2050) and emissions are linked to the projected
animal production efficiencies and fertiliser use as described above (Table 1; Fig. 2).
In addition, the net effect of agricultural land use on the carbon balance (DC) in the
form of sequestration (sinks) or emissions (sources) of C is estimated via inter- or
extrapolations of the accounts made by Gyldenkærne et al. (2007) for the period
1990e2025.
2.3. Partial effects of measures to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions
Based on literature studies and recent reviews by the Danish Ministry of Food,
Agriculture and Fisheries (2008a,b), a list of relevant measures to mitigate GHG
emissions have been selected, and the maximum possible, partial effect of each
separate measure has been quantified for the 2050 situation of the reference
scenario described above. These partial effects are described in the Results and
Discussion section together with the references behind the key figures, which may
be divided into the following two main categories (For further details see Results
section and Tables 3 and 4):
1. First, the selected measures to mitigate GHG emissions in the form of N2O, CH4
and DC via better manure and fertiliser handling (Sections 3.2.1e3.2.7), fodder
optimisation (Section 3.2.8) and optimised cropping and land use practices
(Sections 3.2.9e3.2.11) are documented, together with the connected effects on
fossil energy use.
2. Secondly, the potentials for substituting fossil energy with bioenergy produc-
tion, including the associated effects on other GHG emissions are described
(Section 3.3).
In general, the partial effects of measures in 2050 are deduced using the most
updated literature values, including the latest updated methane conversion factor
(MCF) of 17%, as recommended by IPCC (2006a,b), and the methods described below
to estimate net energy balances. In contrast the reference development (Section 2.2),
in accordance with the national reporting standards (Nielsen et al., 2009), is based
on the IPCC (1997) standards and an MCF of 10%.
2.4. Agricultural energy use and bioenergy production
Based on FAO’s definition of basic energy concepts (Hulcher, 1991), we calculate
the fossil energy balance from the direct energy used in the form of fuels, electricity,
etc. (Edirect), the indirect energy used to produce the production factors needed in
the form of fertilisers, pesticides, machinery, buildings and fodder imported (Eindir-
ect), and the bioenergy produced by agriculture (Ebioenergy):
Energy Balance ¼ Edirect þ Eindirect
Ebioenergy (1)
The factors used to account for the direct and indirect energy use are docu-
mented by Dalgaard et al. (2001), and the same methodology is used in the present
study to derive national energy balances for Danish Agriculture in 2010 and 2050.
The energy balances calculated for 2010 and 2050 include the four major bio-
energy types currently produced by Danish agriculture (Danish Energy Agency,
2009): 1) Straw for Combined Heat and Power (CHP); 2) Short Rotation Coppice
(SRC) willow for CHP; 3) biogas; and 4) biodiesel from rapeseed oil, or animal carcass
Table 2
CO2-emission factors according to Audsley (1997), and the bioenergy sources that
can substitute the related fossil energy sources.
Fossil energy Emission factor Bioenergy
source (kg CO2 GJ
1) source
Natural gas 56.9 Biogas
Diesel oil 74.0 Biofuels, slurry cooling etc.
Coal 95.0 Straw or woodchips
(from SRC or forests)
used for Combined
Heat and Power (CHP).
3195
waste. Moreover, energy harvested from agricultural land afforested in the period
2010e2050 is also included in the 2050 agricultural energy balance, whereas bio-
energy from other forests, or from organic waste utilised for biogas or other types of
energy production, is not included in the present study. Other potential sources of
renewable energy from wind, water or solar power, bioethanol etc. are not
considered. However, in the partial effects analysis of Table 4 some additional bio-
energy production options, like incineration of the fibre fraction of manures, energy
maize for biogas, or biogas from harvested nature conservation grasslands, are
included for use in the discussion and perspectives of results.
Bioenergy production yields are derived from Jørgensen et al. (2005, 2008) and
the Danish Energy Agency (2009). For instance, the estimated present-day energy
yield from SRC willow for CHP is 147 GJ ha
1 yr
1 if planted on former arable land,
compared to 60 GJ ha
1 yr
1 from extensive grasslands harvested for biogas.
According to Hedegaard et al. (2008) and the experiences from Swalöf Weibull’s
willow improvement programmes, an annual yield increase of 1.5% is realistic for
SRC willow, but for the present reference scenario development we assume a 1%
annual yield increase, corresponding to a net energy yield of 227 GJ ha
1 yr
1 in
2050.
Table 2 shows the CO2-emission factors used to convert energy production, or
bioenergy substitution of fossil energy, to the GHG effect measured in CO2-eq.
Energy for fuels and indirect energy for fodder imports are converted to CO2-eq. via
the factor for diesel fuel, whereas energy used in the form of electricity, machinery
or buildings is converted via the factor for coal, and to comply with the European
Commission’s Guidelines (Audsley, 1997) emissions from synthetic fertiliser
production is estimated via the emission factor for natural gas.
2.5. Scenarios for GHG emissions from Danish agriculture
In this paper we set out three types of scenarios in the following sequence:
1. A reference scenario for the development in agricultural GHG emissions (excl.
energy-related CO2-emissions), under the above-mentioned assumptions
about a “frozen policy” and a sustained food production 2010e2050. This
increases the area “available for other biomass production” (see Fig. 1). In the
reference scenario it is assumed that this area is managed such that the net
GHG emissions per ha are the same as the area under conventional food
production.
2. Partial scenarios for the maximum possible effect of selected, single measures
to reduce GHG-emissions compared to the reference scenario situation for
2050, and including effects of changes in energy consumption or bioenergy
production in relation to the specific measure.
3. A synthesis scenario where the combined effect of the reference development
and a plausible combined implementation of the partial measures to reduce
GHG emissions is assessed. In this scenario we assess both the energy balance
and the total GHG balance for Danish agriculture, including effects of direct and
indirect energy consumptions and the potentials for bioenergy production, and
compare the 2050 situation to the 2010 situation. Furthermore, to evaluate the
sensitivity of the GHG and energy balances to the assumed annual increase in
crop yield, we compare the “high yield” situation described above (“high yield”)
to a situation where only half of the expected yield increase is achieved in 2050
(“low yield”). In the synthesis scenario, all of the area identified as “available for
other biomass production” (Fig. 1) is planted with willow for bioenergy (SRC,
CHP), because of the high energy yield and GHG mitigation cost-effectiveness
of this option compared to other options for production of biomass energy in
Denmark (Dubgaard et al., 2009). Increases in other types of bioenergy
production in the form of straw for CHP, and increased biofuel production from
rapeseed and animal carcass waste, etc. is estimated based on Jørgensen et al.
(2008) and Danish Energy Agency (2008).
In the following sections we present the results of these three scenarios.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Reference development in greenhouse gas emissions
1990e2050
In the period from 1990 to 2010 the GHG emissions in the form
of N2O, CH4 and DC was reduced by 35% (Fig. 3), with the relatively
largest reduction from changes in the carbon pool mining (DC) from
3.3 to 0.8 Tg CO2 (
77%, especially caused by the ban on burning
straw in the fields), and smaller reductions in N2O (
43%) and CH4
(
12%) emissions. In the reference scenario from 2010 to 2050 (see
Section 2.5), the total emission is expected to further decrease by
26%, giving a total decrease from 1990 to 2050 of 48%. Again, from
2010 to 2050 the largest relative decrease is expected for DC
3196 T. Dalgaard et al. / Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203

Table 3
Partial effects of mitigation options to reduce agricultural emissions in the form of nitrous oxide (N2O), methane (CH4), net carbon storage (DC) and net reduced energy
consumption measured in CO2-equivalents (CO2-eq.). The effects are measured per livestock unit (LU), per hectare (ha) or in %-point of the maximum possible extra capacity
(extent) compared to the reference situation for 2050.

Mitigation option Partial effect Extent Total effect, Denmark 2050 (103 t CO2-eq yr
1)

N2O CH4 DC Energy

Cooling of pig slurrya 230 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 30% 11 70 0.8
10
Cover solid manure stores
Pig manure 225 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 100% 1.4 3.6 0.2 0
Cattle manure 100 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 100% 0.6 3.0 0.1 0
Cover slurry tanksb
Pig manure 200 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 90% 8.3 161 0 0
Cattle manure 165 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 90% 5.5 113 0 0
Separationb
Pig manure 330 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 50% 0 161 1.8
5.8
Cattle manure 285 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 50% 0 117 1.3
5.3
Acidificationb
Pig manure 770 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 50% 4.6 358 2.0 0
Cattle manure 645 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 50% 4.0 251 1.4 0
Injection in soilsb
Pig manure 18 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 75% 15.3 0 0 0
Cattle manure 17 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 75% 12.4 0 0 0
Nitrification inhibitors
Synthetic NH3eN
60% N2O 100% 292 0
Fodder optimization
Dairy cows
15% CH4 100% 239 0
Young cattle
10% CH4 100% 40 0
Reduced tillage 300,000 ha
Energy consumption 40 kg CO2 ha
1 12
Soil carbon 800 kg CO2 ha
1 240
Catch crops 315,000 ha 0
Nitrous oxide 185 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 58
Soil carbon 733 kg CO2 ha
1 231
Intermediate crops 525,000 ha 0
Nitrous oxide 93 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 49
Soil carbon 367 kg CO2 ha
1 193
Restoration of cultivated wetland soils
Nitrous oxide 2675 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 30,000 ha 80 c

Methane
2100 kg CO2-eq. ha
1
63

Soil carbon 10,267 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 308
a
Active cooling via pipes in slurry channels; only applied for sows and piglets.
b
It is assumed that less than 4% of the livestock manure in 2050 is stored as solid manure, and the rest in the form of slurry.
c
It is assumed, that the energy use for cropping operations is reduced proportional to the area restored (see also Table 6).

Table 4
Partial effects of bioenergy production options to reduce agricultural emissions in the form of nitrous oxide (N2O), methane (CH4), net carbon storage (DC), and net energy
production measured in CO2-equivalents (CO2-eq.), in 2050. The effects are measured per livestock unit (LU), per hectare (ha) or in %-point of a plausible extra extent compared
to the reference situation.

Bioenergy type Partial effect Extent Total effect, Denmark 2050 (103 t CO2-eq yr
1)

N2O CH4 DC Energy

Biogas treatmenta
Pig manure 645 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 50% 65 172
47 117
Cattle manure 590 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 50% 56 126
37 90
Biogas from harvested nature 1373 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 75,000 ha
45 b
0 148
protection grasslands
Biogas from energy maize 5310 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 100,000 ha
232 b
0 763
Short rotation coppice willowc 12,700 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 500,000 ha 135 b
785 5435
Straw for CHPc 1987 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 450,000 ha 63 b

294 894
Oilseeds for fueld 5700 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 30,000 ha 0 0 0 171
Afforestation 110,000 ha
Energy production 1350 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 150
Nitrous oxide 640 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 70
Carbon in soil, wood etc. 104 kg CO2-eq. ha
1 1100
Incineration, fibre fractiona

1
Pig manure 290 kg CO2-eq. LU 50%
1.6 9.0
116 250
Cattle manure 415 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 50%
1.1 6.1
144 313
a
It is assumed, that less than 4% of the livestock manure in 2050 is stored as solid manure, and the rest in the form of slurry.
b
Included in the nitrous oxide emissions component.
c
Reductions in N2O emissions are mainly due to fixation of N in the soil, and the reduced N-fertilisation compared to the alternative practices.
d
Only effects from energy production; the other emissions are assumed equal for such crops grown for energy and for food.

18
16
Carbon dioxide equivalents (Tg)
14
12
10
8 or leca nuts (Danish Energy Agency, 2009). A surface crust may
6
4 (IPCC, 2006a,b). Clemens et al. (2006) found that an additional solid
2 for methane oxidation has been documented in surface crusts from
0 Petersen, 2005) that may explain this effect. The effect of a solid
1990 2000 2010 2020
year
Methane Nitrous oxide
Fig. 3. Estimated development in GHG emissions in the form of CH4, N2O and carbon
sources minus sinks (DC) for Danish agriculture 1990e2010, and for the reference
scenario 2010e2050.
(
64%), whereas the largest nominal reduction is for N2O, which is
reduced from 6.3 to 5.2 Tg CO2 (
20%). In comparison, the CH4
emissions are reduced relatively more (
30%), due in particular to
the increased use of slurry for biogas.
3.2. Partial effects of greenhouse gas mitigation options
An overview of the derived partial effects of the selected
measures to further reduce GHG emissions is presented in Table 3,
which also includes estimates for the maximum total effect of each
separate mitigation option, as compared to the reference situation
in 2050 (i.e. the effect of the maximum possible, partial imple-
mentation of the particular measure; see also Dalgaard et al., 2010).
In the following sections the scientific basis behind each of these
mitigation options are described and discussed in more detail:
3.2.1. Cooling of pig slurry
Sommer et al. (2004) reported a 31% reduction of CH4 emissions
from livestock houses and manure stores if slurry channels were
cooled to 10  C, a strategy originally developed for NH3 mitigation. In
practice cooling below 15  C is not cost-effective, and this will reduce
the overall CH4 mitigation effect to 18%. Other effects of cooling
include an increase in the N-value of the manure ex store, and energy
use for the cooling (Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries,
2008a). The overall net effect of the cooling measure is estimated to be
230 kg CO2-eq. LU
1. Cattle houses are naturally ventilated and
unheated in Denmark; for cattle, active cooling of slurry channels is
therefore not a cost-effective option (Ministry of the Environment,
2009). Cooling is mainly an option where excess heat from the cool-
ing unit can be utilised, i.e. for heating the housing of sows and piglets.
3.2.2. Covering solid manure stores
Depending on wetness and compaction, CH4 and N2O may be
emitted during storage of solid manure, and total N- and C-losses can
be substantial (Petersen et al., 1998). These losses, and the derived
CH4 and N2O emissions, can almost be eliminated with airtight
coverage during storage (Hansen et al., 2006; Chadwick, 2005). Based
on the results of Hansen et al. (2006) it is estimated that coverage of
T. Dalgaard et al. / Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203 3197
heaps with solid manure from pigs and cattle may reduce GHG
emissions by 226 and 101 kg CO2-eq. LU
1, respectively. Coverage of
solid manure is already mandatory in Denmark, unless the stack
receives manure additions daily. In practice this is rarely done.
3.2.3. Covering slurry tanks
According to Danish legislation slurry tanks must be covered to
reduce NH3 losses and odour nuisance, and in most cases this is
achieved by a natural crust or an artificial crust from chopped straw
reduce CH4 emissions (Sommer et al., 2000; Amon et al., 2006), and
currently a 40% reduction is assumed in the IPCC methodology
cover over slurry tanks further reduced CH4 emissions. A potential
both cattle and pig slurry stores (Petersen et al., 2005; Ambus and
2030 2040 2050 cover on slurry stores on N2O emissions is not known, but is
assumed here to be negligible. In accordance with Amon et al.
(2006) the reduction of CH4 emissions during storage of slurry by
use of a cover with passive ventilation is estimated at 15%, corre-
Net carbon source
sponding to 199 and 165 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 for pig and cattle slurry,
respectively. These estimates also include the indirect effect on N2O
emissions from an estimated reduction of NH3 losses of around
2e3% (Mikkelsen et al., 2006), even though this effect is very
uncertain and dependent on a corresponding reduction in the total
N fertiliser amount distributed by the farmer.
3.2.4. Separation of slurry into a solid and a liquid fraction
For slurry separation, the net GHG reduction, including effects on
soil C storage and energy use, was estimated by Sommer et al.
(2009), who reported a reduction of 16% and 25%, respectively,
from pigs and cattle slurry. This effect is due to a reduction of CH4
emissions during storage. No net effect on N2O emissions in the field
were expected, because the increased N-value of the thin fraction
after separation will be counterbalanced by a smaller N-value of the
solid fraction (Sørensen et al., 2004). A total effect of separation on
CH4 and N2O emissions from cattle slurry during storage and after
field application of 37% was reported by Amon et al. (2006).
However, in their study effects on soil C storage or energy use was
not included. For the present paper the total GHG effect of separa-
tion is estimated at 330 and 284 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 for pig and cattle
slurry respectively. These estimates assume that separation is
combined with coverage of the fibre fraction during storage, as this
may otherwise lead to large N2O emissions (Hansen et al., 2006).
3.2.5. Acidification of slurry
A pilot study of emissions from livestock houses has indicated
a considerable reduction (possibly more than 50%) of CH4 and N2O
emissions with a commercial system for acidification of the slurry
using sulphuric acid (Danish Agricultural Advisory Service, 2004).
These preliminary observations of inhibitory effects have been
confirmed in lab-scale and pilot-scale storage experiments with
both pig and cattle slurry (Berg et al., 2006; Ottosen et al., 2009).
Indeed, feeding strategies lowering the pH of the slurry may also
affect methanogenesis (Eriksen et al., 2010). The effect of acidifica-
tion on N2O emissions after field application is assumed to be small.
Based on the data available the reduction of CH4 emissions was set
to 60%, whereby the total GHG effect of acidification is estimated to
769 and 644 kg CO2-eq. LU
1 from pig and cattle slurry respectively.
3.2.6. Field application of slurry by direct injection
Slurry spreading by direct injection reduces the NH3 loss
compared to trail-hose application and broadcast spreading, which is
not permitted in Denmark (Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and
3198 T. Dalgaard et al. / Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203
Fisheries, 2008a). Mikkelsen et al. (2006) estimated that the higher N
fertiliser value of the slurry with direct injection compensated for the
extra energy use, resulting in an effect of 18 and 17 kg CO2-eq. LU
1,
with application of pig and cattle slurry respectively.
3.2.7. Nitrification inhibitors in synthetic fertilizers
Wolt (2004) and Clough et al. (2007) reported that nitrification
inhibitors were able to reduce the risk for N2O emissions from the
ammonia equivalents of synthetic fertilisers by 60%; this value is
used here. Some of the relatively few field experiments with
nitrification inhibitors conducted in Denmark have shown
improved crop yields (Pedersen, 2004, 2006), but this effect and
any associated reduction of nitrate leaching or N2O emissions, are
not included in the present study.
3.2.8. Fodder optimization
According to Russell et al. (2007) and Weisbjerg et al. (2005) CH4
emissions from dairy cows may be reduced by 15e20% via the
optimisation of feed rations, without significant effects on
production or animal health. This effect can be achieved by
adjusting the type of carbohydrates and the proportion of fat and
roughage in the feed ration. Young cattle (especially heifers) are
traditionally fed a more fibre rich diet, and the potential for
reducing CH4 emissions from this livestock category is estimated to
be lower, i.e. around 10% (Weisbjerg et al., 2005).
3.2.9. Reduced tillage
Reduced tillage (without ploughing) reduces the fuel
consumption and related CO2-emissions by about 30e64% (Olesen
et al., 2005). For the reduced-tillage practices presently used in
Denmark this corresponds to an average emission reduction of
40 kg CO2 ha
1 yr
1. Moreover it may lead to an increased soil C
storage, although there may be a risk of higher N2O emissions.
However, given the light-textured and well-drained soils typical for
Danish agriculture, this latter effect can be neglected (Rochette,
2008). Thus, based on figures from the Danish Ministry of Food,
Agriculture and Fisheries (2008a) and Chatskikh et al. (2008), the
total effect on reduced soil tillage is estimated here to be
840 kg CO2 ha
1 yr
1.
3.2.10. Catch crops and intermediate crops
Olesen et al. (2004) and Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture
and Fisheries (2008a) estimated that a catch crop, i.e. the growth
of undersown ryegrass between autumn harvest of the main crop
and spring sowing, will reduce N2O emissions by an amount cor-
responding to 185 kg CO2-eq ha
1 yr
1. In addition, a positive effect
on soil C storage corresponding to 733 kg CO2 ha
1 yr
1 was esti-
mated. Intermediate crops represent another option, where for
example Brassica spp. is established between an early autumn
harvest and late autumn sowing. The establishment of interme-
diate and catch crops are made without extra ploughing, and with
no or only little soil tillage. Therefore, the extra energy use induced
is very small compared to the total energy use (Dalgaard et al.,
2001), and is not included in Table 3. According to Thomsen et al.
(2008), the effect of such intermediate crops is about half that for
the above-mentioned catch crop; this value is used here.
3.2.11. Restoration of cultivated wetland soils
This measure involves the destruction of drainage systems of
soils previously reclaimed from wetlands, plus the cessation of
cultivation and fertilisation on these areas; arable rotations are
replaced by permanent grasslands. The resultant reduction in the
oxidation of soil organic matter, plus the higher input of C to the soil
from the grass compared to the arable crops is expected to result in
an increased accumulation of soil C of 300e500 kg C ha
1 yr
1.
This is compared to the current situation, where there is estimated
to be a significant net soil C mining (Danish Ministry of Food,
Agriculture and Fisheries, 2008a). With the reestablishment of
wetlands, there is decreased denitrification because the soils is no
longer cultivated and fertilised, and a risk of N2O emissions, which
in this study is estimated via the IPCC (2006b) default methodology
for indirect emissions. Moreover, the CH4-emmissions are
increased, whereas the energy use for cropping operations is
reduced proportional to the area restored.
3.3. Partial effects of bioenergy production options
The GHG effects of selected options for bioenergy production are
summarised in Table 4, and described below:
3.3.1. Biogas from manure or harvested crops
The GHG effects of biogas production from manure or harvested
crops are based on reviews by the Danish Ministry of Food,
Agriculture and Fisheries (2008a), Jørgensen et al. (2008),
Sommer et al. (2002), Sommer and Husted (1995). The positive
effect of manure treatment is significant, and further improve-
ments in the biogas yields per kg of slurry of about 20%-point may
be expected towards 2050, compared to a present efficiency of
around 50% (Jørgensen et al., 2008). However, such higher biogas
yields per kg of slurry will also reduce the C recycled to fields and
accumulated in soils, thereby reducing the net GHG effect. There-
fore, all the present calculations are based on a net efficiency of 50%.
The net GHG effect of crops harvested for biogas is relatively small
and uncertain, and very dependent on local conditions, the derived
soil carbon balance, and related losses of other GHGs. Especially
N2O from fertilisation, for example of maize harvested for biogas,
may reduce the net GHG mitigation effect (Danish Ministry of Food,
Agriculture and Fisheries, 2008a).
3.3.2. Straw, short rotation coppice, or woodchips from afforested
land for CHP
In Denmark, straw and woodchips from SRC willow or afforested
land areas are used for CHP, and the energy yields have been
published by the Danish Energy Agency (2009) and Jørgensen et al.
(2008). The GHG effect of burning rather than incorporating the
straw, is based on figures by Christensen (2002) and Danish
Ministry of Food Agriculture and Fisheries (2008a,b). Based on
Polglase et al. (2000), Post and Kwon (2000), it is concluded that
the C sequestration from the woody plants mainly takes place in
the upper soil-layer and in form of the tree biomass, whereas the
sequestration in deeper soil layers is insignificant (Paul et al., 2003).
From this, and in accordance with the Danish Ministry of Food
Agriculture and Fisheries (2008a), the GHG effect estimates of
Table 4 are derived. It should be noted that these DC estimates are
adapted to Danish conditions, and are significantly higher than the
estimates calculated according to IPCC (2006b).
3.3.3. Oilseeds for fuel
Today, oilseed rape is the most widespread energy crop in
Denmark (Statistics Denmark, 2010). For the present study the
energy and GHG balance for this production are based on standard
values for this crop from Olesen et al. (2001), Jørgensen et al. (2008)
and the Danish Ministry of Food Agriculture and Fisheries (2008a).
In addition, some biodiesel is produced from livestock carcasses
(Danish Energy Agency, 2009), which was not separated from the
value of fuels derived from rapeseed oil.
3.3.4. Incineration of the manure fibre fraction
Sommer et al. (2009) reported significant potentials for GHG
mitigation via this measure. However, based on Olesen and
 T. Dalgaard et al. / Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203 3199

Sommer (2005) and Wood and Cowie (2004) it can be concluded scenario. Here all the area “available for other biomass” production
that the net GHG effect of incinerating the fibre fraction of manure than food production is planted with SRC willow for CHP, and with
after slurry separation are uncertain. In addition, the interactions the expected increased (“high”) crop yields. Note that the increased
with other measures are uncertain, mainly because of the signifi- utilisation of biogas and straw for CHP leads to a net reduction of soil
cant effects on soil C pools and thereby possibly a reduction of the C, whereas SRC willow and afforestation leads to a net accumula-
long-term soil fertility, which is already critically low in parts of tion. However, in addition to the direct bioenergy CO2-mitigation
Denmark (Schjønning et al., 2009). Moreover, the major GHG effect of the bioenergy mitigation measures, they generally also lead
benefit from incineration of the fibre fraction of manure is via the to a significant indirect GHG effect via a net reduction of N2O, CH4
substitution of fossil fuels, which may be of limited value in a future and soil C stock changes.
fossil free society. Therefore this measure is not included in the Measured in petajoules (1 PJ ¼ 1015 J), Table 6 shows the esti-
following synthesis scenarios. mated energy balance for Danish agriculture in 2010, and for the
2050 reference scenario with the expected yield increase of Table 5
3.4. Synthesis scenario for a CO2-neutral Danish agriculture by (“high yield”), as well as a situation where only half of the expected
2050 increase in crop yields is realized (“low yield”). In the low yield
situation, the area “available for other biomass”, and the resulting
The present paper does not include an assessment of the bioenergy production from SRC willow planted in 2050, is signifi-
economic costs or benefits associated with the implementation of cantly lower, but the total energy balance is still shifted from
the GHG-measures listed. However, based on previous farm budget negative (
41 PJ) in 2010 to a positive energy balance of between
and welfare economic accounts made by Dubgaard et al. (2009), 53 PJ and 124 PJ in 2050. The bioenergy production from straw for
and the Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries CHP and from biogas is expected to more than double, so that straw
(2008a,b) discussion of practical possibilities for the combined is collected from an additional 450,000 ha in 2050 compared to
implementation of the measures listed, we define a synthesis 2010, and 85% of all manures is used for biogas production in 2050.
scenario. In this scenario, the selected partial measures were all In contrast, the amount of rapeseed and animal carcass waste, etc.
implemented with 75% of the maximum possible effects shown in used for biofuels is only expected to increase by around 50% (Danish
Tables 3 and 4, representing a simple summary of the maximum Energy Agency, 2008), and the bioenergy contribution from affor-
plausible combined implementation of the measures defined. ested, former agricultural areas is also small compared to the other
Table 5 shows that such a combined 75% implementation may bioenergy sources implemented. The direct and indirect energy use
(compared to the reference situation) almost halve the total 2050 is reduced from 2010 to 2050 as a result of the reduced agricultural
emission of N2O, CH4 and C stock changes (DC) in the synthesis area, the reduced use of synthetic fertilisers, and the increased
production efficiency, where also the livestock numbers and the
fodder imports can be reduced, whilst total food production is
Table 5 sustained. However, the energy input needed for the low and high
Greenhouse gas emissions in the form of changed N2O, CH4 emissions and net soil
yield scenarios for 2050 does not differ significantly, because the
carbon stock changes (DC) in the synthesis scenario with a 75% effect of the selected
partial measures from Table 3 and Table 4, compared to the reference scenario with livestock numbers and the total area farmed are the same in the
no additional measures implemented in 2050. All the measures are implemented two situations.
according to the predicted land use of Fig. 1, in a situation where all the area Finally, the total GHG balance for Danish agriculture in 2010 is
“available for other biomass production” is grown with Short Rotation Coppice (SRC) summarized (Table 7), indicating that the inclusion of energy
willow and used for Combined Heat and Power (CHP).
related CO2-emissions adds a net emission of around 2.9 Tg CO2-eq.
(Tg CO2-eq.) N2O CH4 DC Total to the 10.6 Tg CO2-eq. GHG emissions in the form of N2O, CH4 and C
Reference scenario 2050: 2.75 5.25 0.46 8.45 stock changes (DC) in the reference scenario (Fig. 3). Moreover,
Table 8 summarizes the situation in 2050, where the reference
Manure and fertiliser measures:
scenario will lead to a reduction of the GHG emissions to
Cooling of slurry
0.01
0.05 0.00
0.06
Cover manure stores
0.01
0.21 0.00
0.22
Manure separation
0.00
0.21 0.00
0.21
Acidification of slurry
0.01
0.46 0.00
0.47 Table 6
Soil injection of slurry
0.02 0.00 0.00
0.02 Estimated fossil energy balance for Danish agriculture 2010, and for the 2050
Nitrification inhibitors
0.22 0.00 0.00
0.22 synthesis scenario with the expected high yield increase (“high yield”), and with
a “low yield” situation where only half of the expected increase in crop yields are
Fodder optimisation measures: realized.
Optimized cattle feeding 0.00
0.21 0.00
0.21
(PJ) 2010 2050

Cropping and land use measures: Low yield High yield

Reduced tillage 0.00 0.00
0.18
0.18 Direct energy use:
Cover crops (catch þ intermediate crops)
0.08 0.00
0.32
0.40 Fuels
20
19
19
Restoration of cultivated wetland soils
0.06 þ0.05
0.23
0.24 Electricity
6
5
5
(stopped drainage and harvest) Indirect energy use:
Fertilisers and pesticides
10
8
8
Bioenergy measures: Machinery
4
4
4
Biogas from slurrya
0.09
0.22 þ0.06
0.25 Buildings
6
5
5
Biogas from harvested nature areas
0.03 0.00 0.00
0.03 Fodder import
19
16
16
SRC willow
0.10 0.00
0.59
0.69 Bioenergy production:
Straw for CHP
0.05 0.00 þ0.22 þ0.17 Straw for CHP 19 40 40
Oilseeds for fuel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Afforestation 2 2
Afforestation
0.05 0.00
0.83
0.88 SRC willow for CHP 1 37 109
Biogas 3 28 28
Balance after reduction measures: 2.01 3.93
1.41 4.54 Biofuels 2 3 3
a
50% included in the 2050 reference scenario, plus 0.7  50%-point ¼ 35%-point
Energy balance
41 53 124
included here.
3200 T. Dalgaard et al. / Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203

Table 7 reduce both nutrient pollution and GHG emissions from agricul-
Total greenhouse gas (GHG) balance for Danish Agriculture 2010 including the GHG ture. However, the effects of the measures described depend
emissions in the form of CH4, N2O and carbon sources minus sinks (DC) from Fig. 3,
the fossil energy related CO2-emissions, and the CO2-mitigation from the present
strongly on the technological development assumed (Table 1) and,
bioenergy production (see Tables 2 and 6). as discussed by Olesen et al. (2010) and Halsnæs et al. (2007), on
whether the expected increases in the agricultural production can
GHG emission (Tg CO2-eq.)
be achieved. Other developments in food production will also affect
Reference situation:
the scope for mitigating GHG emissions via, for example, increased
CH4, N2O and DC emissions: 10.6
bioenergy crop production, and vice versa. Especially an increased
Fossil energy use: livestock production (Steinfeld et al., 2006) and consumption of
CO2 from direct energy use 2.0 meat (Goodland and Anhang, 2009) may be problematic, but is not
CO2 from indirect energy use 3.0 included in the present study. One of the major problems here is,
that a decreased production of animal products in Denmark may
Bioenergy GHG mitigation:
lead to increased production elsewhere in The World, where the
Straw for CHP
1.8
SRC willow for CHP
0.1 efficiency in the animal production is typically lower, and maybe
Biogas
0.2 related with higher GHG emissions per product produced. We
Biofuels
0.1 recommend further studies within this area. In line with the
development of organic farming and other more extensive
Total GHG balance: 13.5
production systems, there are also a number of challenges to be
tackled (Halberg et al., 2006). This include both new opportunities
for development of more sustainable production systems with
8.4 Tg CO2-eq. in the form of N2O, CH4 and DC, and a possible a higher C sequestration capacity (Johnson et al., 2007; Dalgaard
further reduction from mitigation options in the synthesis scenario, et al., 2006), and lower net fossil energy consumption and GHG
leading to an emission of between 4.4 and 5.3 Tg CO2-eq., in the emissions (Dalgaard et al., 2001, 2002). Finally, it must be empha-
high and the low yield situation respectively. sized that the scenarios of the present paper does not evaluate the
economic costs and cost-efficiency of the different measures, which
in combination with the future political framework will be the main
4. General discussion
drivers of the actual developments to be expected (Dubgaard et al.,
2009).
The estimated development in GHG emissions (Fig. 3) showed
A wide range of mitigation options for manure management
relatively high reductions from 1990 to 2000. This has two main
were considered in this study, most of them with reference to
reasons. Firstly, a diverse range of agri-environmental regulations
recent studies conducted under Danish conditions. Greenhouse gas
and changes in farming practices have impacted GHG emissions.
emissions from manure can vary considerably depending on
These include the 1990 ban on the burning of straw in the fields, the
manure composition and local climatic conditions, and clearly the
reduced liming of fields, and the reduction of soil C mining due to
GHG mitigation potential depends on the representativeness of
increased planting of hedgerows and other woody plants on former
both reference scenario and effect of each measure. Hence, there is
agricultural soils (Gyldenkærne et al., 2007). Secondly, the Danish
a continued need for documentation of environmental technolo-
action plans implemented to reduce nutrient losses from agricul-
gies and management strategies under a variety of conditions.
ture to the aquatic environment have significantly reduced the N
Cooling of slurry during in-house storage was considered as
losses from agriculture in the period (Kronvang et al., 2008; Hansen
a strategy to reduce emissions. An alternative strategy would have
et al., 2011), and thus GHG emissions (Erisman et al., 2007). The
been frequent emptying and cleaning of slurry channels
profound effect of these action plans in reducing the use of
(Häussermann et al., 2006), but in both cases the effect will depend
synthetic N fertilisers by 40% while simultaneously increasing the
on retention time and outside storage temperature (Sommer et al.,
crop and livestock production (Dalgaard and Kyllingsbæk, 2003) is
2009). The reduction in emissions from solid manure assumed
an excellent example of the large potential previously identified by
during storage was also observed by Chadwick (2005) who
Johnson et al. (2007) for improved management practices in
combined compaction with an airtight cover. A reduction of CH4
agriculture.
emissions may be assumed in the presence of a surface crust (IPCC,
There is no doubt that the mitigation measures discussed and
2006a; VanderZaag et al., 2009). This was not considered as
listed in the present paper (Table 3, Table 4) may help to further
a mitigation option in the present study since nearly all slurry
stores in Denmark already have a crust (Danish Energy Agency,
Table 8 2009). The assumed CH4 mitigation of a solid cover on slurry
Estimated GHG emissions in the form of CH4, N2O and carbon sources minus sinks stores refers to limited empirical evidence, but a stimulation of
(DC) for the 2050 synthesis scenario, with the bioenergy production of Table 6, and microbial CH4 oxidation in the crust is likely to occur as a result of
a 75% implementation of the partial measures to mitigate GHG emissions of Table 5
elevated headspace CH4 concentrations (Husted, 1994; VanderZaag
(compared to the reference scenario with no additional measures implemented in
2050). et al., 2010). Finally, slurry acidification was adopted as a CH4
mitigation option based on consistent effects observed during
Low yield High yield
storage of both cattle and pig slurry under laboratory and pilot-
(Tg CO2-eq.) (Tg CO2-eq.)
scale storage conditions, which are currently being prepared for
Reference scenario: 8.45 8.45
publication.
Mitigation options 2050:
The current scope for bioenergy production (Table 6) is esti-
Manure and fertiliser measures
1.20
1.20 mated on the basis of a maximum implementation of SRC willow
Fodder optimisation measures
0.21
0.21 for CHP, which is expected to be an effective measure with respect
Cropping and land use measures
0.94
0.82 to both energy production (Jørgensen et al., 2008), GHG mitigation
Bioenergy measures
1.27
1.68
(Olesen et al., 2010) and costs (Dubgaard et al., 2009). It is also
Balance after mitigation options: 4.83 4.54
expected to create other environmental benefits such as reduced
nitrate leaching and thus reduced eutrophication (Jørgensen et al.,
 T. Dalgaard et al. / Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203
2005). So far, the uptake of willow by Danish farmers is rather
limited, and ongoing evaluations of commercial results are expec-
ted to show if better performance can be achieved than in Sweden,
where commercial willow yields have been much lower than
expected (Mola-Yudego and Aronsson, 2008). However, the higher
precipitation in Denmark, and focus on optimal agricultural
management (in contrasts to the lack of fertilisation of the willow
by Mola-Yudego and Aronsson, 2008), are expected to ensure
higher yields in Denmark (Skøtt, 2009). The yields of alternative
bioenergy options will, in general, be lower. For example maize
produced for biogas conversion will result in lower energy yields,
with an estimated energy balance for Danish agriculture of
18e20 PJ for low and high crop yield increases, respectively,
compared to the energy balance of 53e124 PJ for short SRC willow
for CHP (Table 6). Moreover, the GHG balance will be improved by
a build-up of soil C with willow production (Grelle et al., 2007), in
contrast to a reduction of soil C, and a loss of methane from the
maize fermentation and combustion process when bioenergy is
based on whole-crop maize production for biogas (Danish Ministry
of Food Agriculture and Fisheries, 2008a).
The future utilisation of crops in biorefineries, for example to
produce bioethanol, may provide a useful source of biofuel for the
transport sector, but will reduce GHG emissions to a much lower
extent than CHP; CHP is a very cost-efficient process to reduce GHG
emissions, as long as there is a market for the heat (Hedegaard
et al., 2008). Even though there are major potentials for new
economic developments and technological breakthroughs in these
new bioenergy conversion technologies, the overall GHG effects are
uncertain (Danish Advisory Committee for Research in Food and
Agriculture, 2006) and are not considered in the present study.
5. Conclusions
In summary, the results indicate that there is a significant
potential for reducing the GHG emissions and energy use within
Danish agriculture. From 1990 to 2010 the total emissions in the
form of N2O, CH4 and DC were reduced by 35%, and in the period
towards 2050 a further reduction of more than 50% compared to
the 2010 situation may be realistic. In addition, there may be
a potential for a four to seven-fold increase of the bioenergy
production and a resulting positive energy balance from agricul-
ture. With a sustained food production, and the assumed
improvements in agricultural production efficiency, we therefore
conclude that it is possible to achieve an agricultural production
that substantially reduces the GHG emissions by 50e70% and even
delivers surplus bioenergy for use in other sectors. Especially, there
are large potentials for GHG-emission reductions via optimised
manure and fertiliser handling (e.g. slurry systems with coverage of
stores, cooling, and acidification), cattle feeding practices (e.g.
optimised fat and roughage rations), and changed land use (e.g.
restoration of cultivated wetland soils, and more cover crops).
Finally, afforestation and bioenergy production from e.g. SRC wil-
low and biogas are identified, effective measures to mitigate the net
GHG emission. While the calculated effects of management
changes and bioenergy production potentials rest on many
assumptions, we hope that the study may serve as inspiration for
the achievement of the official Danish vision for a society inde-
pendent of fossil fuels by 2050, and for similar visions of a global
society where GHG emissions are stabilised and fossil fuels
conserved for the benefit of future generations.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank The Danish Ministry of Food,
Agriculture and Fisheries and The Danish Climate Commission for
3201
initialising our literature review, being the central background
material for the present publication. Moreover, we are grateful to
The International Centre for Research in Organic Food Systems
(ICROFS) for the funding of related research projects and to the
European integrated research project NitroEurope (www.
NitroEurope.eu) for the Open Science Conference initiative and
the present special issue publication.
References
Ambus, P., Petersen, S.O., 2005. Oxidation of 13C-labeled methane in surface crusts
of pig- and cattle slurry. Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies 41,
125e133.
Amon, B., Kryvoruchko, V., Amon, T., Zechmeister-Boltenstern, S., 2006. Methane,
nitrous oxide and ammonia emissions during storage and after application of
dairy cattle slurry and influence of slurry treatment. Agriculture, Ecosystems &
Environment 112, 153e162.
Audsley, E. (Ed.), 1997. Harmonisation of Environmental Life Cycle Assessment for
Agriculture. European Commission DG Agriculture, Brussels Final Report from
Consorted Action AIR3-CT94-2028.
Berg, W., Brunsch, R., Pazsiczki, I., 2006. Greenhouse gas emissions from covered
slurry compared with uncovered during storage. Agriculture, Ecosystems &
Environment 112, 129e134.
Chadwick, D.R., 2005. Emissions of ammonia, nitrous oxide and methane from
cattle manure heaps: effect of compaction and covering. Atmospheric Envi-
ronment 39, 787e799.
Chatskikh, D., Olesen, J.E., Hansen, E.M., Elsgaard, L., Petersen, B.M., 2008. Effects of
reduced tillage on net greenhouse gas fluxes from loamy sand soil under winter
crops in Denmark. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 128, 117e126.
Christensen, B.T. (Ed.), 2002. Biomass for Energy and Consequences for Soil Carbon
In Danish: Biomasseudtag til energiformål e konsekvenser for jordens kul-
stofbalance i land- og skovbrug. Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Aarhus DJF
report 72, Markbrug.
Clemens, J., Trimborn, M., Weiland, P., Amon, B., 2006. Mitigation of greenhouse gas
emissions by anaerobic digestion of cattle slurry. Agriculture, Ecosystems &
Environment 112, 171e177.
Clough, T.J., Di, H.J., Cameron, K.C., Sherlock, R.R., Metherell, A.K., Clark, H., Rys, G.,
2007. Accounting for the utilization of a N2O mitigation tool in the IPCC
inventory methodology for agricultural soils. Nutrient Cycling in Agro-
ecosystems 78, 1e14.
Dalgaard, T., Jørgensen, U., Petersen, S.O., Pedersen, B.M., Kristensen, T.,
Hermansen, J.E., Hutchings, N., 2010. Landbrugets drivhusgasemissioner og
bioenergiproduktionen i Danmark 1990e2050, Report for the Danish Climate
Commission, Copenhagen. 55 p.
Dalgaard, T., Jørgensen, U., Olesen, J.E., Jensen, E.S., Kristensen, E.S., 2006. Looking at
biofuels and bioenergy. Science 312, 1743. Letter to Science.
Dalgaard, T., Kyllingsbæk, A., 2003. Developments in the nitrogen surplus and the
fossil energy use in Danish Agriculture during the 20th century. In: Usó, J.L.,
Patten, B.C., Brebbia, C.A. (Eds.), Advances in Ecological Sciences, vol. 18. WIT
Press, Southampton, UK, ISBN 1-85312-974-7, pp. 669e678.
Dalgaard, T., Halberg, N., Fenger, J., 2002. Can organic farming help to reduce
national energy consumption and emissions of greenhouse gasses in Denmark?
In: van Lerland, E.C., Lansink, A.O. (Eds.), Economics of Sustainable Energy in
Agriculture Economy and Environment, vol. 24. Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Dordrecht, The Netherlands, ISBN 1-4020-0785-X, pp. 191e204.
Dalgaard, T., Halberg, N., Porter, J.R., 2001. A model for fossil energy use in Danish
agriculture used to compare organic and conventional farming. Agriculture,
Ecosystems & Environment 87 (1), 51e65.
Dämmgen, U., Hutchings, N.J., 2008. Emissions of gaseous nitrogen species from
manure management: a new approach. Environmental Pollution 154 (3),
488e497.
Danish Advisory Committee for Research in Food and Agriculture, 2006. Economic
Growth and a Clean Environment e a New Biotechnological Research Strategy.
(In Danish: Værditilvækst og bedre miljø e en bioteknologisk forskningsstrategi
for nonfood og foder). Det Rådgivende Udvalg for Fødevareforskning. Dir-
ektoratet for FødevareErhverv, København, ISBN 87-91791-71-5. 132.
Danish Agricultural Advisory Service, 2004. Emissions from Cattle Housing. (In
Danish: Emission af ammoniak og drivhusgasser fra naturligt ventilerede
kvægstalde). Farmtest e Kvæg nr. 21. Dansk Landbrugsrådgivning, Skejby, 56 p.
Danish Energy Agency, 2009. Energy Statistics 2008. Danish Energy Agency,
Copenhagen. www.ens.dk, 60 p.
Danish Energy Agency, 2008. Prognosis for Danish Energy Consumption. (In Danish:
Fremskrivning af Danmarks energiforbrug og udledning af drivhusgasser frem
til 2025). Report. The Danish Energy Agency, Copenhagen, ISBN 978-87-7844-
740-1, 46 p.
Danish Ministry of Economic and Business Affairs, 2009. Green growth political
agreement. In Danish: Aftale om Grøn Vækst. June 16, 2009. http://www.oem.
dk/graphics/oem/nyheder/Pressemeddelelser%202009/Gr%F8n%20V%E6kst-
aftale_final.pdf. Økonomi og Erhvervsministeriet, Copenhagen.
Danish Ministry of the Environment, 2009. Cooling of Slurry in Swine Buildings.
Best Available Technology Report 19 May 2009, 9 pp. (in Danish).
3202 T. Dalgaard et al. / Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203
Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, 2008a. Agriculture and Climate.
(In Danish: Landbrug og klima. Analyse af landbrugets virkemidler til reduktion
af drivhusgasser og de økonomiske konsekvenser). Report. Danish Ministry of
Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, Copenhagen, ISBN 978-87-7083-291-5,
146 p.
Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, 2008b. The Soil e a Scarce
Resource. (In Danish: Jorden e en knap resource. Fødevareministeriet rapport
om samspillet mellem fødevarer, foder og bioenergi). Report. Danish Ministry of
Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, Copenhagen, ISBN 978-87-92285-69-0, 182 p.
Donnellan, T., Hanrahan, K., 2007. Impact Analysis of the CAP Reform on Main
Agricultural Commodities. EOP Report. Teagasc-Rural Economy Research Centre,
Athenry, Co, Galway. www.teagasc.ie/research/reports/ruraldevelopment/5530/
eopr-5530.pdf, 82 p.
Dubgaard, A., Nissen, C.J., Jespersen, H.L., Gylling, M., Jacobsen, B.H., Jensen, J.D.,
Hjorth-Gregersen, K., Kejser, A.T., Helt-Hansen, J., 2009. Economic Analysis for
a Cost-effective Climate Strategy for Danish Agriculture. (In Danish:
Økonomiske analyser for landbruget af en omkostningseffektiv klimastrategi.
Udredningsrapport 16 September 2009). Institute of Food and Resource
Economics, University of Copenhagen, Denmark, 126 p.
Eriksen, J., Adamsen, A.P.S., Nørgaard, J.V., Poulsen, H.D., Jensen, B.B., Petersen, S.O.,
2010. Emissions of sulphur-containing odorants, ammonia and methane from
pig slurry: effects of dietary methionine and benzoic acid. Journal of Environ-
mental Quality 39, 1097e1107.
Erisman, J.W., Bleeker, A., Galloway, J., Sutton, M.S., 2007. Reduced nitrogen in
ecology and the environment. Review paper. Environmental Pollution 150
(2007), 140e149.
European Commission, 2000. Framework for Community Action in the Field of
Water Policy Directive 2000/60/EC of The European Parliament and The Council
of 23 October.
Goodland, R., Anhang, J., 2009. Livestock and Climate Change. Report. Worldwatch
Institute, Washington D.C.. http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6294
Grelle, A., Aronsson, P., Weslien, P., Klemedtsson, L., Lindroth, A., 2007. Large
carbon-sink potential by Kyoto forests in Sweden e a case study on willow
plantations. Tellus Series B-Chemical and Physical Meteorology 59, 910e918.
Gyldenkærne, S., Petersen, B.M., Olesen, J.E., 2007. Konsekvenser og muligheder ved
Danmarks deltagelse i Kyotoprotokollens artikel 3.4 på landbrugsområdet.
Working Report no. 5. Danish Environmental Agency, Copenhagen, 50 p.
Halberg, N., Alrøe, H.F., Knudsen, M.T., Kristensen, E.S., 2006. Global Development of
Organic Agriculture: Challenges and Prospects. CABI Publishers, 369 pp.
Halberg, N., Kristensen, I.S., 1997. Expected crop yield loss when conversion to
organic dairy farming in Denmark. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 14,
25e41.
Halsnæs, K., Kühl, J., Olesen, J.E., 2007. Turning climate change information into
economic and health impacts. Climatic Change 81, 145e162. doi:10.1007/
s10584-006-9221-4.
Hanrahan, K., Donnellan, T., Howley, P., 2008. Results of Policy Scenario Analysis,
Agricultural Member State Modelling for the EU and Eastern European Coun-
tries (AGMEMOD 2020). AGMEMOD WP7 P12 D12. Agri-food Projections for EU
Member States.
Hansen, M.N., Henriksen, K., Sommer, S.G., 2006. Observations of production and
emission of greenhouse gases and ammonia during storage of solids separated
from pig slurry: effects of covering. Atmospheric Environment 40, 4172e4182.
Hansen, B., Thorling, L., Dalgaard, T., Erlandsen, M., 2011. Trend reversal of nitrate in
Danish groundwater e a reflection of agricultural practices and nitrogen
surpluses since 1950. Environmental Science and Technology 45 (1), 228e234.
Hedegaard, K., Thyø, K.A., Wenzel, H., 2008. Life cycle assessment of an advanced
bioethanol technology in the perspective of constrained biomass availability.
Environmental Science & Technology 42, 7992e7999.
Houghton, J., 2004. Global Warming. The Complete Breefing, third ed. Cambridge
University Press, The U.K., 351 p.
Hulcher, W.S., 1991. Basic energy concepts. In: Energy for Sustainable Rural
Development Projects, vol. 1. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Orga-
nisation (FAO), Rome, pp. 5e26.
Husted, S., 1994. Seasonal variation in methane emission from stored slurry and
solid manures. Journal of Environmental Quality 23, 585e592.
Häussermann, A., Hartung, E., Gallmann, E., Jungbluth, T., 2006. Influence of season,
ventilation strategy, and slurry removal on methane emissions from pig houses.
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 112, 115e121.
IPCC, 1997. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Reporting Instructions. In: Revised 1996
Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, vols. 1e3. The Intergov-
ernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), United Kingdom. http://www.ipcc.
nggip.iges.or.jp/public/gl/invs1.htm.
IPCC, 2006a. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. In:
General Guidance and Reporting, Vol. 1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, Japan, ISBN 4-88788-032-4. http://www.ipcc.nggip.iges.or.jp Corrected
as of November 2008.
IPCC, 2006b. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. In:
Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use, vol. 4. Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, Japan, ISBN 488788-032-4. Corrected as of February 2009.
IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
Geneva, Schwitzerland. http://www.ipcc.ch/, 104 p.
Johnson, J.M.F., Franzluebbers, A., Weyers, S.L., Reicosky, D.C., 2007. Agricultural
opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Environmental Pollution
150 (2007), 107e124.
Jørgensen, U., Sørensen, P., Adamsen, A.P., Kristensen, I.T., 2008. Energi fra biomasse e
Ressourcer og teknologier vurderet i et regionalt perspektiv. DJF Markbrug,
Report no. 134, 74 p.
Jørgensen, U., Dalgaard, T., Kristensen, E.S., 2005. Biomass energy in organic farming e
the potential role of short rotation coppice. Biomass and Bioenergy 28, 237e248.
Kronvang, B., Andersen, H.E., Børgesen, C.D., Dalgaard, T., Larsen, S.E., Bøgestrand, J.,
Blicher-Mathiasen, G., 2008. Effects of policy measures implemented in
Denmark on nitrogen pollution of the aquatic environment. Environmental
Science and Policy 11 (2), 144e152.
Mikkelsen, M.H., Gyldenkærne, S., Poulsen, H.D., Olesen, J.E., Sommer, S.G., 2006.
Emission of Ammonia, Nitrous Oxide and Methane from Danish Agriculture
1985e2002. Methodology and Estimates. Research Notes from NERI, no. 231.
National Environmental Research Institute, Roskilde, Denmark, 87 p.
Mola-Yudego, B., Aronsson, P., 2008. Yield models for commercial willow biomass
plantations in Sweden. Biomass & Bioenergy 32, 829e837.
Nielsen, O., Winther, M., Mikkelsen, M.H., Gyldenkærne, S., Lyck, E., Plejdrup, M.,
Hoffmann, L., Thomsen, M., og Fauser, P., 2009. Projection of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions 2007 to 2025. NERI Technical Report no. 703. Aarhus University.
National Environmental Research Institute, Roskilde, Denmark, 209 p.
Olesen, J.E., Andersen, J.M., Jacobsen, B.H., Hvelplund, T., Jørgensen, U., Schou, J.S.,
Graversen, J., Dalgaard, T., og Fenhann, J.V., 2001. Kvantificering af tre tiltag til
reduktion af landbrugets emission af drivhusgasser. DJF Report No. 48,
Markbrug. Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Foulum, ISBN:1397-9884,
81 p.
Olesen, J.E., Gyldenkærne, S., Petersen, S.O., Mikkelsen, H.M., Jacobsen, B.H.,
Vesterdal, L., Jørgensen, A.M.K., Christensen, B.T., Abildtrup, J., Heidmann, T.,
Rubæk, G., 2004. Jordbrug og klimaændringer e samspil til vandmiljøplaner DJF
Report Markbrug no. 109.
Olesen, J.E., Hansen, E.M., Elsgaard, L., 2005. Udledning af drivhusgasser ved pløjefri
dyrkningssystemer. In: Olesen, J.E. (Ed.), Drivhusgasser fra jordbruget e
reduktionsmuligheder, pp. 52e66. DJF rapport Markbrug Report no. 113.
Olesen, J.E., Sommer, S.G., 2005. Effect af afbrænding af separationsprodukter på
drivhusgasemissioner og luftforurening. In: Rapport fra arbejdsgruppen om
afbrænding af fraktioner af Husdyrgødning. Faculty of Agricultural Sciences,
Foulum, Denmark, pp. 84e88.
Olesen, J.E., Petersen, J., Haastrup, M., Knudsen, L., 2010. Causes of yield stagnation
in Danish winter wheat. In: Plantekongres 2010: Sammendrag af indlæg. Aar-
hus Universitet, Det Jordbrugsvidenskabelige Fakultets, pp. 116e117.
Ottosen, L.D.M., Poulsen, H.V., Nielsen, D.Aa., Finster, K., Nielsen, L.P., Revsbech, N.P.,
2009. Observations on microbial activity in acidified pig slurry. Biosystems
Engineering 102, 291e297.
Paul, K.I., Polglase, P.J., Richards, G.P., 2003. Predicted change in soil carbon
following afforestation or reforestation, and analysis of controlling factors by
linking a C accounting model (CAMFor) to models of forest growth (3PG), litter
decomposition (GENDEC) and soil C turnover (RothC). Forest Ecology and
Management 177, 485e501.
Pedersen, C.Å. (Ed.), 2004. Danish Field Experiments 2004 In Danish: Oversigt over
Landsforsøgene 2004. Forsøg og undersøgelser i de landøkonomiske foreninger.
Dansk Landbrugsrådgivning, Skejby.
Pedersen, C.Å. (Ed.), 2006. Danish Field Experiments 2006 In Danish: Oversigt over
Landsforsøgene 2006. Forsøg og undersøgelser i de landøkonomiske foreninger.
Dansk Landbrugsrådgivning, Skejby.
Pedersen, C.Å. (Ed.), 2009. Danish Field Experiments 2009 In Danish: Oversigt over
Landsforsøgene 2009. Forsøg og undersøgelser i de landøkonomiske foreninger.
Dansk Landbrugsrådgivning, Skejby.
Petersen, S.O., Amon, B., Gattinger, A., 2005. Methane oxidation in slurry storage
surface crusts. Journal of Environmental Quality 34, 455e461.
Petersen, S.O., Lind, A.M., Sommer, S.G., 1998. Nitrogen and organic matter losses during
storage of cattle and pig manure. Journal of Agricultural Science 130, 69e79.
Polglase, P.J., Paul, K.I., Khanna, P.K., Nyakuengama, J.G., O’Connell, A.M., Grove, T.S.,
Battaglia, M., 2000. Change in Soil Carbon Following Afforestation or Re-
forestation: Review of Experimental Evidence and Development of a Concep-
tual Framework. NCAS Technical Report No. 20. Greenhouse Office, Canberra,
Australia. http://whitepaper.climatechange.gov.au/ncas/reports/pubs/tr20final.
pdf, 117 p.
Post, W.M., Kwon, K.C., 2000. Soil carbon sequestration and land-use change:
processes and potential. Global Change Biology 6, 317e327.
Poulsen, H.D. (Ed.), 2008. Evaluering af det generelle ammoniakkrav Dansk Land-
brug, Dansk Svineproduktion, Landscentret, Dansk Kvæg, Fødevareøkonomisk
Institut, Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser og Det JorsbrugsVidenskabelige Fakultet
ved Aarhus Universitet. Report. Danish Environmental Agency, Copenhagen, p.
115.
Rochette, P., 2008. No-till only increases N2O emissions in poorly-aerated soils. Soil
and Tillage Research 101, 97e100.
Russell, J.M., Barnett, J.W., Desilets, E., Bertrand, S., 2007. Mitigation strategies to
reduce GHG emissions from the dairy industry. Bulletin of the International
Dairy Federation 422, 30e44.
Schjønning, P., Heckrath, G., Christensen, B.T., 2009. Threats to Soils in Denmark DJF
Report Plant Science no. 143.
Scott, N.A., Tate, K.R., Giltrap, D.J., Tattersall Smith, C., Wilde, H.R., Newsome, P.J.F.,
Davis, M.R., 2002. Monitoring land-use change effects on soil carbon in New
Zealand: quantifying baseline soil carbon stocks. Environmental Pollution 116
(1), 167e186.
Skøtt, T., 2009. Warmer climate results in more bioenergy. (In Danish: Varmere
Klima giver mere bioenergi). Forskning i Bioenergy 28 (3).
 T. Dalgaard et al. / Environmental Pollution 159 (2011) 3193e3203
Sommer, S.G., Olesen, J.E., Petersen, S.O., Weisbjerg, M.R., Valli, L., Rohde, L.,
Béline, F., 2009. Region-specific assessment of greenhouse gas mitigation with
different manure management strategies in four agroecological zones. Global
Change Biology 15, 2825e2837.
Sommer, S.G., Petersen, S.O., Møller, H.B., 2004. Algorithms for calculating methane
and nitrous oxide emissions from manure management. Nutrient Cycling in
Agroecosystems 69, 143e154.
Sommer, S.G., Petersen, S.O., Møller, H.B., 2002. A New Model for Calculating the
Reduction in Greenhouse Gas Emissions through An-aerobic Co-digestion of
Manure and Organic Waste, DIAS Report, Plant Production. No. 81, pp. 54e63.
Sommer, S.G., Petersen, S.O., Søegaard, H.T., 2000. Greenhouse gas emission from
stored livestock slurry. Journal of Environmental Quality 29, 744e750.
Sommer, S.G., Husted, S., 1995. Chemical composition of the buffer system in livestock
and biogas plant digested slurry. Journal of Agricultural Science 124, 45e53.
Statistics Denmark, 2010. National Statistical Database. (Statistikbanken). Danmarks
Statistik, København. www.dst.dk.
Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., Castel, V., Rosales, M., de Haan, Cees, 2006.
Livestock’s Long Shadow. Environmental Issues and Options. Food and Agri-
culture Organization of The United Nations, Rome, 390 p.
Sørensen, P., Thomsen, I.K., Christensen, B.T., 2004. Physical separation of pig
slurry has small effect on the overall utilisation of nitrogen. In: Hatch, D.J., et
3203
al. (Eds.), Controlling Nitrogen Flows and Losses. Wageningen Academic
Publishers, pp. 234e235.
Thomsen, I.K., Petersen, B.M., Jacobsen, B., Kudsk, P., Hansen, E.M., 2008. Dyrkning
og effektivitet af mellemafgrøder e foreløbige resultater. Intern Report DJF
markbrug no. 17. Aarhus Universitet, Det Jordbrugsvidenskabelige Fakultet,
Foulum.
VanderZaag, A.C., Gordon, R.J., Jamieson, R.C., Burton, D.L., Stratton, G.W., 2009. Gas
emissions from straw covered liquid dairy manure during summer storage and
autumn agitation. Transactions of the ASABE 52, 599e608.
VanderZaag, A.C., Gordon, R.J., Jamieson, R.C., Burton, D.L., Stratton, G.W., 2010.
Permeable synthetic covers for controlling emissions from liquid dairy manure.
Applied Engineering in Agriculture 26, 287e297.
Weisbjerg, M., Hvelplund, T., Lund, P., Olesen, J.E., 2005. Metan fra husdyr.
Muligheder for reduktion ved ændret fodring. DJF Markbrug, Report no. 113
p. 67e83.
Wolt, J.D., 2004. A meta-evaluation of nitrapyrin agronomic and environmental
effectiveness with emphasis on corn production in the Midwestern USA.
Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 69, 23e41.
Wood, S., Cowie, A., 2004. A Review of Greenhouse Gas Emission Factors for
Fertilizer Production, IEA Bioenergy Task 38. 20 p. www.ieabioenergy-task38.
org/publications/GHG_Emission_Fertilizer%20Production_July2004.pdf.