首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Nitrous oxide emissions from a dung heap measured by chambers and plume methods
Affiliation:1. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0QB, UK;2. Silsoe Research Institute, Silsoe, Bedfodshire MK45 4HS, UK;1. College of Forestry, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang 330045 (China);2. College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095 (China);3. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Rice University, Houston TX 77005 (USA);1. State Key Laboratory of Marine Environmental Science, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361005, China;2. College of Environment and Ecology, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361005, China;3. Atmospheric Sciences Research Center, University at Albany, SUNY, Albany 12203, USA;4. Institute of Environmental Engineering, Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan;1. Institute for Hydrobiology and Aquatic Ecosystem Management, University for Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Max Emanuel Str. 17, A-1180 Vienna, Austria;2. Institute of Soil Research (IBF), University for Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Peter-Jordan Str. 92, 1190 Vienna, Austria;3. Institute of Sanitary Engineering and Water Pollution Control, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU), Muthgasse 18, A-1190 Vienna, Austria;4. Wasser Cluster Lunz-Inter University Center for Aquatic Ecosystem Research, Dr Carl Kupelwieser Promenade 5, A-3293 Lunz am See, Austria;5. Department of Science, Technical and Vocational Education, College of Education and External Studies, Makerere University, P.O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda;1. State Key Laboratory of Soil and Sustainable Agriculture, Institute of Soil Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China;2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;3. School of Biology and Environmental Science, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland;4. Department of Plant Ecology, Justus-Liebig University Giessen, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 26, 35392 Giessen, Germany;1. State Key Laboratory of Atmospheric Boundary Layer Physics and Atmospheric Chemistry, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, PR China;2. Institute for Meteorology and Climate Research, Atmospheric Environmental Research, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, D-82467 Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany;3. Key Laboratory for Yellow River and Huai River Water Environment and Pollution Control, Ministry of Education, School of Environment, Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, PR China;4. College of Earth Science, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, PR China
Abstract:Dung heaps provide a large, spatial and temporal variable, source of the greenhouse gas N2O. In this paper emission rates measured by static and flow through chamber methods, which enclose only a small area of the heap, were compared with Gaussian plume and tracer ratio methods, which measure the emissions from the entire dung heap. The dung heap was a 300 m3 heap, composed of material from nearby cattle sheds. From the flow through and static chambers it was estimated that the dung heap emitted 315 and 51 g N2Osingle bondN m−3 day−1, respectively. The spatial variability between the chambers and chamber methods was large. Standard deviations of the mean fluxes were >75% of the average flux. The smaller emissions were measured on the slopes of the heap and the larger emissions on the ridge. The plume of N2O was measured downwind of the dung heap by (1) tunable diode laser spectroscopy and calculation of the N2O source strength of the heap using Gaussian plume theory and (2) tracer ratio method releasing SF6 from the heap summit and capture in Tedlar bags downwind with subsequent analysis by gas chromatography. The Gaussian plume theory calculated an average N2O source strength of 5.3 g N2Osingle bondN m−3 day−1 (1.4–6.7 g N2Osingle bondN m−3 day−1). The tracer ratio method calculated a slightly larger average emission rate of 14.4 g N2Osingle bondN m−3 day−1 (7.4–38.6 g N2Osingle bondN m−3 day−1). Both methods were successfully validated by point release of SF6 and N2O, which suggests that the micrometeorological methods provided a good estimate of the source strength of the heap, whereas the few chamber measurements overestimated its source strength.
Keywords:
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号