Innovation Offers Opportunities For Less Nitrogen And Greenhouse Gases From Agriculture, But Extensification Remains Necessary

A large part of the environmental problems in livestock farming can be solved with technical innovations, but livestock farmers also have to extensify to achieve the goals. This is evident from the 'Exploration of the effects of agricultural innovations' by WUR researchers Gerard Ros and Wim de Vries that was published on 20 January. Researcher Gerard Ros explains the research.

Commissioned by the Interprovincial Consultation (IPO, the collaborating provinces), WUR researchers determined the potential of agricultural innovations to sufficiently reduce emissions of ammonia, greenhouse gases and nitrate.

If all available innovations are applied in livestock farming and all farmers participate, the national targets for ammonia and greenhouse gases will come within reach, the researchers state. Measures in the stable, such as acidification of manure, separation of urine and faeces and the rapid removal of manure, yield the greatest environmental benefits. Furthermore, feed measures, manure processing and precision fertilisation help to achieve the targets. 'The large number of available innovations offers companies perspective to select the right measure.'

If the researchers add up all practically feasible emission reductions, they arrive at a reduction of ammonia emissions of 41-50% and a reduction of greenhouse gases between 27-48% in the coming five years. In all provinces, the task in the NPLG can be achieved with this. The long-term goal in 2050, halving the emission of greenhouse gases, is a lot more difficult.

The package of measures provides a diverse picture for water quality. The measures provide sufficient improvement of groundwater quality, but the NPLG targets for surface water are not achieved in most provinces.

The researchers conclude: 'Realisation of the national targets for ammonia, greenhouse gases and nutrient leaching and run-off is only possible if all companies either extensify or implement innovations in their business operations in a proper manner. A combination of both is therefore almost certainly necessary to achieve sustainability in Dutch agriculture.'

Researcher Gerard Ros explains the report in more detail.

Why did the IPO want this study?
Gerard Ros: 'This research is part of a strategic exploration of IPO in the context of the NPLG, in which provinces have a management role to realize the goals in the rural area. They wanted to know how far they can get with innovations to achieve the environmental goals and which measures are promising. We conducted a literature study and held a workshop to assess the innovations.'

Does the study focus on livestock farming?
'We have assessed innovations in livestock farming, including the application of manure in both livestock farming and arable farming. For water quality, it is obvious to include the application of manure in arable farming. For ammonia and greenhouse gases, dairy farming makes the largest contribution and that is also where the greatest potential lies. While intensive livestock farming has already invested a lot in recent years in measures to reduce emissions, dairy farming still produces relatively large amounts of ammonia and greenhouse gases. Dairy cattle therefore offer the greatest potential for improvement.'

Which measures yield the most results?
'In the barn, (biological) acidification of manure leads to lower ammonia emissions. Less protein in the feed ration and more grazing also help. In order to reduce greenhouse gases, manure processing and better manure application on the land are also necessary. Manure processing is also good for reducing ammonia. Given the large number of innovations, farmers can choose from the measures that best suit their company and environment.'

And intensive livestock farming?
'The air washers work in principle, but you have to turn them on and maintain them properly. There is a lot of discussion about the air washers because in practice they capture less ammonia than on paper, but they do contribute. Furthermore, pig and chicken farmers do not have many options compared to dairy farmers; they can optimize the feed, acidify manure and apply manure fermentation. Manure fermentation is becoming an important innovation in light of the greenhouse gas targets, where farmers are given a choice: do they invest per company or do they invest together?'

How much will the innovations cost?
Ros: 'Measures in stables are relatively expensive and increase the risk of a technical 'lock-in': farmers are then stuck with this technology. Rapidly separating, removing and processing manure in the stable and good manure application in the field is a cheaper strategy but yields less environmental benefit for greenhouse gases. There are still many innovations available to reduce ammonia emissions, and fewer for methane. More innovation is needed and desirable here.'

Is water quality difficult to improve with innovations?
'That's right. We can achieve the nitrate targets for groundwater if all farmers apply good agricultural practices, WUR colleague Edo Gies already said. The bottlenecks for surface water are greater, because phosphate plays an important role in this. Many soils have high concentrations of phosphate due to fertilization practices in the past. The question now is: how can farmers gradually reduce this pollution? By fertilizing less, so that the phosphate reserves in the soil decrease. But this is a long-term matter: the effects of good fertilization practices will only be visible in 10 to 20 years. That is why additional measures are also needed in the water system, such as good water flow, sufficiently deep ditches and good management of the ditch banks.

What are the vulnerabilities in your research?
Ros: 'We have mapped out the potential innovations and then calculated: what can they yield if everyone participates? In practice, that is still quite a challenge. Secondly, many innovations have been tested on practical farms, but that is a limited number of farms and we do not know how such a system works out across the board. Thirdly: innovations are part of the solution. Livestock farmers should also look at extensification, or fewer cows per hectare, thus a reduction in the livestock population. They may run fewer risks with extensification than with the purchase of expensive technology. Sustainability is more than just innovation.'