规模化养殖场牛奶生产碳足迹评估方法与案例分析

发布时间：2018-07-03 04:29

本文选题：规模化奶牛场 + 碳足迹　；参考：《中国农业科学院》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：畜禽养殖业是重要的温室气体排放源之一,目前国内较少有针对中国规模化奶牛场的生产实际进行牛奶生产碳足迹评估方法研究。本研究以规模化奶牛养殖场为评估对象,基于生命周期理念,按照碳足迹评估框架和相关标准,构建规模化养殖场牛奶生产碳足迹评估方法,并利用该方法进行了案例研究,探讨了不同因素对牛奶生产碳足迹的影响,为规模化奶牛场的温室气体核算及农业低碳养殖技术的研究提供支撑。主要研究结论如下：(1)规模化养殖场牛奶生产碳足迹核算方法中系统边界为从饲料种植环节开始截止到农场大门,功能单位为1kg蛋白脂肪校正奶,系统温室气体分配方法为蛋白分配,肠道发酵、粪便管理和氮肥田间施用环节的温室气体排放采用《2006IPCC国家温室气体清单指南》提供的方法2核算,饲料种植环节中化肥和农药等生产资料的生产,以及饲料加工和养殖环节能耗的温室气体排放均采用活动数据乘排放系数计算。相比于国外现有的模型和核算方法,该牛奶生产碳足迹核算方法提供的饲料加工、农资生产、运输和能耗等排放系数主要采用国内研究结果,饲料种植过程中的农资投入量、饲料消耗和粪便管理等参数来源于国内统计数据或生产实际,更符合中国的生产实际。同时,本研究整理提供了中国不同省份饲料作物种植过程的农资投入量和不同规模养殖场的生产参数,便于在评估时调用。(2)利用规模化养殖场牛奶生产碳足迹核算方法进行了案例分析,该养殖场存栏量为5367头,牛奶单产为7.7 t/(头·年),粪便处理方式主要为氧化塘贮存和堆肥处理,系统边界为从饲料生产到农场大门。研究表明,2013年该牛奶生产系统温室气体排放总量为27093.83 t CO2-eq,平均每头牛每年产生的温室气体为5.05 t CO2-eq,按照蛋白分配法,该奶牛场每生产1kg标准奶(FPCM)的碳足迹为1.34kg CO2-eq。(3)案例研究表明,该牛奶生产系统中肠道发酵环节的贡献率最大,占系统总排放量的41.18%,其次为饲料生产加工环节,占系统总排放量的24.28%,粪便管理和粪便田间施用环节分别占系统总排放量的14.92%和10.25%,奶牛场能源消耗环节占系统总排放量的8.74%。对关键排放源进一步分析,泌乳牛肠道发酵排放占到了整个肠道发酵甲烷排放的61.67%,氮肥田间施用和化肥生产环节排放占到了饲料生产加工环节的74%,粪便管理过程中的N20排放占到该环节温室气体排放总量的57.1%,其中堆肥带来的N20排放占到粪便管理环节N20排放的75%。该系统的主要排放的温室气体为CH4和N2O,其排放量当量分别占系统总排放量的48%和32%。为确定重点环节温室气体减排技术研究提供参考。(4)对不同功能单位、分配方法、GWP值对碳足迹的影响进行了定量分析,结果表明两种不同的分配方法得出的牛奶碳足迹除不分配和质量分配、蛋白分配和经济价值两两比较没有显著性差异(P0.05)外,其他任意两者间进行比较均有显著性差异(P0.05)。采用不同GWP值得出的牛奶碳足迹均有显著性差异(P0.05)。RM碳足迹与标准奶比较时具有显著性差异(P0.05),当以FPCM与以ECM为功能单位的碳足迹比较时没有显著性差异(P0.05),由此得出在进行牛奶生产碳足迹比较时,需要注意不同分配方法、GWP值和功能单位对牛奶碳足迹的影响。
[Abstract]:The livestock breeding industry is one of the important sources of greenhouse gas emission. At present, there are few studies on the evaluation method of the carbon footprint of milk production in China. This study takes the scale dairy farm as the evaluation object, based on the life cycle concept, according to the carbon footprint assessment framework and the related standards, the scale of the scale is built on the scale. The method of evaluating the carbon footprint of milk production in the breeding farm was used and a case study was carried out. The effects of different factors on the carbon footprint of milk production were discussed, which provided support for the greenhouse gas accounting of the dairy farm in the large-scale dairy farm and the research on the agricultural low carbon culture technology. The main conclusions are as follows: (1) the production of carbon feet in the milk production of the large-scale farm. The system boundary is from the feed planting link to the farm gate, the functional unit is the 1kg protein fat correction milk, the system greenhouse gas distribution method is protein distribution, the intestinal fermentation, the fecal management and the nitrogen fertilizer field application of greenhouse gas emissions are provided by the <2006IPCC national greenhouse gas list guide. In law 2, the production of chemical fertilizer and pesticide production data, as well as the greenhouse gas emission from feed processing and energy consumption are calculated by active data by the emission coefficient. Compared with the existing models and accounting methods in foreign countries, the production of feed, agricultural production and transportation are provided by the method of calculating the carbon footprint in the milk production. And energy consumption and other emission factors mainly adopt domestic research results. The input of agricultural investment, feed consumption and fecal management in the process of feed planting are derived from domestic statistical data or production practice, which is more in line with the actual production practice in China. At the same time, this study provides the agricultural investment in different provinces in China. The production parameters of different scale farms are easy to be called. (2) a case analysis is made of the accounting method of carbon footprint in the production of milk production in a large-scale farm. The stock of the farm is 5367 and the milk yield is 7.7 t/ (head year). The treatment of the feces is mainly for the storage and composting of the oxygen pond, and the boundary of the system is from the feed production to the feed. The study showed that the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions from the milk production system was 27093.83 t CO2-eq in 2013, and the average annual greenhouse gas generated by each cow was 5.05 t CO2-eq. According to protein distribution, the carbon footprint of 1kg standard milk (FPCM) produced in the dairy farm was 1.34kg CO2-eq. (3), which showed the midgut of the milk production system. The contribution rate of the channel fermentation is the largest, accounting for 41.18% of the total system emissions, followed by the feed production and processing link, accounting for 24.28% of the total system emissions, and 14.92% and 10.25% of the total emission of the dung management and fecal application, respectively, and the 8.74%. of the total system emissions of the dairy farm energy consumption links further to the key emission sources. The analysis shows that the intestinal fermentation of lactating cattle accounts for 61.67% of the methane emission in the whole intestinal tract. The field application of nitrogen fertilizer and the production link of chemical fertilizer account for 74% of the feed production and processing link, and the N20 emission in the process of manure management accounts for 57.1% of the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions in this link, of which the N20 emissions from the composting account for the manure management. The main emissions of the 75%. system of link N20 emissions are CH4 and N2O, and their emissions equivalent to 48% of the total emission of the system and 32%. provide reference for the key link greenhouse gas emission reduction technology research. (4) the effects of different functional units, distribution methods and GWP values on the carbon footprint are quantitatively analyzed, and the results show that two There was no significant difference in the distribution of milk carbon footprint, quality distribution, protein distribution and economic value 22 (P0.05), and there were significant differences (P0.05). The carbon footprint of milk used by different GWP was significant (P0.05).RM carbon footprint and standard. There was a significant difference between para milk (P0.05). There was no significant difference between FPCM and the carbon footprint of ECM as a functional unit (P0.05). It was concluded that the effects of different distribution methods, GWP values and functional units on the carbon footprint of cow milk should be paid attention to when comparing the carbon footprint of milk production.
【学位授予单位】：中国农业科学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：S823;S811.5

【参考文献】