-

Manure separation to better distribute organic matter at farm level (Netherlands)

Mestscheiding om organische stof op bedrijfsniveau beter te verdelen (NL)

Description

Separation of cow manure is a common practice on dairy farms in The Netherlands to improve the nutrient use efficiency.

Het primaire doel van mestscheiding is de productie van een dikke
fractie met hoge gehalten aan organische stof en mineralen en een laag vochtgehalte. Een dergelijke geconcentreerde
fosfaatrijke fractie is een waardevolle organische meststof en kan over grote afstand vervoerd worden. De
dunne waterige fractie, met daarin het grootste deel van de stikstof, kan op eigen grond of in de nabije omgeving als
meststof worden aangewend of verder worden gezuiverd tot loosbaar water.

Slurry manure is fed through a manure separator that separates much of the thick material from the liquid portion. These fractions differ in the proportion between P and N; the thick fraction contains relatively more P than the thin fraction.
The thick fraction is used on maize fields or as substrate in cow stables; the thin fraction, with the larger part of the nitrogen, can be used on other parts of the farm or is exported from the farm to be treated for discharge in the environment. Due to stricter regulations for the application of N and P to crop land and grassland, less manure may be applied to the land. If manure must be exported because the threshold for P is reached, this implies that also N is exported from the farm.

Purpose of the Technology: Slurry from livestock consists of more than 90% of water. The primary purpose of manure separation is to produce a thick fraction with high contents of organic matter and nutrients and a low moisture content. The thick fraction is a valuable fertiliser and can be transported over large distances. The thin fraction, with the larger part of the nitrogen, can be applied as fertiliser on the farm, on farmland in the proximity, or can be treated into a quality suitable for discharge in the environment or water drainage system.

Manure separation allows farmers to use organic matter from manure more efficiently at the farm level. Manure separation increases the efficiency of processing and using manure in 5 ways:

1. By concentrating phosphorus in the thick fraction the volume of manure to be exported can be decreased, and also the export of nitrogen from the farm.
2. Manure separation creates three types of manure (thick, thin and mixed), which allows for differentiated application to different fields and crops, and reductions on requirements for artificial fertiliser.
3. Manure separation decreases the volume of manure to be exported from farms, and therefore saves energy and transport costs.
4. The thick fraction can be stored in stacks, taking up less space.
5. The thick fraction can be used as substrate in stables, replacing costly sawdust.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Purchase a manure separator. Periodically feed your collected slurry manure through the separator and then apply the thick portion to your fields. Discard the liquid portion.

Natural / human environment: Dairy farming on sandy soils in the eastern part of The Netherlands. Stricter manure regulation originting from the Nitrates Directive sets a limit on the amounts of animal manure for farms on sandy and loess soils in the eastern and southern part of The Netherlands.

Location

Location: Haarlo - Oude Eibergen, Gelderland, Netherlands

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 6.59421, 52.10475

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. < 0.1 km2 (10 ha))

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: less than 10 years ago (recently)

Type of introduction
Thick separated manure (Henk Leever (Oude Eibergenseweg 13, 7273 PJ, Haarlo, Netherlands))
Manure Separator (Henk Leever (Oude Eibergenseweg 13, 7273 PJ, Haarlo, Netherlands))

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Cropland
    • Annual cropping: cereals - maize, cereals - other, fodder crops - grasses, root/tuber crops - potatoes
    Number of growing seasons per year: 1
  • Grazing land
    • Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing
    • Improved pastures

Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
SLM group
  • integrated soil fertility management
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility

Technical drawing

Technical specifications

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated:
  • Currency used for cost calculation: Euro
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 0.94 Euro
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 255.70
Most important factors affecting the costs
Labour. Equipment.
Establishment activities
  1. Buy a seperator (Timing/ frequency: None)
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (Euro) Total costs per input (Euro) % of costs borne by land users
Equipment
Seperator Machine 1.0 5320.0 5320.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 5'320.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 5'659.57
Maintenance activities
  1. Operating separator (Timing/ frequency: once per year)
  2. Applying both thick fraction manure and RDM manure (Timing/ frequency: once per year)
Maintenance inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (Euro) Total costs per input (Euro) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Labour ha 1.0 127.68 127.68 100.0
Sampling manure ha 1.0 21.28 21.28 100.0
Equipment
Machine use ha 1.0 308.56 308.56 100.0
rent of manure separator h 1.0 16.5 16.5 100.0
depreciation costs m3 1.0 0.65 0.65
maintenance machine 1.0 0.3 0.3
Electricity ha 1.0 3.72 3.72 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides
Extra Potassium ha 1.0 10.64 10.64 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 489.33
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 520.56

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
182 days of precipitation annually
Thermal climate class: temperate. Mean monthly temperature varies between 2-17 °C ( LGP 240-269 days, mean monthly temperature varies between 2-17 °C)
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Water quality refers to:
Is salinity a problem?
  • Ja
  • Nee

Occurrence of flooding
  • Ja
  • Nee
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
  • Other forms of exploitation
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure
health

poor
good
education

poor
good
technical assistance

poor
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
good
markets

poor
good
energy

poor
good
roads and transport

poor
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
good
financial services

poor
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
increased


expected, based on better targeted fertiliser application

demand for irrigation water
increased
decreased


expected due to increase of SOM

expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
decreased


On artificial fertiliser (30-80% reduction on N fertiliser) and substrate for cow stables. But since the thick fraction contains less N per kg of P2O5 than the original mix, farners applying the thick fraction (for maize as described in this QT) may need to apply more articial N-fertilizer

farm income
decreased
increased


Decreased costs for manure export from the farm: A smaller part of the total manure mix needs to be exported (ca 35% less N-export than without manure separation; 10-30% less net energy use)

Ease of manure storage
decreased
increased


Thick fraction is less voluminous and can be stacked

Energy use
increased
decreased

Quantity before SLM: 4-7 GJ/ha
Quantity after SLM: 3-5 GJ/ha
Energy use for manure transport, processing, digestion and fertiliser use

Expenses on machinery
increased
decreased


For farms with less than 1000-2000 tons of manure to be separated expenses on manure separation become larger than benefits. Such farms could better hire a mobile separator, as in the descirption of this SLM technology.

Socio-cultural impacts
Improved livelihoods and human well-being
decreased
increased


Dairy farmers have learned more about the importance of soil organic matter for their production systems, and about the consequences of soil and manure management on soil organic matter and other aspects of soil health. This learning was brought by the exchange of knowledge between farmers and experts, and between farmers themselves. Farmers also profited from services provided to them by the farmers' foundations: shared investments (e.g. in the manure separator) and support in the application for subsidies to finance the SLM measure.

Ecological impacts
water quality
decreased
increased


expected: reduction in leaching of nitrate and phosphorus due to better targeted manuring to plant needs

soil moisture
decreased
increased


due to increased SOM

soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
increased


due to improved manure composition for crop growth and build-up of SOM

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases
increased
decreased


due to better targeted fertiliser use to needs of crops and reduced use of artificial fertiliser (30-80% less supply of N-fertiliser required)

Emission of NH3
increased
decreased

Quantity before SLM: 18
Quantity after SLM: 20
NH3 loss in kg/ha, for dairy farms with 1.75 cows/ha, manure prod of 255 kg N/haand other assumptions; model estimate

P2O5 surplus
increased
decreased

Quantity before SLM: 1
Quantity after SLM: 4
P2O5 surplus in kg/ha, same conditions

Off-site impacts
groundwater/ river pollution
increased
reduced

Quantity before SLM: 12.5
Quantity after SLM: 10.4
Reduced leaching of nitrate from fields where manure is applied due to less surplus of N in thin fraction(NO3-N in groundwater in mg/lfor farm with 1.75 dairy cows/ha)

Energy use
increased
decreased

Quantity before SLM: 4-7 GJ/ha
Quantity after SLM: 3-5 GJ/ha
Energy use for transport of manure from farms, processing, digestion, fertiliser use

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Benefits compared with maintenance costs
There is no evidence yet on economic and agronomic effects of using the manure separator in the area, so the land user's perspective cannot be given. Assessments of costs, effects and energy use based on modelling are available in the literature for dairy and arable farming in the NL in Schroder et al. (2009). These reveal that for farms with 1.75 to 2.18 dairy cows/ha and under conditions of manure production and application and manure regulations for this part of The Netherlands, the required export of N-manure could decrease by 35%, required N-fertiliser by 30-80%, and net energy use by 10-30%.

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual temperature increase

not well at all
very well
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
local rainstorm

not well at all
very well
local windstorm

not well at all
very well
drought

not well at all
very well
general (river) flood

not well at all
very well
Other climate-related consequences
reduced growing period

not well at all
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Number of households and/ or area covered
2
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Ja
  • Nee
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • increases soil organic matter

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? continued application of the measure and subsidy for maintenance of the manure separator by the Foundation; support to farmers in calculating parameters for manure separation specific for their farm (type of manure, concentrations, fields to apply to, livestock intensity)
  • energy saving and reduced loss of N while maintaining equal levels of crop production
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • increases soil organic matter

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? continued application of the measure and subsidy for maintenance of the manure separator by the Foundation; support to farmers in calculating parameters for manure separation specific for their farm (type of manure, concentrations, fields to apply to, livestock intensity)
  • increases available soil moisture
  • reduces leaching of nitrate to the groundwater
  • reduces energy use for manure handling and transport
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • there is still little experience with manure separation and there are many uncertainties relating to separation efficiency and financial aspects

References

Compiler
  • Simone Verzandvoort
Editors
Reviewer
  • Fabian Ottiger
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Mei 10, 2015
Last update: Junie 5, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Links to relevant information which is available online
  • Mestscheiding: relaties tussen techniek, kosten, milieu en landbouwkundige waarde - Jaap Schröder, Fridtjof de Buisonjé, Gerrit Kasper, Nico Verdoes & Koos Verloop, Plant and Animal Sciences Groups Wageningen UR, 2009.: http://edepot.wur.nl/50884
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International