Greenhouse gas emissions from pig and poultry production sectors in China from 1960 to 2010

被引:0
|
作者
Wang Li-zhi [1 ]
Xue Bai [1 ]
Yan, Tianhai [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Sichuan Agr Univ, Inst Anim Nutr, Yaan 625014, Peoples R China
[2] Agri Food & Biosci Inst, Hillsborough BT26 6DR, Down, North Ireland
关键词
China; greenhouse gas inventory; pig; poultry; METHANE PRODUCTION;
D O I
10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61372-2
中图分类号
S [农业科学];
学科分类号
09 ;
摘要
Pig and poultry production in China had experienced considerable changes from 1960 to 2010. The present study aimed to evaluate the effects of these changes on greenhouse gas emission inventories (expressed as CO2 equivalent) from these two sectors. The inventories included methane emissions from enteric fermentation, methane and nitrous oxide production from manure management. The greenhouse gas emissions from these sources in 2010 in pig sector were 17, 62 and 21%, respectively, and that in poultry sector (including chicken, duck, goose and others) were 1, 18 and 81%, respectively. Total CO2 equivalent increased from 1960 to 2010 in both pig (11 582 to 55 564 Gg yr(-1)) and poultry (1497 to 14 873 Gg yr(-1)) sectors. Within poultry sector, emissions from chicken, duck, goose and others accounted for 74, 15, 11 and 0.01% in 2010, respectively. However, during the last 50 years, these emissions continuously reduced when related to production of 1 kg of pork (8.01 to 1.14 kg kg(-1)), poultry meat (1.19 to 0.37 kg kg(-1)) and egg (0.47 to 0.33 kg kg(-1)), which is mainly associated with the continuous improvement in production efficiency in all management systems. These results provide benchmark information for Chinese authorities to develop appropriate policies and mitigation strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from pig and poultry sectors.
引用
收藏
页码:221 / 228
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Greenhouse gas emissions from pig and poultry production sectors in China from 1960 to 2010
    WANG Li-zhi
    XUE Bai
    Tianhai Yan
    JournalofIntegrativeAgriculture, 2017, 16 (01) : 221 - 228
  • [2] Greenhouse gas emissions from vegetables production in China
    Zhang, Fen
    Liu, Fabo
    Ma, Xiao
    Guo, Guangzheng
    Liu, Bin
    Cheng, Taihong
    Liang, Tao
    Tao, Weilin
    Chen, Xinping
    Wang, Xiaozhong
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 317
  • [3] Potential reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from pig production in China on the basis of households' pork consumption
    Yan, Bojie
    Li, Yaxing
    Yan, Jingjie
    Shi, Wenjiao
    ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL, 2023, 177
  • [4] Analysis and prediction of greenhouse gas emissions from wheat production in China
    Liu G.
    Xu W.
    Dai Y.
    Xu Z.
    Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2018, 70 : 1315 - 1320
  • [5] Greenhouse gas emissions from different plant production system in China
    Meng, Weiqing
    He, Mengxuan
    Li, Hongyuan
    Hu, Beibei
    Mo, Xunqiang
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2019, 235 : 741 - 750
  • [6] Investigating historical dynamics and mitigation scenarios of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions from pig production system in China
    Chen, Xiaowei
    Chen, Yun
    Liu, Xingxing
    Li, Yuliang
    Wang, Xiaolong
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 296
  • [7] Assessing the greenhouse gas emissions from poultry fat biodiesel
    Jorgensen, Andreas
    Bikker, Paul
    Herrmann, Ivan T.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2012, 24 : 85 - 91
  • [8] Assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from poultry enteric fermentation
    Wang, SY
    Huang, DJ
    ASIAN-AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCES, 2005, 18 (06): : 873 - 878
  • [9] Spatial heterogeneity of greenhouse gas emissions from cereal crop production in China
    Zhuang, Minghao
    Caro, Dario
    Qin, Wei
    Wang, Chun
    Yang, Xiaolin
    Liu, Rui
    Zhang, Lin
    ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTRY LETTERS, 2022, 20 (06) : 3371 - 3376
  • [10] Spatial heterogeneity of greenhouse gas emissions from cereal crop production in China
    Minghao Zhuang
    Dario Caro
    Wei Qin
    Chun Wang
    Xiaolin Yang
    Rui Liu
    Lin Zhang
    Environmental Chemistry Letters, 2022, 20 : 3371 - 3376