Manure Transportation

Methods 5.0

manure

on-farm

mechanical

If manure was applied to the field, energy was used to retrieve the manure and transport it to the field gate.

Published

September 22, 2025

Introduction

Applying animal manure to farm soils can improve soil fertility and health by supplying nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and organic matter. When manure is applied to a crop, additional energy is required to load and transport the manure from its source to its destination (video example).

Manure is a nutrient application activity option in the Fieldprint Calculator for all crops, though applications are most likely to occur on fields near livestock operations or at integrated crop/livestock operations. Access to manure sources and forms varies regionally (Flynn et al. 2023; Spiegal et al. 2020).

Pumping, loading, hauling, and application of hog/swine manure in Iowa. Source: Mike Less

Methods

The energy associated with manure transportation ( \(E_{mt}\)) depends on the amount of manure transported and the distance between the loading and application sites. The amount of manure transported depends on the application rate for the receiving field. When a user adds a manure application activity to their operations, they will enter the manure source and type (based on their manure analysis) and application rate. Any data entered should be on an “as-applied” basis, which is also referred to as “as-sampled” or “as-received” (by the lab). For example, if a field received 5,000 gallons per acre of liquid swine manure, a user would enter “5,000 gal/ac” for the application rate; there is no need to convert beforehand to a dry-weight basis of tons/ac of solids.

Note

See Manure Inputs for more explanation on manure inputs and the use of default data.

Inputs

The following are manure inputs that affect the transportation energy estimate:

Input	Value	Units	Symbol
Manure source	User selection	Beef, Dairy, Poultry, or Swine
Manure type (form)	User selection	Liquid, slurry, semi-solid, or solid.
Field area	Defined by user-entered field boundary	ac	\(A\)
Application rate	User entry	ton ac^-1 gal ac^-1	\(R\)
Density factor of liquid manures¹	8.34	lb gal^-1	\(\rho\)
Distance transported	Based on type	mi	\(d\)
Transportation energy constant²	10,416	BTU ton^-1 mi^-1	\(C_{mt}\)
Energy factor per gallon diesel	137,381 144.9446	BTU gal^-1 MJ gal^-1	\(E_{diesel}\)

¹ Used for liquid/slurry manures (Wilson et al. 2022)

² Source: 2023 ANL-GREET Feedstock CI Calculator.

{.striped .hover}

Steps

Determine total tons of manure transported.
Determine distance between the loading site and application site
Calculate the direct energy use portion of \(E_{mt}\)
Derive gallons of diesel used
Calculate all direct and indirect energy and emission components, accounting for global warming potentials.

Step 1: Determine tons of manure transported

If manure type = Semi-solid or Solid (solids > 10%), then the Calculator sets the units of application to \(ton\ ac^{-1}\). The field acres multiplied by the rate gives the total tons of manure applied (\(m\)) .

\[ m = A\ R \]

If manure type = Liquid or Slurry (solids < 10%), then the Calculator sets the units of application to \(gal\ ac^{-1}\). The volume applied will be converted to \(ton\) (and then \(kg\)) in the back-end by multiplying by a density factor and dividing by 2000 \(lb\ ton^{-1}\). The density factor of 8.34 \(lb\ gal^{-1}\) applies mostly to manure with less than 5% solids (Wilson et al. 2022), though it can be used for slurry up to 10% solids (Bormann et al. 2024).

\[ m =\frac{A\ R\ \rho}{2000} \]

where units of \(R\) = gal ac^-1

Step 2: Determine transportation distance

The manure transportation distance is the distance (mi) from the manure source to the edge of the field where it was applied. This is used with a factor from GREET FD-CIC with units of energy per ton per mile to calculate energy and emissions related to manure transportation. Manure transport distances vary across the United States and by manure source (Spiegal et al. 2020; Dell et al. 2022; Bryant et al. 2022). However, the Fieldprint Calculator limits additional user input by using the following distances as defaults for manure transportation:

3 miles if the manure form is liquid or slurry.
30 miles if the manure form is semi-solid or solid.

Note

We are open to collaboration to develop regional and/or source-specific default distances for manure transportation.

Step 3: Calculate direct energy use portion

\[ E_{mt_{direct}} = m\ d\ C_{mt} \]

The \(C_{mt}\) factor represents the direct energy use per ton per mile, which accounts for loading of the manure as well as hauling it the distance \(d\).

Note

The energy use associated with the field application of manure is captured separately through the Platform’s integration with the CR-LMOD operation database (Carlson et al. 2018).

Step 4: Derive gallons of diesel used

\[ V_{diesel} = \frac{E_{mt_{direct}}}{E_{diesel}} \]

Step 5: Calculate all direct and indirect energy and emission components

Up to this point, only direct energy use has been estimated. Knowing the amount of diesel used on-farm allows us to determine not only the direct emissions of component GHGs due to combustion, but also the upstream energy and emissions associated with the diesel (e.g. manufacturing).

The amount of diesel is multiplied by a given component’s energy or emission factor per gallon (Table 1) . Lastly, standardize to kg CO₂e with Global Warming Potential factors (CO₂ = 1, CH₄ = 27, N₂0 = 273).

For example: \(Upstream\ CO_2 = V_{diesel} * C_{upstream\ CO_2} * GWP_{CO_2}\), where \(C\) is a constant for upstream CO2 emissions (units = kg gal^-1) and \(GWP\) in this case would be 1.

Example: Transporting Liquid Manure

A grower applied dairy manure on a 100-acre field at a rate of 4,500 gal ac^-1. They have the manure lab analysis. How much energy and emission was associated with the manure transport?

Manure Sample Test Results³

³ adopted from Ohio State ANR

Analysis	Percent	Nutrients (lb/1000 gal)
Moisture	98.61
Nitrogen, Total	.18	15.7
Nitrogen, Ammonium	.12	10.4
Nitrogen, Organic	.06	5.2
Phosphorus (P₂O₅), Total	.11	9.6
Potassium (K₂O)	.15	13.0

Answer

First, note that the user can verify from the lab analysis that the manure type was indeed “Liquid” because the % solids was less than 4%, which supports the expectation that the application rate was in units of gallons per acre.

427 gal gallons of diesel were used to load and transport 1,876 ton tons of manure. Total energy use was 68,668 MJ MJ with a total of 4,850 kg kg CO₂e emitted.

metric	system_boundary	source_category	MJ	units
Energy Use	Upstream	Energy use associated with production of fuels	6803.117	MJ
Energy Use	On-Farm Mechanical	Energy use associated with mobile machinery	61865.163	MJ

metric	system_boundary	source_category	CO2_fossil	CO2_biogenic	CH4_fossil	CH4_biogenic	N2O	units
GHG Emissions	Upstream	GHG emissions associated with production of fuels	416.0211	0	29.62274	0	2.275765	kg_CO2e
GHG Emissions	On-Farm Mechanical	GHG emissions associated with mobile machinery	4355.1639	0	11.56742	0	35.540794	kg_CO2e

Tables

Energy and Emission Factors

Table 1: Units for GHG gases are kg per gallon of diesel. Units for energy (mj) are MJ per gallon of diesel.

metric	system_boundary	source_category	source_detail	CO2_fossil	CH4_fossil	N2O	NF3	SF6	MJ
Energy Use	Upstream	Energy use associated with production of fuels	Manure Transportation \| Diesel (on-road medium-heavy duty truck)	0.0000000	0.0000000	0.0000000	NA	NA	15.9391
GHG Emissions	Upstream	GHG emissions associated with production of fuels	Manure Transportation \| Diesel (on-road medium-heavy duty truck)	0.9747006	0.0023290	0.0000195	NA	NA	0.0000
Energy Use	On-Farm Mechanical	Energy use associated with mobile machinery	Manure Transportation \| Diesel (on-road medium-heavy duty truck)	0.0000000	0.0000000	0.0000000	NA	NA	144.9446
GHG Emissions	On-Farm Mechanical	GHG emissions associated with mobile machinery	Manure Transportation \| Diesel (on-road medium-heavy duty truck)	10.2037634	0.0009094	0.0003050	NA	NA	0.0000

References

Bormann, Nancy Bohl, Erin Cortus, Melissa Wilson, Kevin Silverstein, Larry Gunderson, and Kevin Janni. 2024. “ManureDB-National Database of Manure Nutrient Content and Other Characteristics: 1998-2023.”

Bryant, Ray B., Dinku M. Endale, Sheri A. Spiegal, K. Colton Flynn, Robert J. Meinen, Michel A. Cavigelli, and Peter J. A. Kleinman. 2022. “Poultry Manureshed Management: Opportunities and Challenges for a Vertically Integrated Industry.” Journal of Environmental Quality 51 (4): 540–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeq2.20273.

Carlson, Jack, Lucas Yaege, Joel Poore, Larry Wagner, James Frankenberger, and Olaf David. 2018. “Standardizing Cropping System Data for Integrated Agricultural Resource Assessment.” International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software, June. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/iemssconference/2018/Stream-C/16.

Dell, Curtis J., John M. Baker, Sheri Spiegal, Sarah A. Porter, April B. Leytem, K. Colton Flynn, C. Alan Rotz, et al. 2022. “Challenges and Opportunities for Manureshed Management Across U.S. Dairy Systems: Case Studies from Four Regions.” Journal of Environmental Quality 51 (4): 521–39. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeq2.20341.

Flynn, K. Colton, Sheri Spiegal, Peter J. A. Kleinman, Robert J. Meinen, and Douglas R. Smith. 2023. “Manureshed Management to Overcome Longstanding Nutrient Imbalances in US Agriculture.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling 188 (January): 106632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106632.

Spiegal, Sheri, Peter J. A. Kleinman, Dinku M. Endale, Ray B. Bryant, Curtis Dell, Sarah Goslee, Robert J. Meinen, et al. 2020. “Manuresheds: Advancing Nutrient Recycling in US Agriculture.” Agricultural Systems 182 (June): 102813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102813.

Wilson, Melissa L., Scott Cortus, Rachel Brimmer, Jerry Floren, Larry Gunderson, Kristin Hicks, Tim Hoerner, et al. 2022. Recommended Methods of Manure Analysis, Second Edition. University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing. http://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/227650.