Excess manure from intensive livestock production is a recognised environmental hazard as its mismanagement threatens the quality of water resources and contributes to emissions of NH3, CH4 and N2O. For these reasons, farmers search for options to reduce environmental impacts of excess manure, while remaining productive and economically viable. In this study we compare several scenarios for excess pig slurry management using Life Cycle Assessment. Scenarios include the collective transfer of slurry versus its treatment (i.e. in either collective or individual stations), the covering of slurry storage tanks (i.e. uncovered, natural crust and PVC cap) and different methods of slurry application to crop land (i.e. injection, surface spreading by trailing hose with and without tillage and splash plate). Transfer of slurry has lower eutrophication and acidification than the individual or collective treatment of slurry due to lower NH3. , it also has a better performance in terms of energy use as it treatment consumes large amounts of electricity in the treatment process while transfer slurry respresents a net saving of energy due to the substitution of fertilisers. Covering slurry tanks can reduce eutrophication and acidification by up to 70%, due to the reduction of NH3 emissions and reduces energy use by 8%, due to greater fertiliser substitution. Injection represents the best technique for slurry application to crop land as it reduces eutrophication and acidification by 32 to 74% relative to surface spreading due also to reduced NH3 emission. Extra energy needed for the injection of slurry is offset by the increased substitution of fertilisers due to reduced NH3 emission. An optimal system for slurry management would include the transfer of slurry for its use in substitution of fertilisers, covering of slurry tanks with a PVC cap and the injection of slurry. However, the economic and organisational feasibility of this system should be evaluated. Also, a possible incre