Des Moines, Iowa: Iowa State Univ. Cowell, D. A., and H. M. ApSimon. 1998. Cost-effective strategies for the abatement of ammonia emissions from European.
se 1837 ms USE (Pg1895-1902)
7/10/01
10:04 AM
Page 1895
EFFECT OF A MANURE ADDITIVE ON AMMONIA EMISSION FROM SWINE FINISHING BUILDINGS A. J. Heber, J. Q. Ni, T. T. Lim, C. A. Diehl, A. L. Sutton, R. K. Duggirala, B. L. Haymore, D. T. Kelly, V. I. Adamchuk
ABSTRACT. The effect of a commercial manure additive (Alliance®) on ammonia (NH3) emissions was evaluated in commercial 1000-head grow-finish swine buildings over a six-month period. The test was conducted in two treated and two control buildings at a modern swine-finishing site consisting of nine identical buildings. Automatic spray application systems in the treated buildings intermittently sprayed the additive onto the surfaces of the below-floor manure storages. Ammonia concentrations were measured with a chemiluminescence analyzer at three location groups in each building over 7 or 12 min periods every 1.0 to 1.5 h. Pit fan airflow rates were measured continuously with impeller anemometers. Wall fan airflow rates were calculated from fan pressure/airflow curves and measured static differential pressure between indoor and outdoor air. Nearly 7,000 data subsets from 332 building-days of testing were obtained for comparing NH3 emission rates between control and treated buildings. The mean NH3 emission rate per AU (animal unit or 500 kg live weight) from the treated buildings (96.4 g/day·AU) was 24% (P < 0.05) lower than the control buildings. The volume of additive solution was sufficient to dilute the fresh manure by 20%, but the effect of dilution only on NH3 emission was not measured. Keywords. Air quality, Air pollution, Environment, Pig house, Ventilation.
A
mmonia (NH3) is a noxious gas that is produced from microbial and enzymatic decomposition of proteins, amino acids and other nitrogenous compounds in animal waste. Ammonia plays an important role in the nitrogen cycle and is emitted from livestock production facilities to the atmosphere in relatively large amounts (Buijsman et al., 1987; Cowell and ApSimon, 1998). Excessive emissions of NH 3 are associated with acid rain deposition (ApSimon et al., 1987) and acidification of soil and surface water (Asman and Janssen, 1987). The loss of NH3 from animal manure during storage or field application can cause significant reductions in its value as nitrogen fertilizer (Pain et al., 1989). Typical NH3 emission rates from swine houses range from 5 to 130 g/d·AU (animal unit = 500 kg live
Article was submitted for publication in March 2000; reviewed and approved for publication by the Structures & Environment Division of ASAE in October 2000. Presented as ASAE Paper No. 99-4032. Journal Contribution No. 16232 of Purdue University Agricultural Research Programs. Mention of specific equipment is for the benefit of readers and does not infer endorsement or preferential treatment of the product names by the authors. The authors are Albert J. Heber, ASAE Member Engineer, Associate Professor, Ji-Qin Ni, ASAE Member, Research Associate, Teng T. Lim, ASAE Student Engineer, Graduate Assistant, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana; Viacheslav I. Adamchuk, ASAE Member Engineer, Assistant Professor, Biological Systems Engineering Department, University of NebraskaLincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska; Claude A. Diehl, Consulting Engineer, West Lafayette, Indiana; Alan L. Sutton, Professor, Daniel T. Kelly, Research Assistant, Animal Sciences Department, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana; Ravi K. Duggirala, Director of Water Technologies, Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri; and Barry L. Haymore, President, ChemLink International, St. Louis, Missouri. Corresponding author: Dr. Albert J. Heber, Purdue University, 1146 ABE Bldg., West Lafayette, IN 47907, phone: 765.494.1214, fax: 765.496.1115, e-mail: .
weight), depending on housing types (Hartung and Phillips, 1994; Ni et al., 2000). High NH3 concentrations in livestock confinement buildings can contribute to adverse health effects on workers and animals. Although NH3 concentrations in well-ventilated swine buildings usually range from 0 to 20 ppm with peaks up to 40 ppm, some experiments on pig health have been conducted at higher concentrations. Ammonia concentrations of 50, 100, and 150 ppm decreased pig growth by 12, 30, and 29%, respectively, compared to 0 ppm NH3 (Drummond et al., 1980). Urbain et al. (1994) reported loss of weight and other health symptoms for pigs exposed to 25, 50, and 100 ppm of NH3 for six days. Currently, fresh air ventilation is used to remove NH3 from livestock confinement buildings. However, ventilation systems are primarily designed to control thermal environment rather than air quality and high concentrations and emissions of NH3 and other gases occur frequently. Therefore, other technologies are needed to effectively control NH3. Such techniques include floor modification (Braam et al., 1997), alternative pen design (Voermans et al., 1995), ozonation (Zhang et al., 1994), biofiltration (Pearson et al., 1992), manure temperature reduction (Andersson, 1995), feed rations that influence protein digestion (Sutton et al., 1996), and various types of manure additives (Bundy and Hoff, 1998; Patni and Jui, 1993). The effects of manure additives on the reduction of NH3 and other gases have been tested in laboratory experiments (Bundy and Hoff, ; Heber et al., 2000; Hörnig et al., 1997; Patni and Jui, 1993; Zhu et al., 1997). However, lab-scale tests often do not represent conditions in commercial buildings in terms of pit surface area to depth ratio, manure addition frequency, temperature distribution, and degree of mixing (Stinson et al., 1999). Field experiments of additives have the advantage of
Transactions of the ASAE VOL. 43(6): 1895-1902
© 2000 American Society of Agricultural Engineers 0001-2351 / 00 / 4306-1895
1895
se 1837 ms USE (Pg1895-1902)
7/10/01
10:04 AM
Page 1896
providing data under real world conditions. However, only three unpublished articles of field evaluations of manure additives for NH3 reduction have been reported (Beke, 1997; Hendriks et al., 1997; Stinson et al., 1999). Alliance, a new manure additive, was developed by Monsanto EnviroChem (St. Louis, Mo.) for improving air quality inside swine houses. It was tested in four naturally and four mechanically ventilated swine buildings in a collaborative research project with Purdue University (Heber et al., 1998). The objective of this article was to evaluate the effect of Alliance on NH3 emission from the four mechanically ventilated buildings.
were treated with the additive and buildings 3B and 4B were untreated and used as controls. The first trial began on 6 March with 865, 872, 868 and 866 pigs with mean weights of 65, 61, 56 and 51 kg in 3A, 3B, 4A and 4C, respectively. It ended on 8 May in 3A and 3B with 855, 112-kg pigs and 865, 108-kg pigs, respectively, and on 28 May in 4A and 4B with 841, 117-kg pigs and 838, 112-kg pigs, respectively. The second trial began on 26 June with 892, 887, 876 and 867 pigs weighing 28, 22, 29 and 27 kg and ended on 25 September with 881, 874, 832 and 863 pigs weighing 96, 90, 97 and 95 kg in 3A, 3B, 4A and 4B, respectively. A more detailed description of the test installation and procedure was provided by Heber et al.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
THE BUILDINGS Each building was 12.3 m wide, 65.9 m long and had a 2.4 m deep manure pit under a fully slatted concrete floor with a surface area of 799 m2 (fig. 1). The 2.3 m high ceiling was insulated with 0.08-m-thick loose-fill cellulose
The tests of Alliance were conducted during two consecutive trials in four of nine, mechanically ventilated, swine finishing buildings located near McLean, Illinois, between March and September 1997. Buildings 3A and 4A
Figure 1–Cross-section (top), floor plan (middle), and side view (bottom) of a building with pressure and temperature measurement points and gas sampling locations. 1896
TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASAE
se 1837 ms USE (Pg1895-1902)
7/10/01
10:04 AM
Page 1897
insulation. Each building sidewall consisted of a 0.81 m high, 0.15 m thick concrete skirt and 1.52 m curtains. There were twenty, 3.3 × 5.9 m, pens on either side of a 0.76-m-wide central aisle. Each building was ventilated with four pit fans and five wall fans. The four, 0.46 m diameter, variable-speed pit fans (Model AT18F, Aerotech, Lansing, Mich.) were installed at the top of vertical wooden chimneys and operated continuously. One, 0.9 m diameter and four, 1.2 m diameter exhaust fans were located on the east wall of the building to create a tunnel ventilation effect during hot weather. The building was cross-ventilated at other times using 13 baffled ceiling inlets (fig. 1). THE PIGS Pigs were weighed before being placed into the buildings and were fed a standard corn/soybean ration ad libitum throughout the experiment. The mean weight of the pigs after n days in the building was calculated based on their initial weight and an assumed average growth rate of 0.75 kg/d, equations 1 and 2 (Ni et al., 2000): n
Wp n = Wp 0 +
∑ Q pi
(1)
i=1
Q pi = 0.07 + 20.12 × 10–3 W p i – 1 – 1.23 × 10–4 W p i – 1
2
(2)
where n = number of days in the grow-finish building = pig growth rate (kg/d) Qp Wp(0) = beginning pig weight (kg) Wp(n) = pig weight on nth day (kg) THE MANURE Manure samples were obtained from the manure pit, and analyzed in the Purdue Animal Sciences Waste Management Laboratory. A plastic cup attached to a plastic rod was lowered through the pump-out ports to obtain samples from the manure surface. Pit profile samples were obtained by lowering a probe sampler (Coliwasa Sampler, Nutrient Resource Management, Inc., Columbus, Ohio) through the full depth of the manure. Probe samples were poured into a bucket and thoroughly mixed. A sub-sample of the mix was collected and stored in a sealed 237 mL plastic bottle, placed in a Styrofoam container with ice, and transported to the laboratory. Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) was determined by the micro-Kjeldahl nitrogen method (Nelson and Sommers, 1972). Ammonium nitrogen (NH4+-N) was determined using the steam distillation method (Bremner and Keeney, 1965). For dry matter, the samples were analyzed gravimetrically at 90°C. For P and K, manure samples were wet ashed by refluxing with concentrated HNO3 for three hours prior to analysis of the digest. Analysis of K was determined by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Analysis of P was evaluated according to Murphy and Riley (1962).
VOL. 43(6): 1895-1902
THE ADDITIVE The Alliance concentrate had the following physical and chemical properties: Appearance: Opaque dark blue liquid Odor: Almond scent Specific gravity: 1.13 at 25°C pH: 3.0 Composition: 24% water, 5% benzaldehyde, 9% neodol, 18% proprietary surfactants, 34% glyoxal, and 10% copper sulfate Classification: Non-hazardous, biodegradable Freezing point: – 9°C A rotating spinner nozzle was installed in each pen and the additive solution was sprayed into the pit headspace with a goal of covering most of the manure surface (fig. 1). Spraying cycles were implemented using a programmable time controller (Models CPM1 and H5L, OMRON Electronics, Inc., Schaumburg, Ill.). An electronic injection pump was used to continuously meter the additive into the water line to create a solution of 0.44% Alliance. The additive delivery rate was 0.20 kg/min; whereas, the water delivery rate was about 47 kg/min (20 nozzles at 2.33 kg/min per nozzle and 310 kPa). The target dosage was 300 ppm (trial 1) to 350 ppm (trial 2) of an assumed fresh manure production rate of 84 kg/day per 1000-kg live animal weight (ASAE, 1997). A 4-min spray occurred with the nozzles of either the 20 even pens (10 on each side of the aisle) or the 20 odd pens every 4 h (table 1). This spray sequence, developed by the manufacturer, began at 0900 h every morning. The total volume of solution added to the pit was about 1120 kg or about 20% of the fresh manure produced by 880, 75-kg pigs (ASAE, 1997). MEASUREMENT OF VENTILATION RATE Building ventilation rate was the sum of the airflow of the wall fans and the pit fans. Airflow rates of the wall fans were calculated based on fan curves (eqs. 3 and 4) supplied by the manufacturer, and the differential static pressure between indoor and outdoor air. The static pressure of each building was measured with a ±25 Pa differential static pressure transmitter (Model C1, Dresser Industries, Stratford, Conn.): Qf,90 = –118.9P + 22022
(3)
Qf,120 = –220.49P + 42359
(4)
where Qf,90 = airflow rate of the 90 cm fan (m3 /h) Qf,120 = airflow rate of the 120 cm fan (m3 /h) P = static pressure (Pa) Wall fans were monitored with a system of low-voltage solid-state input relays and 240 VAC relays that were Table 1. Timing of the additive spray Step
Remarks
1 2 3 4 5
4 min: odd nozzles north and south side Wait 3 h and 56 min 4 min: even nozzles north and south side Wait 3 h and 56 min Repeat steps 1-4 every eight hours
1897
se 1837 ms USE (Pg1895-1902)
7/10/01
10:04 AM
Page 1898
activated by fan motor voltages. It was assumed that fan motors and belts were functional and therefore that motor voltage indicated fan operation. Fan status (on or off) was recorded every minute. Pit fan airflow rates were measured with full-size impeller anemometers (FanCom Model FMS 50, Techmark, Lansing, Mich.). However, only the NE pit fan in 3A and no fans in 3B were equipped with an anemometer. Since the four pit fans in 3B were identical and controlled by one controller, the total airflow rates of the pit fans were calculated as four times the airflow measured by the anemometer for the NE pit fan. The control voltage for the four pit fans in 3B was recorded and the ventilation rate was estimated based on an airflow/voltage relationship determined from 3A data. All pit fan chimneys in 4A and 4B were equipped with anemometers. Therefore, the total pit fan airflow rates in 4A and 4B were the sum of the individual pit fan airflow rates. Air temperatures were measured with semiconductor temperature sensors encased in 15 cm long stainless steel sheaths (Model AD592, Computer Boards, Inc., Mansfield, Mass.). Indoor room temperatures were measured at seven locations equally spaced along the center aisle 2.0 m above the floor. Outdoor temperature was measured with an aspirated radiation protection shield mounted 3.0 m above the ground on a tower located between buildings 4A and 4B. Data for each continuously measured variable including gas concentrations were stored as 20-s block averages. MEASUREMENT OF AMMONIA CONCENTRATION Ammonia concentration was measured with a chemiluminescence NH3 analyzer (Model 17C, Thermal Environmental Instruments, Inc., Franklin, Mass.). The analyzer consisted of two separate modules, a converter module and an analyzer module. Ammonia was first converted to nitric oxide (NO) with the solid-state catalytic converter at 875°C before it was measured. The analyzer was calibrated with zero and 30 ppm certified gas every 7 to 14 days. Ammonia was sequentially measured at three gas sampling location groups (GSLGs) in each building: (1) pit head space (six sampling points); (2) pit fans (four sampling points); and (3) wall fans (five sampling points). The GSLG 3 was not installed until June. Multiple sampling tubes, e.g., six pit headspace points, were connected in parallel to the gas sampling system (fig. 1). Four sampling points at the inlets to the four, 120-cm wall fans were controlled individually with computer-operated solenoids. The solenoids were open only when the corresponding fans were operating. The gas sampling tube for the 90-cm wall fan was always open to protect the gas sampling pump. Gas samples were collected in parallel from locations 0.5 m directly upstream of the wall fans. Ammonia concentrations of each GSLG were measured continuously for 15 min before switching to the next GSLG. Thirty minutes were allocated during each 60-min sampling cycle to measure gas concentrations in each building. Thus, gas concentrations at each GSLG were measured during 24 sampling periods daily. The GSLG 3 was added to the system on 4 June in 3A and 3B, and on 16 July in 4A and 4B. A 90-min sampling cycle was then 1898
applied with 15-min sampling periods resulting in 16 sampling periods per day per GSLG. The sampling period for each GSLG was reduced to 10 min on 14 August and the daily number of sampling periods returned to 24. The first 3 min of NH3 data during the 15- and 10-min periods were ignored to allow the NH3 analyzer to equilibrate. Thus, the effective sampling period was 12 or 7 min. COMPLETE-DATA AND FULL-BUILDING DAYS Only complete-data and full-building (CDFB) days were selected for comparing treated and control buildings. The term “complete data” means that there were 24 or 16 periods of NH3 emission data available during the day. In other words, good measurements were collected during each sampling period of the day. Thus, days with lost data due to various problems with the measurement system were excluded except for days with only 1-h NH3 analyzer calibrations. The term “full building” means that both control and treated buildings (3A and 3B, or 4A and 4B) were fully occupied. The minimum number of pigs required for “fullbuilding” status were 855 for 3A and 3B, and 832 for 4A and 4B. A total of 332 building-days consisting of 6,944 data subsets was selected from the entire test period (table 2). CALCULATION OF AMMONIA EMISSION RATE The NH3 emission rate during each period was the product of the mean NH3 concentration over the effective 7 or 12-min sampling period and the mean ventilation rate over the same 7 or 12 min. The NH3 concentration of ventilation inlet air was assumed to be zero. Ammonia emission rates from the wall fans were calculated by multiplying the NH3 concentration of GSLG 3 by the sum of the wall fan airflow rates. Ammonia concentrations in the pit headspaces were used initially until the GSLG 3 was installed. Ammonia emission from the pit fans was calculated by multiplying the NH3 concentration of gas collected GSLG 2 and the sum of the pit fan airflow rates. Building NH3 emission was the sum of the emissions from the wall fans and the pit fans.
RESULTS AMMONIA CONCENTRATION AND EMISSION The average daily mean (ADM) NH3 concentrations during the first trial ranged from 8.9 ± 1.3 ppm (mean ± 95% confidence interval) in the 4A pit headspace to 13.7 ± 1.5 ppm in the 3B pit fans (table 3). The mean outside temperatures during the first trial were 8.4°C for buildings Table 2. Number of complete-data and full-building (CDFB) days and data subsets for each building for ammonia emission comparison Each Building for 3A & 3B Month March April May June July August September Total
CDFB 6 9 4 5 24 28 16 92
Data Subsets 144 216 96 80 312 576 384 1,808
Each Building for 4A & 4B CDFB 0 14 22 0 6 21 11 74
Data Subsets 0 336 528 0 96 440 264 1,664
TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASAE
se 1837 ms USE (Pg1895-1902)
7/10/01
10:04 AM
Page 1899
Table 3. Average daily mean ammonia concentrations at different measurement locations in the treated (3A and 4A) and control (3B and 4B) buildings during CDFB days Location
First Trial*
3A Pit headspace 3A Pit fans 3A Wall fans 3B Pit headspace 3B Pit fans 3B Wall fans 4A Pit headspace 4A Pit fans 4A Wall fans 4B Pit headspace 4B Pit fans 4B Wall fans
10.1 ± 1.4 11.9 ± 2
Second Trial*
Entire Period*
5.1 ± 0.4 4.0 ± 0.6 4.8 ± 0.5 5.4 ± 0.6 5.7 ± 0.5 5.4 ± 0.5 5.9 ± 0.7 6.6 ± 0.5 5.7 ± 0.8 5.2 ± 0.7 6.4 ± 0.9 6.7 ± 0.7
6.1 ± 0.6 5.6 ± 0.9 4.8 ± 0.5 6.3 ± 0.6 7.4 ± 0.8 5.4 ± 0.5 7.1 ± 0.8 8.2 ± 0.7 5.7 ± 0.8 7.5 ± 0.9 8.2 ± 0.8 6.7 ± 0.7
9.5 ± 0.8 13.7 ± 1.5 8.9 ± 1.3 10.5 ± 1.1 10.8 ± 1.2 10 ± 1.2
* Average ± 95% confidence interval. Unit: ppm. Table 4. Mean values of temperature and ventilation rates during CDFB days Mean Temperature (°C) Building
Outside
Inside
8.4 ± 2.3 8.4 ± 2.3 12.0 ± 1.6 12.0 ± 1.6
21.1 ± 0.4 21.5 ± 0.4 21.3 ± 0.5 21.2 ± 0.4
64 596 ± 18 594 62 678 ± 21 235 88 722 ± 13 594 88 567 ± 13 270
Trial 2 3A 3B 4A 4B
21.9 ± 0.9 21.9 ± 0.9 20.0 ± 1.1 20.0 ± 1.1
24.5 ± 0.5 25.3 ± 0.5 24.4 ± 0.7 24.1 ± 0.7
Control (3B)
Treated (4A)
Control (4B)
First Trial Average* (g/d·AU) Maximum (g/d·AU) Minimum (g/d·AU) n
57.1 ± 5.6 42.1 83.4 19
65.3 ± 13.0 33.3 156.5 19
53.9 ± 2.5 41.1 79.7 36
65.2 ± 3.6 43.9 89.4 36
Second Trial Average* (g/d·AU) 106.6 ± 6.2 Maximum (g/d·AU) 62.7 Minimum (g/d·AU) 183.6 n 73
146.7 ± 10.0 93.0 ± 10.1 121.8 ± 12.2 71.8 37.3 70.8 274.0 165.7 201.6 73 38 38
Entire Period Average* (g/d·AU) 96.4 ± 6.5 Maximum (g/d·AU) 42.1 Minimum (g/d·AU) 183.6 n 92
129.9 ± 10.7 74.0 ± 6.9 33.3 37.3 274.0 165.7 92 74
94.3 ± 9.2 43.9 201.6 74
Table 6. Reductions of ammonia emission rate per animal unit (AU)
First trial (%) Second trial (%) Entire test (%)
Reduction in 3A as Compared with 3B
Reduction in 4A as Compared with 4B
Average Reduction in 3A and 4A
13 27 26
17 24 22
16 26 24
157 761 ± 10 480 149 277 ± 10 422 129 650 ± 13 874 133 211 ± 14 225
3A and 3B and 12°C for buildings 4A and 4B (table 4). The second trial, with mean outside temperatures of 20 to 22°C, resulted in ADM NH3 concentrations of 4.0 ± 0.6 ppm in the 3A pit fans to 6.7 ± 0.7 ppm in the 4B wall fans. The ADM concentrations during the entire period ranged from 4.8 ± 0.5 ppm to 8.2 ± 0.8 ppm at the six GSLGs. Mean NH3 concentrations were higher in the control buildings than in the treated buildings at all GSLGs except for the 4A and 4B pit fans. The ADM NH3 emission rate from treated building 3A (57.1 ± 5.6 g/d·AU) was 13% lower than control building 3B (65.3 ± 13.0 g/d·AU) during the 19 CDFB days of the first trial (tables 5 and 6, and fig. 2). The ADM NH3 emission rate from 3A (106.6 ± 6.2 g/d·AU) was 27% lower (P < 0.05) than 3B (146.7 ± 10.0 g/d·AU) during 73 CDFB days of the second trial. Over both trials (92 CDFB days), the ADM NH3 emission rate from 3A (96.4 ± 6.5 g/d·AU) was 26% lower (P < 0.05) than 3B (129.9 ± 10.7 g/d·AU). During 36 CDFB days of the first trial, the ADM NH3 emission rates were 53.9 ± 2.5 and 65.2 ± 3.6 g/d·AU for 4A (treated) and 4B (control), respectively, 17% lower (P < 0.05) in the treated building. The ADM NH3 emission rates during 38 CDFB days of the second trial were 93.0 ± 10.1 and 121.8 ± 12.2 g/d·AU for 4A and 4B, respectively, 24% lower (P < 0.05) in the treated building. The ADM NH3 emission rates during the entire test period (74 CDFB days) were 74.0 ± 6.9 and 94.3 ± 9.2 g/d·AU for 4A and 4B, respectively, 22% lower (P < 0.05) in the treated building (fig. 3).
VOL. 43(6): 1895-1902
Treated (3A)
* Average ± 95% confidence interval. Mean Ventilation Rate (m3 /h)
Trial 1 3A 3B 4A 4B
Table 5. Average daily mean ammonia emission rates (CDFB days)
Figure 2–Normalized daily mean ammonia emission rates from treated (3A) and control (3B) buildings during CDFB days.
Figure 3–Normalized daily mean ammonia emission rates from treated (4A) and control (4B) buildings during CDFB days.
1899
se 1837 ms USE (Pg1895-1902)
7/10/01
10:04 AM
Page 1900
The ADM NH3 emission rates from the two treated buildings (3A and 4A) and two control buildings (3B and 4B) were 86.4 and 114.0 g/d·AU, respectively. The treatment of the additive apparently reduced the NH3 emission by 24% (P < 0.05). MANURE CHARACTERISTICS AND PRODUCTION RATES The trial means of manure pH ranged from 7.01 to 7.43 and varied insignificantly between buildings during the two trials (table 7). Also, no significant differences between the pH of profile and surface samples were detected. The profile samples had about 50 and 44% higher solids contents and phosphorus concentrations than the surface samples. Ammonia and nitrogen concentrations were 5 to 15% higher in the profile. Potassium concentrations of both sample locations were approximately equal. Dilution of the manure by the additive solution occurred in the treated buildings. The mean dry matter, total N, ammonia, and P in the treated buildings were 71, 88, 92, and 66% of those in the control buildings, respectively; Table 7. Mean manure characteristics in the treated (3A and 4A) and control (3B and 4B) buildings for each trial
Location
Dry Matter Trial pH (%)
Total N Ammonia P (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
K (ppm)
Treated 3A surface 3A surface 3A profile 3A profile 4A surface 4A surface 4A profile 4A profile
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
7.4 7.0 7.4 7.3 7.5 7.2 7.2 7.1
3.2 4.3 3.7 4.0 2.5 3.2 6.8 6.0
4802 4666 5065 5207 4675 4282 5470 5238
3488 3551 3535 3772 3223 3221 3700 3348
981 1309 1126 1227 595 738 1850 1364
1508 1133 1609 1425 1617 1308 1585 1288
Mean surface 1-2 Mean profile 1-2
7.3 7.2
3.3 5.1
4606 5245
3371 3589
906 1392
1392 1477
3B surface 3B surface 3B profile 3B profile 4B surface 4B surface 4B profile 4B profile
7.2 7.0 7.3 7.2 7.4 7.3 7.2 7.2
6.7 5.3 8.0 6.3 3.5 3.9 7.8 6.1
5520 5125 6016 5697 5080 5262 6066 6000
3715 3440 3918 3936 3562 3851 3936 3998
2154 1470 2341 1538 1015 1307 2299 1803
1526 1299 1679 905 1592 1384 1720 1543
7.2 7.2
4.9 7.0
5247 5945
3642 3947
1487 1995
1450 1462
Control 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Mean surface 1-2 Mean profile 1-2
Table 8. Total manure production in buildings Building Variable
3A
3B
4A
4B
Beginning manure depth (cm) Ending manure depth (cm) Average number of pigs Average weight of pigs (kg) Actual total manure* production (kg/day·pig) Estimated fresh manure production† (kg/day·pig)
105 187 752 72.5
100 170 785 73.2
105 209 789 78.2
93 174 830 79.0
5.27
4.31
6.38
4.72
6.09
6.15
6.57
6.64
* Total manure is defined here as urine, feces, and dilution water added to the pit including wash water and the manure additive solution. Evaporation losses were not considered. † Based on 84 kg/day of fresh manure production per 1000 kg live pig weight (ASAE, 1997). 1900
whereas, mean K concentrations were similar. Manure depth increased about 20% more in the treated buildings than in the control buildings (table 8) between the beginning of trial 1 (11 April) and the end of trial 2 (25 September). Since the manure pits were already 100 cm deep at the beginning of the test, the total manure volumes in the treated pits were less than 10% more diluted at the end of the test. The estimated manure production during this period, based on standard manure production rates (ASAE, 1997), would have been 6.09, 6.15, 6.57, and 6.64 kg/day·pig for buildings 3A, 3B, 4A, and 4B, respectively. Actual mean daily manure production rates, based on the mean number of pigs in the buildings, were 5.27, 4.31, 6.38, and 4.72 kg/day·pig, respectively. Thus, the actual total manure production rates in control buildings 3B and 4B were 30 and 29% less than published production rates of fresh manure, respectively.
DISCUSSION The inside NH3 concentrations reported in this article were comparable to concentrations measured in Europe and North America, which ranged from 5 to 23 ppm (Ni et al., 2000). This research was conducted during warm weather, which, because of higher ventilation rates, usually results in lower concentrations than during other seasons of the year. The resulting emission rate is greater since increases in ventilation rates during warmer weather are usually greater in magnitude than the reductions in concentrations (Ni et al., 2000). Thus, NH3 concentrations were lower and NH3 emissions were greater during the second trial as compared to the first trial because of higher ambient temperatures. Indoor temperatures were 3.3°C warmer during the second trial (table 4). The NH3 emission rates per AU during the second trial were 87, 124, 73, and 87% higher than during the first trial for 3A, 3B, 4A, and 4B, respectively. Ammonia reductions due to the additive application were somewhat higher in the second trial (26%) than in the first trial (16%) for the two replications. This apparent difference may be related to seasonal variations of gas emissions from swine buildings. Cooler weather during the first trial resulted in lower indoor temperatures (table 4) in the buildings, and consequently, lower ventilation rates. Emission rates in the winter are expected to be much lower than reported in this article. Theoretically, the release of manure gases is a process of mass transfer from a liquid medium into a gas. This release is influenced by concentration, temperature, and velocity profiles in both the gas and liquid (Ni, 1999). These profiles in a swine finishing building are positively related to fresh manure production, manure and air temperatures, internal air velocities, and building ventilation rate. Based on the results of this field test, swine producers can achieve 13 to 27% reductions in NH3 emission from their deep-pit finishing houses during mild and warm weather with Alliance. This relatively modest reduction in emissions was quite consistent throughout the test. The effectiveness of the additive in reducing emissions from the treated manure surface itself was probably much higher for a couple of reasons. First, the fraction of the manure pit surface contacted by the spray was unmeasured, but TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASAE
se 1837 ms USE (Pg1895-1902)
7/10/01
10:04 AM
Page 1901
probably was much less than 100%. Second, the additive was sprayed only into the manure pit leaving manure residue on the floor, equipment and pigs untreated. The maximum theoretical reduction in NH3 is the percentage of the total NH3 release in the building that is derived from the pit under the floor. This percentage is reported to be 40 to 60% (Hoeksma et al., 1992). A manure contaminated floor contributes significantly to NH3 emission from swine buildings (Ni et al., 1999). It is important for producers using Alliance to keep building surfaces above the pit including the floor as clean and dry as possible. These activities will result in greater percentage reductions of building NH3 emission if the additive is utilized. Based on a comparison of manure depths and characteristics, the additive solution diluted the manure solid and nutrient contents by about 20%, thus increasing manure transportation costs. The dilution of total N and NH3 in the manure may have contributed to lower NH3 emission. However, a water-only test was not conducted to determine the effect of dilution. Lower manure pH tends to decrease NH3 release (Ni, 1999), but pH was not affected by the treatment (table 7). Although odor emission from pig production facilities is one of the major air pollution complaints received by government authorities, a tenuous and debatable relationship exists between NH3 and nuisance odor (Liu et al., 1993). Therefore, no odor-reducing benefits were concluded from these tests. According to the cost-benefit analysis by the manufacturer, the capital cost for the Alliance application equipment for a 1200-head finishing building was $1,500. The cost of the additive was $1.38/pig space per year or $0.50/marketed hog, based on 135-day growth cycles and a product cost of $3.43/L. Since the NH3 emission reduction of 24% was relatively low and manure dilution would increase manure transportation costs, other benefits of the additive are needed to make it cost effective for most producers. However, other significant benefits were not observed. A statistically insignificant trend towards increased retention of total N and NH3-N in the treated manure was noted. The additive may have suppressed degradation of more complex nitrogenous compounds in the manure by manipulating microbial activity or controlling enzyme activities related to NH3 release.
CONCLUSIONS 1. Ammonia emission rates from swine finishing buildings increased with ambient and indoor temperatures. Ammonia emission rates ranged from 54 to 65 g/d·AU during the first trial with mean outside and inside temperatures of 10.2°C and 21.3°C, respectively, and from 93 to 147 g/d·AU during the second trial with mean outside and inside temperatures of 21.0°C and 25.6°C, respectively. 2. Overall, the NH3 emission per AU in two buildings using Alliance was 24% (P < 0.05) less than two control buildings. The emissions were 16 and 26% less during the first and second trials, respectively. 3. The application of Alliance to the pit added about 20% to the total manure production rate. The
VOL. 43(6): 1895-1902
dilution of pit contents may have contributed to the reduction of NH3 emissions. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. This research was supported, in part, by the Multi-State Consortium on Animal Waste, the Purdue University Agricultural Research Programs, and Monsanto Enviro-Chem Systems. The authors also acknowledge the collaboration and assistance of Mr. Brad Begolka, Heartland Pork, Inc.
REFERENCES Andersson, M. 1995. Cooling of manure in manure culverts. A method of reducing ammonia emissions in pig buildings. Report No. 218. Lund, Sweden: Institutionen för Jordbrukets Biosystem och Teknologi, Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet. ASAE Standards, 44th Ed. 1997. D384.1. Manure production and characteristics, 649-650. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Asman, W. A. H., and A. Janssen. 1987. A long-range transport model for ammonia and ammonium for Europe. Atmos. Environ. 21(10): 2099-2119. Beke, M. 1997. Additives in slurry to decrease ammonia emission. In Int. Symp. on Ammonia and Odour Control from Animal Production Facilities, eds. J. A. M. Voermans, and G. J. Monteny, Vol. II: 635-639, Vinkeloord, The Netherlands, Oct. 6-10. Rosmalen, Netherlands: NVTL. Braam, C. R., J. J. M. H. Ketelaars, and M. C. J. Smits. 1997. Effects of floor design and floor cleaning on ammonia emission from cubicle houses for dairy cows. Netherlands J. Agric. Sci. 45: 49-64. Bremner, J. M., and D. R. Keeney. 1965. Steam distillation methods for determination of ammonium, nitrate and nitrite. Analytica Chimica Acta 32: 485-495. Buijsman, E., H. M. Maas, and W. H. Asman. 1987. Anthropogenic NH3 emissions in Europe. Atmos. Environ. 21(5): 1009-1022. Bundy, D. S., and S. J. Hoff. 1998. The testing procedures and results of pit additives tested at Iowa State University. In Animal Production Systems and the Environment. An International Conference on Odor, Water Quality, Nutrient Management and Socioeconomic Issues, Vol. I: 279-285, Des Moines, Iowa, 19-22 July. Des Moines, Iowa: Iowa State Univ. Cowell, D. A., and H. M. ApSimon. 1998. Cost-effective strategies for the abatement of ammonia emissions from European agriculture. Atmos. Environ. 32(3): 573-580. Drummond, J. G., S. E. Curtis, J. Simon, and H. W. Norton. 1980. Effects of aerial ammonia on growth and health of young pigs. J. Animal Sci. 50(6): 1085-1091. Hartung, J., and V. R. Phillips. 1994. Control of gaseous emissions from livestock buildings and manure stores. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 57: 173-189. Heber, A. J., J. Q. Ni, B. L. Haymore, R. K. Duggirala, C. A. Diehl, and M. L. Spence. 1998. Measurements of gas emissions from commercial swine buildings. ASAE Paper No. 98-4058. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Heber, A. J., J. Q. Ni, K. J. Fakhoury, A. L. Sutton, J. A. Patterson, D. T. Kelly, and P. Shao. 2000. Laboratory tests of manure additives for odor control. ASAE Paper No. 00-4048. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Hendriks, J., D. Berckmans, and C. Vinckier. 1997. Field tests of bio-additives to reduce ammonia emission from pig houses. In Int. Symp. on Ammonia and Odour Control from Animal Production Facilities, eds. J. A. M. Voermans, and G. J.Monteny, Vol. II: 707-713, Vinkeloord, The Netherlands, 6-10 Oct. Rosmalen, Netherlands: NVTL. Hoeksma, P., N. Verdoes, J. Oosthoek, and J. A. M. Voermans. 1992. Reduction of ammonia volatilization from pig houses
1901
se 1837 ms USE (Pg1895-1902)
7/10/01
10:04 AM
Page 1902
using aerated slurry as recirculation liquid. Livestock Prod. Sci. 31(1-2): 121-132. Hörnig, G., W. Berg, and M. Türk. 1997. Harmful gas and odor emissions under use of feed and slurry additives. In Livestock Environment: 5th Int. Symposium, eds. R. W. Bottcher, and S. J. Hoff, 78-85. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Liu, Q., D. S. Bundy, and S. J. Hoff. 1993. Utilizing ammonia concentrations as an odor threshold indicator for swine facilities. In Livestock Environment. 4th Int. Symposium, eds. E. Collins, and C. R. Boon, 678-685. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Murphy, J., and J. P. Riley. 1962. A modified single solution method for the determination of phosphate in natural waters. Analytica Chimica Acta 27: 31-36. Nelson, D. W., and L. E. Sommers. 1972. A simple digestion procedure for estimation of total nitrogen in soils and sediments. J. Environ. Qual. 1: 423-425. Ni, J. Q. 1999. Mechanistic models of ammonia release from liquid manure, A review. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 72(1): 1-17. Ni, J. Q., C. Vinckier, J. Coenegrachts, and J. Hendriks. 1999. Effect of manure on ammonia emission from a fattening pig house with partly slatted floor. Livestock Prod. Sci. 59(1): 2531. Ni, J. Q., A. J. Heber, T. T. Lim, C. A. Diehl, R. K. Duggirala, B. L. Haymore, and A. L. Sutton. 2000. Ammonia emission from a large mechanically-ventilated swine building during warm weather. J. Environ. Qual. 29(3): 751-758. Pain, B. F., V. R. Phillips, C. R. Clarkson, and J. V. Klarenbeek. 1989. Loss of nitrogen through ammonia volatilization during and following the application of pig or cattle slurry to grassland. J. Sci. Food & Agric. 47(1): 1-12. Patni, N. K., and P. Y. Jui. 1993. Effectiveness of manure additives. ASAE Paper No. 93-4021. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Pearson, C. C., V. R. Phillips, G. Green, and I. M. Scotford. 1992. A minimum-cost biofilter for reducing aerial emissions from a broiler chicken house, 245-254. In Biotechniques for Air
1902
Pollution Abatement and Odour Control Policies. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers. Stinson, R., S. P. Lemay, E. M. Barber, and T. Fonstad. 1999. Effectiveness of three manure pit additives in commercial scale manure channels and simulated outdoor storage. ASAE Paper No. 99-4150. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Sutton, A. L., K. B. Kephart, J. A. Patterson, R. Mumma, D. T. Kelly, E. Bogus, D. D. Jones, and A. J. Heber. 1996. Manipulating swine diets to reduce ammonia and odor emissions. In Conf. Proc.: 1st Int. Conference on Air Pollution from Agricultural Operations, 445-452, Kansas City, Missouri, 7-9 February. Ames, Iowa: MidWest Plan Service. Urbain, B., P. Gustin, J. F. Prouvost, and M. Ansay. 1994. Quantitative assessment of aerial ammonia toxicity to the nasal-mucosa by use of the nasal lavage method in pigs. Am. J. Vet. Res. 55: 1335-1340. Zhang, R., D. S. Bundy, and Y. Yin. 1994. Removal of ammonia and odors from contaminated air in animal houses by a ferroelectric plasma reactor. ASAE Paper No. 94-4056. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Voermans, J. A. M., N. Verdoes, and G. M. den Brok. 1995. The effect of pen design and climate control on the emission of ammonia from pig houses. In Conference Proc.: 7th Int. Symposium on Agricultural and Food Processing Wastes, 252260, Chicago, Illinois, 18-20 June. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE. Zhu, J., D. S. Bundy, X. Li, and N. Rashid. 1997. Controlling odor and volatile substances in liquid hog manure by amendment. J. Environ. Qual. 26: 740-743.
TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASAE
