Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.
EMISSIONS FROM SWINEEMISSIONS FROM SWINEMORTALITY COMPOSTSMORTALITY COMPOSTSDana MilesDana MilesMike McLaughlinMike McLaug...
Why compost?Why compost? It’s old as dirt.It’s old as dirt. For centuries, composting has beenFor centuries, composting ...
Swine population continuesSwine population continuesto increase worldwideto increase worldwide This means more pig waste ...
Did you know?Did you know? The daily manure output of a pig isThe daily manure output of a pig isapproximatelyapproximate...
Another type of wasteAnother type of waste U. S. swine farrowing facilities routinelyU. S. swine farrowing facilities rou...
PurposePurposeImprove practices to dispose ofImprove practices to dispose ofswine farrowing mortalities.swine farrowing mo...
Objective:Objective:Compare sawdust and water (standard)Compare sawdust and water (standard)to other mixtures where additi...
Objective:Objective:Assess potential risks and benefits ofAssess potential risks and benefits ofadding broiler litter and ...
MethodologyMethodology
Compost TreatmentsCompost Treatments 227-L covered heavy-duty plastic227-L covered heavy-duty plasticrecycling binsrecycl...
ParametersParameters Nutrients:Nutrients:– C, N, P, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Cu, ZnC, N, P, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Cu, Zn Microorganisms:M...
ParametersParameters Temperature, Moisture of mixturesTemperature, Moisture of mixtures Emissions:Emissions:– COCO22, N,...
ResultsResultsSWSLW SE SLE
Temperatures:Temperatures:Ambient & Compost MixturesAmbient & Compost MixturesValidation Study-Daily NH3Ambient temperatur...
C:N at start and endC:N at start and end Start EndStart End SW 489SW 489 8585 SLW 21SLW 21 2121 SE 160 58SE 160 58 SL...
NutrientsNutrientsMore P, K, Mg, Mn, Cu, Zn were presentMore P, K, Mg, Mn, Cu, Zn were presentinitially in the broiler lit...
Recovery of BacteriaRecovery of Bacteria Clostridium perfringens:Clostridium perfringens:– Among treatments there were si...
Recovery of BacteriaRecovery of Bacteria Gram-negative bacteria:Gram-negative bacteria:– Among treatments there were noAm...
Recovery of BacteriaRecovery of Bacteria Gram-positive bacteria:Gram-positive bacteria:– Among treatments there were sign...
EmissionsEmissions Each 24 h for first 4 daysEach 24 h for first 4 days Each 24 h for 4 days after turn 1Each 24 h for 4...
Initial NHInitial NH33 fluxflux
NHNH33 flux after turn 1flux after turn 1
NHNH33 flux after turn 2 & endflux after turn 2 & end
CO2 Flux g/(m2 h) CH4 Flux mg/(m2 h)N2O Flux mg/(m2 h)SWSLWSESLESWSLWSESLESWSLWSESLEN2O CO2 CH4Turn1Turn2Turn1Turn2Turn1Tu...
ConclusionsConclusions Adding broiler litter to sawdustAdding broiler litter to sawdust(1:1/w:w) increased compost(1:1/w:...
ConclusionsConclusions Litter increased levels of someLitter increased levels of somenutrients and bacteria, but changesn...
ConclusionsConclusions Composting offers environmentallyComposting offers environmentallysound disposition of these bypro...
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Rhonda Cornelius, Renotta Smith,Rhonda Cornelius, Renotta Smith,Cindy Smith, Mary Hardy,...
Thank you!Thank you!
Prochain SlideShare
Chargement dans…5
×

Emissions from Swine Mortality Compost

797 vues

Publié le

Proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/67661

Animal agriculture is looking for innovative means to dispose of mortalities. Composting is an environmentally friendly option that retains the nutrients of the animal and organic materials. Southern U.S. swine farrowing operations often use sawdust as a C source for mortality composting. The objective of this study was to compare the farm standard mortality composting procedure (using sawdust and water) with other mixtures having supplementary C and N provided by broiler litter and by replacing water with swine lagoon effluent.

  • Soyez le premier à commenter

Emissions from Swine Mortality Compost

  1. 1. EMISSIONS FROM SWINEEMISSIONS FROM SWINEMORTALITY COMPOSTSMORTALITY COMPOSTSDana MilesDana MilesMike McLaughlinMike McLaughlinJohn BrooksJohn BrooksArdeshir AdeliArdeshir AdeliUSDA-ARS Genetics & Precision AgricultureUSDA-ARS Genetics & Precision AgricultureResearch Unit, Mississippi State, MSResearch Unit, Mississippi State, MS
  2. 2. Why compost?Why compost? It’s old as dirt.It’s old as dirt. For centuries, composting has beenFor centuries, composting has beenused to recycle organic material backused to recycle organic material backinto the soil.into the soil. Other benefits:Other benefits:-destroys pathogens-destroys pathogens-converts N from NH-converts N from NH33 to moreto morestable organic formsstable organic forms-reduces volume of waste-reduces volume of waste
  3. 3. Swine population continuesSwine population continuesto increase worldwideto increase worldwide This means more pig waste that needsThis means more pig waste that needsto be dealt with in ways that are:to be dealt with in ways that are:– Environmentally sensibleEnvironmentally sensible– Economically realisticEconomically realistic– Socially acceptableSocially acceptable
  4. 4. Did you know?Did you know? The daily manure output of a pig isThe daily manure output of a pig isapproximatelyapproximately 6%6% of its body weight?of its body weight? In various types of 100-sow units, theIn various types of 100-sow units, therange of fresh manure produced isrange of fresh manure produced is600-2800 kg/d.600-2800 kg/d.
  5. 5. Another type of wasteAnother type of waste U. S. swine farrowing facilities routinelyU. S. swine farrowing facilities routinelycompost daily mortalities using open staticcompost daily mortalities using open staticpiles.piles. The amount of annual mortality for a 1000-The amount of annual mortality for a 1000-sow farrowing to finish farm was estimatedsow farrowing to finish farm was estimatedat 20 tons (Imbeah, 1998).at 20 tons (Imbeah, 1998). For a 2000-head finishing operation, justFor a 2000-head finishing operation, justover 2 tons of mortality may be expectedover 2 tons of mortality may be expectedannually (Vansickle, 2013).annually (Vansickle, 2013).
  6. 6. PurposePurposeImprove practices to dispose ofImprove practices to dispose ofswine farrowing mortalities.swine farrowing mortalities.
  7. 7. Objective:Objective:Compare sawdust and water (standard)Compare sawdust and water (standard)to other mixtures where additional Cto other mixtures where additional Cand N were supplied by:and N were supplied by: Broiler litterBroiler litter Swine lagoon effluentSwine lagoon effluent
  8. 8. Objective:Objective:Assess potential risks and benefits ofAssess potential risks and benefits ofadding broiler litter and swine effluent toadding broiler litter and swine effluent tocompost by comparingcompost by comparing Nutrient levelsNutrient levels Bacterial pathogensBacterial pathogens Gaseous emissionsGaseous emissions
  9. 9. MethodologyMethodology
  10. 10. Compost TreatmentsCompost Treatments 227-L covered heavy-duty plastic227-L covered heavy-duty plasticrecycling binsrecycling bins Three replications of fourThree replications of fourtreatments:treatments:– Sawdust/water SWSawdust/water SW– Sawdust/litter/water SLWSawdust/litter/water SLW– Sawdust/effluent SESawdust/effluent SE– Sawdust/litter/effluent SLESawdust/litter/effluent SLE
  11. 11. ParametersParameters Nutrients:Nutrients:– C, N, P, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Cu, ZnC, N, P, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Cu, Zn Microorganisms:Microorganisms:– Clostridium perfringensClostridium perfringens– Escherichia coliEscherichia coli– Listeria spp.Listeria spp.– Salmonella spp.Salmonella spp.– Gram-positive and Gram-negativeGram-positive and Gram-negativebacteriabacteria
  12. 12. ParametersParameters Temperature, Moisture of mixturesTemperature, Moisture of mixtures Emissions:Emissions:– COCO22, N, N22O, CHO, CH44 via gas chromatographyvia gas chromatography(GRACEnet methodology)(GRACEnet methodology)– NHNH33, CO, CO22, N, N22O, CHO, CH44 via photoacoustic gasvia photoacoustic gasanalyzeranalyzerMeasurement Dates:March – July 2012
  13. 13. ResultsResultsSWSLW SE SLE
  14. 14. Temperatures:Temperatures:Ambient & Compost MixturesAmbient & Compost MixturesValidation Study-Daily NH3Ambient temperatureBroiler litter inclusion increased compost temperatures.
  15. 15. C:N at start and endC:N at start and end Start EndStart End SW 489SW 489 8585 SLW 21SLW 21 2121 SE 160 58SE 160 58 SLE 20SLE 20 2020Approximately 15 g/kg N added withApproximately 15 g/kg N added withbroiler litter.broiler litter.
  16. 16. NutrientsNutrientsMore P, K, Mg, Mn, Cu, Zn were presentMore P, K, Mg, Mn, Cu, Zn were presentinitially in the broiler litter treatments.initially in the broiler litter treatments.Only Na appeared similar among theOnly Na appeared similar among thetreatments.treatments.
  17. 17. Recovery of BacteriaRecovery of Bacteria Clostridium perfringens:Clostridium perfringens:– Among treatments there were significantAmong treatments there were significantdifferences at p=0.05, withdifferences at p=0.05, with greater levelsgreater levelsin the two effluent treatmentsin the two effluent treatments when thewhen theexperiment began. At turn 1 and the end,experiment began. At turn 1 and the end,there were no differences.there were no differences.– Within each treatment there were noWithin each treatment there were nosignificant differences over time ,significant differences over time ,measured at the start, turn 1 and end ofmeasured at the start, turn 1 and end ofthe experiment.the experiment.
  18. 18. Recovery of BacteriaRecovery of Bacteria Gram-negative bacteria:Gram-negative bacteria:– Among treatments there were noAmong treatments there were nosignificant differences at any time.significant differences at any time.– Within each treatment there were noWithin each treatment there were nosignificant differences except that thesignificant differences except that theSW levels decreased over time (p=0.05).SW levels decreased over time (p=0.05).
  19. 19. Recovery of BacteriaRecovery of Bacteria Gram-positive bacteria:Gram-positive bacteria:– Among treatments there were significantAmong treatments there were significantdifferences at p=0.001, with greater levelsdifferences at p=0.001, with greater levelsin the two broiler litter treatments.in the two broiler litter treatments.– Within the SE treatment, there was noWithin the SE treatment, there was nosignificant change over time. In the othersignificant change over time. In the othertreatments, levels decreased significantlytreatments, levels decreased significantlyover time (p=0.05).over time (p=0.05).
  20. 20. EmissionsEmissions Each 24 h for first 4 daysEach 24 h for first 4 days Each 24 h for 4 days after turn 1Each 24 h for 4 days after turn 1 Each 24 h for 2 days after turn 2Each 24 h for 2 days after turn 2 EndEnd
  21. 21. Initial NHInitial NH33 fluxflux
  22. 22. NHNH33 flux after turn 1flux after turn 1
  23. 23. NHNH33 flux after turn 2 & endflux after turn 2 & end
  24. 24. CO2 Flux g/(m2 h) CH4 Flux mg/(m2 h)N2O Flux mg/(m2 h)SWSLWSESLESWSLWSESLESWSLWSESLEN2O CO2 CH4Turn1Turn2Turn1Turn2Turn1Turn2
  25. 25. ConclusionsConclusions Adding broiler litter to sawdustAdding broiler litter to sawdust(1:1/w:w) increased compost(1:1/w:w) increased composttemperatures after aerationtemperatures after aeration(mixing and turning).(mixing and turning).
  26. 26. ConclusionsConclusions Litter increased levels of someLitter increased levels of somenutrients and bacteria, but changesnutrients and bacteria, but changesand levels were not consistent.and levels were not consistent. NHNH33 , N, N22O and COO and CO22 emissions wereemissions werehigher after early aeration; CHhigher after early aeration; CH44emissions peaked later.emissions peaked later.
  27. 27. ConclusionsConclusions Composting offers environmentallyComposting offers environmentallysound disposition of these byproductssound disposition of these byproductsand manures.and manures.
  28. 28. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Rhonda Cornelius, Renotta Smith,Rhonda Cornelius, Renotta Smith,Cindy Smith, Mary Hardy, TimCindy Smith, Mary Hardy, TimFairbrother, and Walter WoolfolkFairbrother, and Walter Woolfolk Farm ownerFarm owner Introductory material:Introductory material:Imbeah. 1998. Composting piggery waste: A review.Imbeah. 1998. Composting piggery waste: A review.Bioresource Technology 63:197-203.Bioresource Technology 63:197-203.Vansickle. 2013. http://nationalhogfarmer.com/resources/es.
  29. 29. Thank you!Thank you!

×