Field Evaluation of DDGS Diet, Alum Manure Additives, and ... · RH/Temp probe Static pressure port...

Teng Teeh Lim, Ph.D., P.E.Commercial Agriculture Program and

Food Systems and BioengineeringUniversity Of Missouri

limt@missouri.edu

Field Evaluation of DDGS Diet, Alum Manure Additives, and BMPs to Reduce Ammonia

Emissions

2

Overview• Test barns• Effects of “Alum” and “Aluminum

Chloride” applications.• Effects of DDGS in the diet,

combined with several best management practices.

• Effects of only BMPs.

3

Field Test Site

Instrumentshelter

48-in dia

Conventional high-rise houses (completed 1994)

201 m x 21 m169K hens

4

High-Rise Layer Barns

• 169K hens, 8-rows, 4-tier crates.• Sidewall fans spaced 7.3 m apart.• 10 fan stages.• “Turbo” ventilation system• Manure scraped daily.• Manure drying enhanced with 18,

918-mm dia. pit circulation fans.

5

Alum and Aluminum Chloride Applications

• Nitrogen is released as ammonium (NH4+) under acidic or neutral conditions, or as NH3 at higher pH. Acidifying agents reduce manure pH and decrease NH3 volatilization

• The addition of alum to poultry litter:– reduces NH3 volatilization.– increases total and soluble N and N/P

ratios.– lowers in-house NH3 concentrations.

6

Alum Application System• A 3000-gal holding tank stored the

chemical. • 1500 gal alum + 1500 gal water. • Spray tubes and sprinkling nozzles were

installed along the barn length.• An air pump provided pressure for

spraying, and the water pump filled the spray pipe with the solution.

• Solutions were sprayed for 4 s per hr.

7

Monitoring PlanMonitoring

Plan

Thermocouple Air sampling (1-13)Anemometer (SVA)

RH/Temp probeStatic pressure portTEOM PM monitor

Vibration sensor on each fan

Fan number

Instrument shelter

F26F50 F38 F29F47

F25 F1F4F22

Floor plan (201 m x 21 m)

F26F50

F13

F38 F29F47

F13F25 F1F4F22

Barn 1 (control)

Barn 2

Cages

Barn 1 (control)Pit

Barn 2 (treated)٭ Activity sensor

Wind sensorSolar sensorS

S

S

٭٭٭٭٭٭

٭٭

٭٭٭٭٭٭

٭٭

٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭٭ ٭

٭

٭

٭٭

1

2

3

23

3

instrument shelter

1

2 2

3

3

3710

44

44

5

55

566 6 6 6

7 7 7 7

7

8 8 8

8 8 8 89

9 9 9

9 9 9

9910 10 10 10

10 10 10 10

710

44

44

5

55

566 6 6 6

7 7 7 7

7

8 8 8

8 8 8 89

9 9 9

9 9 9

9910 10 10 10

10 10 10 10

Fan stage

Alum nozzle lineAlum storage tankAlum spraying pump

Monitoring Plan

Thermocouple Air sampling (1-13)Anemometer (SVA)

RH/Temp probeStatic pressure portTEOM PM monitor

Vibration sensor on each fan

Fan number

Instrument shelter

F26F50 F38 F29F47 F26F50 F38 F29F47

F25 F1F4F22

Floor plan (201 m x 21 m)

F26F50

F13

F38 F29F47

F13F25 F1F4F22

Barn 1 (control)

Barn 2

Cages

Barn 1 (control)Pit

Barn 2 (treated)٭ Activity sensor

Wind sensorSolar sensorS

S

S

٭٭٭٭٭٭

٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭

٭٭

٭٭٭٭٭٭

٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭

٭٭

٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭٭ ٭٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭٭ ٭٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭ ٭٭ ٭

٭

٭

٭٭

1

2

3

23

3

instrument shelter

1

2 2

3

3

3710

44

44

5

55

566 6 6 6

7 7 7 7

7

8 8 8

8 8 8 89

9 9 9

9 9 9

9910 10 10 10

10 10 10 10

710

44

44

5

55

566 6 6 6

7 7 7 7

7

8 8 8

8 8 8 89

9 9 9

9 9 9

9910 10 10 10

10 10 10 10

710

44

44

5

55

566 6 6 6

7 7 7 7

7

8 8 8

8 8 8 89

9 9 9

9 9 9

9910 10 10 10

10 10 10 10

710

44

44

5

55

566 6 6 6

7 7 7 7

7

8 8 8

8 8 8 89

9 9 9

9 9 9

9910 10 10 10

10 10 10 10

Fan stage

Alum nozzle lineAlum storage tankAlum spraying pump

8

Measurement Plan • Ammonia was measured with a

chemiluminescence analyzer (Model 17C, Thermo Scientific), after conversion to nitric oxide.

• A photo-acoustic infrared monitor (Mine Safety Appliances) was collocated with the 17C.

• Fan operation & static pressure were monitored for barn ventilation rate.

• Temperature, humidity, wind speed, and direction.

9

Alum Test Measurement Plan

Table 1. Tests conducted during study. Test Date Description Emission difference

1 9/1-9/10 ESCS 11% 2 9/11-9/20 Alum 29% 3 9/21-9/29 ESCS 12% 4a 9/30-11/4 ESCS + alum, some nozzles were clogged 16% 4b 11/5-12/12 ESCS + alum, nozzles were cleaned on 11/4 16% 4c 12/22-1/20 ESCS + alum, new hens in B2, nozzles cleaned (1/12) 17% 5 1/21-2/9 ESCS + alum (A7, single dose) 33% 6 2/10-2/15 ESCS + alum (A7, 1.5 dose) 23% 7 2/16-3/7 Alum (A7, 1.5 dose) + evening manure scraping* 40% 8 3/8-3/31 Aluminum chloride + evening manure scraping 27%

* ESCS operation was discontinued on March 4, 2006.

10

Alum Application NH3 Emissions

The mean untreated NH3 emission rate was 480 g/d-AU (1.35 g/d-hen)The alum and AlCl3 applications reduced NH3 emission by 23%

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

8/25 9/22 10/20 11/17 12/15 1/12 2/9 3/9 4/6

Day in 2005 and 2006

Em

issi

on, g

/d-A

U

*

B1 Emission

B2 Emission

11

Alum Test Results• The highest paired NH3 emission reductions were

observed in Tests 5 (33%) and 7 (40%), which were probably due to the combined effects of well-functioning nozzles, evening manure scraping, and application of the A7 alum.

• Due to the lack of test replication and only one treated barn and one control barn, it is not known which factor contributed the most.

• The emission rate differences between the two barns averaged 32%, and ranged from -10% to 52% between January 21 and March 31.

A newly installed nozzle and lateral tube next to the ESCS system (left, picture was taken on September 8), and a clogged nozzle

(right, picture was taken on November 1)

Alum Application Nozzle

13

Limitations• Application of dry alum was not economically

feasible.• Manure moisture content (%) ranged from the

upper 20s (warm months) to the upper 30s (cold months), thus limiting the amount of liquid alum that could be applied.

• The nozzles were easily clogged by salt accumulation.

• The chemicals were acidic and corrosive.• The major limitation is related to the fact that

manure on 2nd floor is untreated.

14

Costs and Limitations Alum = $0.13/L, AlCl3 = $0.14/L, without

delivery charges. $44 per barn per day. The automatic spray controller cost about

$3000, and the doubled-wall holding tank was $6500.

The labor to maintain the controller, air and water pumps is about 3 hours per week per barn.

15

DDGS and BMPs Tests• To determine effectiveness and potential

of DDGS and best management practices (BMPs) in mitigating NH3 emissions from commercial high-rise layer houses.

• DDGS = fiber-enhanced diet. • The BMPs included the operation of 36

manure drying fans in the manure pit, reduced crude protein in the feed, improved waterline leak management practices, and lower bird density.

16

DDGS+BMPs Measurement Plan

Table 1. Tests conducted during study. Test Date Description

1 8/1-8/6 Reduced bird density¹ 2 8/7-8/27 Stabilizing period¹ 3 8/28-12/10 DDGS + BMPs 4 12/11-1/14 BMPs only, old manure 5 1/15-2/18 Manure removal period¹ 6 2/19-3/17 BMPs only, new manure

¹) Emission rate was not used to calculate effectiveness of tests

17

DDGS and BMPs TestsMean Manure MC and pH

5

6

7

8

9

10

0

20

40

60

80

100

8/1 8/29 9/26 10/24 11/21 12/19 1/16 2/13 3/12

pH

MC

, %

Day in 2007 and 2008

H1 MC H2 MC

H1 pH H2 pH

18

DDGS and BMPs TestsFeed Fiber Contents

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

8/1 8/29 9/26 10/24 11/21 12/19 1/16 2/13 3/12

Cru

de fi

ber,

%

Day in 2007 and 2008

H1 Crude Fiber

H2 Crude Fiber

19

DDGS and BMPs: Emissions of H1 (untreated) and H2 (treated)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

7/31 8/21 9/11 10/2 10/23 11/13 12/4 12/25 1/15 2/5 2/26 3/18

Red

uctio

n, %

Emis

sion

, mg/

s

*

Day in 2007 and 2008

House 1 House 2 Reduction

20

DDGS and BMPs Tests• In test 1, reduction = 37%, caused by

Lower bird density. • For BMPs + DDGS, reduction = 72% (n=90

days).• For BMPs only, reduction = 64%, but had

residual manure from previous tests.• After re-bedding, for BMPs only, reduction

= 55%. • Pit fans + leakage management

successfully lowered the manure MC.

21

That’s all. Thanks!

22

DDGS and BMPs: Bird Population and Live Mass

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

100000

150000

200000

7/31 8/21 9/11 10/210/2311/1312/412/251/15 2/5 2/26 3/18

Live

Mas

s, A

U

*

Bird

Num

ber

*

Day in 2007 and 2008

B1 Bird NumberB2 Bird NumberB1 Live MassB2 Live Mass

23

DDGS and BMPs: Emission per Live Mass Values

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

7/31 8/28 9/25 10/23 11/20 12/18 1/15 2/12 3/11 4/8

Emis

sion

, g/d

-AU

*

Day in 2007 and 2008

B1

B2

24

DDGS and BMPs: Emissions of H1 (untreated) and H2 (treated)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

7/31 8/21 9/11 10/2 10/23 11/13 12/4 12/25 1/15 2/5 2/26 3/18

Red

uctio

n, %

Emis

sion

, mg/

s

*

Day in 2007 and 2008

House 1 House 2 Reduction