Farm-scale evaluation of ozonation for mitigating ammonia concentrations in broiler houses.

This study evaluated the effectiveness of in-house ozonation within the public health standard limit (0.1 parts per million [ppm]) for mitigating ammonia (NH3) concentrations inside commercial broiler houses. The project was conducted in four identical tunnel-ventilated houses. Two houses served as treatment and the other two served as control units. The experiment was replicated in five consecutive flocks. Except for ozonation treatment, all other operational parameters including feed, broiler strain, age and number of broilers, and ventilation system were the same among four houses. NH3 and carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations in the treatment and control houses were measured for a minimum of 48 hr/week throughout the five flocks of 8 or 9 weeks each. The gas measurements were conducted using portable multigas units (PMUs). House temperatures were recorded with data loggers in each flock. Comparison of temperatures and CO2 concentrations among houses indicated no significant differences in ventilation rates among treatment and control houses in any of the five flocks. As a result, comparisons of NH3 concentrations inside houses were used to evaluate the effectiveness of house ozonation for NH3 emission mitigation. Statistical test of mean NH3 concentrations for each flock separated by house indicated that the house-to-house variation was significantly smaller than the flock-to-flock variation. There was a substantial variation in NH3 concentrations across different flocks, but no house had consistently higher or lower mean NH3 concentrations than any other. Evaluations for differences in mean NH3 from week to week, between treatment groups, and differences in week-to-week variations between treatment groups suggested that ozone effect was not uniform for each week and the effect was not statistically significant for any week. Tests of overall ozone treatment effect and treatment-week interaction indicated there was no difference in mean NH3 between the control and ozone treatment groups (P = 0.25), nor was the week effect different for control and treatment groups (P = 0.46). The results of this field evaluation indicate that there was no statistical evidence to suggest that the ozone treatment has any effect on average NH3 concentrations in these chicken houses.

Dispersion modeling to compare alternative technologies for odor remediation at swine facilities.

The effectiveness of 18 alternative technologies for reducing odor dispersion at and beyond the boundary of swine facilities was assessed in conjunction with an initiative sponsored through agreements between the Attorney General of North Carolina and Smithfield Foods, Premium Standard Farms, and Frontline Farmers. The trajectory and spatial distribution of odor emitted at each facility were modeled at 200 and 400 m downwind from each site under two meteorological conditions (daytime and nighttime) using a Eulerian-Lagrangian model. To predict the dispersion of odor downwind, the geographical area containing the odorant sources at each facility was partitioned into 10-m2 grids on the basis of satellite photographs and architectural drawings. Relative odorant concentrations were assigned to each grid point on the basis of intensity measurements made by the trained odor panel at each facility using a 9-point rating scale. The results of the modeling indicated that odor did not extend significantly beyond 400 m downwind of any of the test sites during the daytime when the layer of air above the earth's surface is usually turbulent. However, modeling indicated that odor from all full-scale farms extended beyond 400 m onto neighboring property in the evenings when deep surface cooling through long-wave radiation to space produces a stable (nocturnal) boundary layer. The results also indicated that swine housing, independent of waste management type, plays a significant role in odor downwind, as do odor sources of moderate to moderately high intensity that emanate from a large surface area such as a lagoon. Human odor assessments were utilized for modeling rather than instrument measurements of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, or particulates less than 10 microm in diameter (PM10) because these physical measurements obtained simultaneously with human panel ratings were not found to accurately predict human odor intensity in the field.

Potential health effects of odor from animal operations, wastewater treatment, and recycling of byproducts.

Complaints of health symptoms from ambient odors have become more frequent in communities with confined animal facilities, wastewater treatment plants, and biosolids recycling operations. The most frequently reported health complaints include eye, nose, and throat irritation, headache, nausea, diarrhea, hoarseness, sore throat, cough, chest tightness, nasal congestion, palpitations, shortness of breath, stress, drowsiness, and alterations in mood. Typically, these symptoms occur at the time of exposure and remit after a short period of time. However, for sensitive individuals such as asthmatic patients, exposure to odors may induce health symptoms that persist for longer periods of time as well as aggravate existing medical conditions. A workshop was held at Duke University on April 16-17, 1998 cosponsored by Duke University, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). and National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) to assess the current state of knowledge regarding the health effects of ambient odors. This report summarizes the conclusions from the Workshop regarding the potential mechanisms responsible for health symptoms from ambient odors. Methods for validation of health symptoms, presence of odor, and efficacy of odor management techniques are described as well.