Air Quality Workshop An Introduction to the BC Poultry Industry Air Quality Research Program Kevin Chipperfield, P.Ag. BC Sustainable Poultry Farming Group, Abbotsford, BC
Funding Acknowledgements Industry and Government Contributions Agriculture Environment Initiatives BC Chicken Growers’ Assn. BC Agriculture Council BC Turkey Assn. BC Sustainable Poultry Farming Group Fraser Valley Egg Producers’ Assn. BC Broiler Hatching Egg Producers’ Assn. United Agri Services BC Investment Agriculture Foundation BC Ministry of Agriculture and Lands Agriculture and Agri ‐ Food Canada
BC SPFG Directorship • Ralph Volkmann, BC Turkey Assn. • Dave Siemens, FV Egg Producers’ Assn. • Hester Mulder, BC Broiler Hatching Egg Producers’ Assn. • Frank Flokstra, BC Chicken Growers’ Assn. Advisory Capacity • Stewart Paulson, BC Ministry of Agriculture and Lands Poultry Specialist
Presentation Overview .... • Brief background on the issues • Technology evaluated by the AQ partnership • Summarize production benefits from ESCS • Specific project results in presentations to follow
Project Partners & Agencies Scientific & Technical Expertise • BC Ministry of Agriculture and Lands – Gustav Rogstrand, David Poon, Jacquay Foyle • Agriculture and Agri ‐ Food Canada – Dr. Shabtai Bittman • UBC School of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene – Dr. Karen Bartlett • BC Sustainable Poultry Farming Group – Kevin Chipperfield
Dust Issues ‐ Intensive Agriculture Facing Changing Land Use
Dust Control ‐ Simple Efforts … Permeable dust barrier Fan airflow & dust barrier Conventional Tree …. Some more Windbreak or Hedgerow useful than others
AQ Solutions ‐ Poultry Farmer Objectives • Treatment not intrusive to production system • Treatment enhances production i.e. positive effect on bird performance – better bird health, good ROI • Simple to use and maintain • Public Relations Benefits i.e. neighbors
SPFG AQ Program Objectives • To monitor and better understand the relationship between poultry farming practices and ambient AQ • To reduce Fraser Valley poultry farm particulate emissions • To increase in ‐ barn air quality through dust reduction and microbial composition changes • To work cooperatively to seek AQ solutions while respecting farmer objectives
AQ Project Objectives • To measure in ‐ barn air quality on a turkey and broiler farm for PM, microbial composition changes in PM, and bird production performance effects • To measure out ‐ of ‐ barn PM and microbial levels at various locations from the barn (incl. ambient) and in relation to Vegetative Filters (trees) • To evaluate PM emission rates from a turkey and broiler farm • To evaluate changes in the above parameters due to use of the ESCS and Vegetative Filters
Vegetative Filter Concept • Good visual appearance • Successful at capturing dust particles – perhaps better at filtering larger particles than smaller ones
VF ‐ Tree Species Used Hybrid Poplar Excelsa Cedar Red Maple
VF – visual evidence …. … indicates they are effective!!
Vegetative Filter Layout Mulch used to evaluate as nutrient absorbent Tree Spacing – about 8’x8’
ESCS Concept • Reduces in ‐ barn dust so less dust leaving barn through exhaust fans • Dust precipitates on walls, ceiling, and floor • Low energy usage (16,000 ft2 barn uses about 200 watts)
Electrostatic Space Charge System Each unit 100 Watts powering 600’ line (8,000 ft 2 ) Corona Points ESCS in Poultry Barn Power Generator
Prelim results: increased visibility ESCS barn – Day 26 (Feb 11, 2008) Control barn – Day 26 (Feb 11, 2008) Dust precipitates onto an electrical cable
Sampling Equipment GRIMM laser-based spectrometer Harvard Impactors (PM 10 and PM 2.5 )
ESCS Operational Observations ... • Important to operate the 2 mA system at 2 mA – monitor to keep system functioning optimally • Keep an eye on gauges to monitor for proper amperage supply to corona lines • Corona lines must be cleaned at end of cycle as part of normal barn cleaning operations – pressure washing likely required??
ESCS Production Performance Evaluation on a Fraser Valley Broiler Farm ‐ Affect on Feed Conversion ‐ 10 Cycle Analysis Note: 2.10 ‐ Feed Conversion is based on payable bird weight ‐ Control treatment is average of 2 barns, ESCS is 1 barn ‐ $/bird value based on 21,000 bird flock Control ‐ Feed cost = $371/MT, Bird Market Value = $1.36/kg 2 2.00 F ESCS e FC Improvement Value 1.94 ESCS Control e = $0.045/bird/cycle d 1.90 Is this real?? Control ESCS 1.85 ESCS Control C 1.83 1.82 1.82 o ESCS 1.80 Control n Control 1.77 Control 1.76 v Control 1.75 1.75 ESCS 1.73 e 1.72 ESCS Control ESCS ESCS r 1.69 1.69 1.69 1.69 1.70 Control s ESCS 1.65 1.64 i Control Control 1.61 o 1.59 1.60 n ESCS ESCS 1.55 1.55 1.50 Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8 Cycle 9 Cycle 10 Mean
ESCS – Simple Financial Analysis $/ft 2 $/bird Total Value from ESCS $0.059 $0.045/cycle* $945/cycle – FC improvements (Range of $0 ‐ $0.11) ESCS System Cost $0.85 $0.65 $13,650 (Installed) Production Cycles 14.4 cycles Required to Cover or Initial Cost 2.2 years * based on 21,000 bird flock in 16,000 ft 2 barn
Microbiological Project Component • 2007 Pilot Study suggested that there was significantly lower levels of poultry pathogens in the ESCS treatment • In fall of 2008 a joint research study between SPFG, UBC, and AAFC was initiated • Funding from BC IAF and SPFG • To study the microbi0logical aspects of in ‐ barn PM including the ESCS, and out–of ‐ barn PM and its effect on poultry farm bio ‐ security
Poultry Farm PM and Microbial Sampling Location Protocol
In Summary Results indicate... � ESCS reduced in ‐ barn PM and PM emissions � ESCS resulted in productivity improvement for the studied broiler barn ($0.045/bd) ‐ 2 ‐ 3 yr payoff? Next Steps... � Enhance ESCS productivity improvement analysis by adding 2 ‐ 3 farms to the study if funds permit � Continue microbial study (1 year remaining with present proposal) � Continue Vegetative Filter study as funds permit
Air Quality Workshop BC Poultry Industry Air Quality Research Program Dr Shabtai Bittman, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Presentation Not Available for distribution
Effects of ESCS on bio ‐ aerosol generated from broiler production Karen Bartlett PhD School of Environmental Health University of British Columbia
Study locations • Producer A = one story broiler barns – Barn 1 ESCS on or off – Barn 2 ESCS on or off • Producer B = two story broiler barns – Upstairs ESCS on or off – Downstairs ESCS on or off
22 15 16 trees 17 18 2 9 4 21 6 19 8 20 14 7 1 3 5 13 10 11 12 Barn A – one story, #5 = ESCS #6 = control
9 8 6 7 5 13, 12 up 4 11, 10 dn 3 2 1 Barn B – 2 story: ESCS on upper floor
Bioaerosols • 1) Selective sampling – Baird Parker media for Gram positive cocci (single cells ~ 1 ‐ 2 µm) – MacConkey media for Gram negative bacteria (Enterobactericeae) MacConkey Agar BP Agar
Bioaerosols • 1) Size selective sampling – Size selection • Stage 1 > 7 µm • Stage 2 = 4.7 – 7.0 µm • Stage 3 = 3.3 – 4.7 µm • Stage 4 = 2.1 – 3.3 µm • Stage 5 = 1.1 – 2.1 µm • Stage 6 = 0.65 – 1.1 µm
Bioaerosols • Biosampler – advantage • Andersen – advantage = size selection = no upper limit at high • Disadvantage = easily concentrations overloaded at high • Disadvantage = lower concentrations limit of detection is • Use most conservative relatively high number = stage 6 Biosampler & Biosampler Andersen
Study design • Samples: • Assess effect of environmental conditions on biologic particulate (season, meteorology, age of flock) • Assess distribution of biologic particuate.
Study design • Sample locations coincide with GRIMM samples: – Perimeter locations, upwind and downwind – Far and near side of vegetative filter (if present) – Assess exhaust stream – Barns clean = baseline – Birds in (age) – Birds out, cleaning
Results
trees Site 12: Range 0 – 318 CFU/m 3 GM = 12.9 GSD 5.98 n = 15 Total Andersen count: background Gram positive bacteria
trees Site 12: Range 0 – 2 CFU/m 3 n = 15 Total Andersen count: background Gram negative bacteria
Site 22: Range 7 – 229 CFU/m 3 GM 35 GSD 3.31 trees n = 15 Site 12: Range 0 – 318 CFU/m 3 GM = 12.9 GSD 5.98 n = 15 Total Andersen count: background Gram positive bacteria
Site 22: Range 0 – 1 CFU/m 3 N = 15 trees Site 12: Range 0 – 2 CFU/m 3 n = 15 Total Andersen count: background Gram negative bacteria
Site 19: Far side Site 18: Near side Range 28 – 607 trees Range 4 – 4046 GM = 109 GSD 4.8 GM = 162 GSD 7.7 Total Andersen count (Gram +ve): vegetative filter
Site 19: Far side Site 18: Near side Range 0 – 2 trees Range 0 - 13 Total Andersen count (Gram -ve): vegetative filter
trees Site 21 (double exhaust): Range 2 – 54806 CFU/m 3 GM = 843 CFU/m 3 GSD 34.8 Total Andersen count: Gram +ve bacteria (double exhaust)
Recommend
More recommend
