alum – Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning Community

April 21, 2022June 22, 2022

Emission of ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, and greenhouse gases following application of aluminum sulfate to beef feedlot surfaces

Purpose

Alum has been successfully used in the poultry industry to lower ammonia (NH₃) emission from the barns. However, it has not been evaluated to reduce NH₃ on beef feedlot surfaces. Additionally, it is not known how it would affect other common emissions from beef feedlot surfaces. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of adding aluminum sulfate to beef feedlot surfaces on NH₃, hydrogen sulfide (H₂S), carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane (CH₄), and nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions.

What Did We Do?

Eight feedlot pens (30 animals per pen) at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center feedlot were utilized. The pens had a central mound constructed on manure and soil and 3 m concrete apron by the feed bunk and cattle were fed a corn-silage based diet. Four pens (30 cattle/pen) had 10% (g g^-1) alum applied to the 6 meters immediately behind the concrete bunk apron and four did not receive alum. The amount of alum added to the area was determined on a mass basis for a depth of 5 cm of feedlot surface material (FSM) using the estimated density of feedlot surface material for Nebraska feedlots (1.5 g cm⁻³). On sampling days, six representative grab samples were collected from the feedlot surface from the six-meter area behind the bunk apron in each pen; samples were combined within pen to make three representative replicates per pen (N=24). Each of the three pooled samples per pen were measured for pH, NH₃, H₂S, CH₄, CO₂, and N₂O using petri dishes and wind tunnels in an environmental chamber at an ambient temperature of 25°C (77°F) and 50% relative humidity. Flux measurements for NH₃, H₂S, CH_4,CO₂, and N₂O flux were measured for 15 minutes using Thermo Fisher Scientific 17i, 450i, 55i, 410iQ, and 46i gas analysis instruments, respectively. Samples were analyzed at day -1, 0, 5, 7, 12, 14, 19, 21, and 26.

What Have We Learned?

Addition of alum lowered pH of FSM from 8.3 to 4.8 (p < 0.01) and the pH remained lower in alum-treated pens for 26 days (p < 0.01). Although the pH remained low, NH₃ flux was only lower (p < 0.01) at day 0 and day 5 for alum-treated pens compared to the pens with no alum treatment. Nitrous oxide emission was not affected by alum treatment (6.2 vs 5.7 mg m^-2 min^-1, respectively for 0 and 10% alum treated pens). Carbon dioxide emission was lower for alum-treated pens than non-treated pens from day 5 until the end of the study (p < 0.05), perhaps due to suppressed microbial activity from the lower pH. Hydrogen sulfide emission was higher (p < 0.05) from alum-treated feedlot surface material (0.8 mg m^-2 min^-1) compared to non-treated feedlot surface material (0.3 mg m^-2 min^-1), likely due to addition of sulfate with alum. Methane emission was also higher in alum-treated pens (173.6 mg m^-2 min^-1) than non-treated pens (81.4 mg m^-2 min^-1). The limited reduction in NH₃, along with increased H₂S and CH₄ emission from the FSM indicates that alum is not a suitable amendment to reduce emissions from beef feedlot surfaces.

Table 1. pH, ammonia (NH₃), hydrogen sulfide (H₂S), methane (CH₄), carbon dioxide (CO₂) and nitrous oxide (N₂O) emission from feedlot surface material treated with 0 or 10% alum (g g^-1 mass basis).
	pH		NH₃ (mg m^-2 min^-1)		H₂S (mg m^-2 min^-1)		CH₄ (mg m^-2 min^-1)		CO₂ (mg m^-2 min^-1)		N₂O (mg m^-2 min^-1)
Day	0% Alum	10% Alum	0% Alum	10% Alum	0% Alum	10% Alum	0% Alum	10% Alum	0% Alum	10% Alum	0% Alum	10% Alum
-1	8.1	8.3	229.6^d	515.9^c	0.3	0.4	136.3^x	73.4^w	4,542	3,234	3.1	4.2
0	8.3^a	4.8^b	163.0^c	32.4^d	0.2^f	1.8^e	43.1^x	193.8^w	4,372	5,294	2.9	1.8
5	8.5^a	6.3^b	279.5^c	83.6^d	0.4	0.5	84.1^x	309.5^w	404^y	1,347^z	6.0	6.8
7	8.6^a	6.7^b	120.2	130.0	0.6^f	1.2^e	53.4	61.7	468^y	1,903^z	15.3	10.9
12	8.6^a	7.2^b	418.0	320.3	0.3	0.3	104.5	145.7	3,742^y	1,939^z	3.3	8.0
14	8.9^a	7.6^b	229.0	145.5	0.2	0.4	25.4^x	180.7^w	4,203^y	2,018^z	11.5	9.3
19	8.6^a	7.5^b	228.0	225.1	0.1^f	1.1^e	132.3^x	254.7^w	5,999^y	3,116^z	6.9	5.8
21	8.4^a	7.2^b	232.0	257.0	0.5	0.8	81.9^x	250.0^w	4,324^y	2,477^z	2.2	1.9
26	8.6^a	8.0^b	584.5^c	319.9^d	0.1^f	0.7^e	72.2	92.9	5,534^y	3,540^z	4.7	2.9
Within a parameter and day, different superscripts indicate a significant difference (p < 0.05) between the emissions from the feedlot surface material treated with 0% and 10% alum.

Future Plans

Future research will evaluate the use of aluminum chloride instead of aluminum sulfate to lower pH of FSM and retain nitrogen. Additionally, microbial amendments are being evaluated to determine if they can reduce gaseous emissions from the feedlot surface.

Authors

Presenting author

Mindy J. Spiehs, Research Animal Scientists, USDA ARS Meat Animal Research Center

Corresponding author

Bryan L. Woodbury, Agricultural Engineer, USDA ARS Meat Animal Research Center

Corresponding author email address

bryan.woodbury@usda.gov

Additional Information

For additional information about the use of alum as a feedlot surface amendment, readers are direct to the following: Effects of using aluminum sulfate (alum) as a surface amendment in beef cattle feedlots on ammonia and sulfide emissions. 2022. Sustainability 14(4): 1984 – 2004. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14041984

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge USMARC technicians Alan Kruger and Jessie Clark for their assistance with data collection and analysis.

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2022. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth. Oregon, OH. April 18-22, 2022. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

April 20, 2022June 22, 2022

An Update on Litter Amendments and Ammonia Scrubbers for Reducing Ammonia Emissions and Phosphorus Runoff from Poultry Litter

Purpose

The objectives of the litter amendment research were to determine why alum applications to poultry litter occasionally fail to reduce soluble phosphorus (P) and to determine if aluminum-, calcium- or iron- based nanoparticles would reduce soluble P in litter when applied alone or in combination with conventional litter treatments used for ammonia control, such as alum and/or sodium bisulfate.

The objective of the scrubber research was to design a scrubber that reduces ammonia, dust, and pathogens in the air inside of animal rearing facilities, like broiler houses, rather than the air being exhausted from the facilities. Currently scrubbers are “end of pipe” technology, which purify the exhaust air, so the only economic benefit is the capture of nitrogen, which is relatively inexpensive. Reducing the ammonia, dust, and pathogens in the air inside poultry houses should result in production benefits, such as those found with litter amendments (improved weight gains, better feed conversion, lower susceptibility to disease, and reduced propane use).

What Did We Do?

A series of laboratory studies were conducted with various litter amendments. The first study was conducted using litter from a commercial broiler house that had been treated with sodium bisulfate ten times over a two year period. Poultry litter (20 grams) was weighed out into 6 centrifuge tubes and half of the litter samples were treated with alum at a rate of 5% by weight. The tubes were incubated in the dark for one week, then extracted with 200 ml deionized water for one hour, centrifuged for 15 minutes at 8,000 rpm, filtered through 0.45 um filter paper and analyzed for soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) using the Murphy-Riley method on an autoanalyzer.

The next four lab studies used the same basic incubation studies, although the litter that was used came from a pen trial we had conducted where we knew the litter had never been treated with sodium bisulfate. Eighty six different treatment combinations involving conventional ammonia control treatments, such as alum and sodium bisulfate with or without the addition of different types of nanoparticles were used. The nanoparticles used in this study were: (1) Al-nano – an aluminum based nanoparticle, (2) Fe-nano – an iron based nanoparticle, (3) MNP – a nanoparticle made of both aluminum and iron, and (4) TPX – a calcium silicate based nanoparticle made by N-Clear, Inc. The sodium bisulfate that was utilized is sold under the tradename PLT (Poultry Litter Treatment) by Jones-Hamilton, Inc.

We also redesigned the ARS Air Scrubber so that it is scrubbing the air inside poultry houses rather than the exhaust air. The critical design feature to allow this was the use of fast sand filters to remove all particulates from the water and acid used to scrub dust and ammonia, respectively.

What Have We Learned?

We found that alum failed to lower soluble P in poultry litter when the litter had been treated with sodium bisulfate, probably due to the formation of sodium alunite [NaAl₃(OH)₆(SO₄)₂], a mineral often found in acid soils where sulfate applications have occurred. The formation of this mineral likely inactivates the Al with respect to P adsorption or precipitation reactions.

We also found that a Ca-based nanoparticle (TPX) was very effective in reducing soluble P in litter, either when applied in combination with alum or sodium bisulfate. Surprisingly, when TPX was applied with sodium bisulfate at very low levels, the soluble P levels of sodium bisulfate-treated litter decreased from 3,410 mg P/kg (when added alone) to 1,220, 541, and 233 mg P/kg litter, respectively, when 0.25, 0.5, and 1% TPX was added with sodium bisulfate.

Future Plans

We are currently conducting a large pen trial to determine the effect of TPX nanoparticles applied with alum or sodium bisulfate on ammonia emissions, soluble P, and P runoff from small plots using rainfall simulators.

We are also building a full-scale prototype of the indoor ammonia scrubber so that we can begin to test the efficacy of this scrubber.

Author

Philip A. Moore, Jr., Soil Scientist, USDA/ARS, Fayetteville, AR

Philip.Moore@USDA.Gov

Additional Information

Moore, P.A., Jr. 2021. Composition and method for reducing ammonia and soluble phosphorus in runoff and leaching from animal manure. U.S. Patent Application No. 17/171,204. Patent pending.

Moore, P.A., Jr. 2022. A system for removing ammonia, dust and pathogens from air within an animal rearing/sheltering facility. U.S. Patent Application No. 17/715,666. Patent pending.

March 25, 2019April 1, 2021

Feed Manipulation, Manure Treatment and Sustainable Poultry Production

This study examined the effects of different treatments of poultry faecal matter on potential greenhouse gas emission and its field application and also evaluated dietary manipulation of protein on the physico-chemical quality of broiler faeces and response of these qualities to 1.5% alum (Aluminium sulphate) treatment during storage.

Poultry litters were randomly assigned to four treatments: salt solution, alum, air exclusion and the control (untreated). Chicks were allotted to corn-soy diets for 42d. The diets were 22 and 20% CP with methionine + lysine content balance and, 22 and 20% CP diets with 110% NRC recommendation of methionine and lysine.

Alum treated faeces had higher (p<0.05) nitrogen retention than other treatments. Treated faecal samples retained more moisture (p < 0.05) than control. The pH tended to be acidic in treated samples (alum, 6.03, p<0.05) and alkaline in the control (7.37, p<0.05). Mean faecal temperature was lower for alum treated faecal samples (28.58oC, p<0.05) and highest for air-tight (29.4^oC, p<0.05). Nitrogen depletion rate was significant lower (p<0.05) in alum treated faecal samples. Post-storage, samples treated with alum increased substantially (≥ 46.51%) in total microbial count, while total viable count was lower (p>0.05; 2.83×106 cfu/ml) in air-tight treatment. Maize seeds planted on alum, air-excluded and control litter soils had average germination percentage range of 65–75%, 54–75% and 74-75%, respectively. In Sorghum plots, GP was 99%, and 89%, respectively for alum and air-tight treated soil 2WAP. Average maize height 21DAP was 48 cm and 23 cm for alum and air-tight treatment, respectively. Salt treated faecal samples did not support germination. Faecal pH of broiler fed low protein diets was acidic (4.76-4.80) while treatment with alum (1.5%) led to further reduction in pH (4.78 to 4.58) faecal nitrogen and organic matter compared with control faeces in a 7 days storage. Faecal minerals were generally lower. In conclusion, feeding low level of dietary protein with or without methionine and lysine supplementation in excess of requirement is a suitable mitigation for nitrogen emission and mineral excretion in broiler production. Alum treated poultry litter will mitigate further nitrogen loss in storage because it lowered nitrogen depletion rate, pH, weight, temperature and supports potential agronomic field application index.

On-farm Demonstration of the application of these results to assist farmers to produce poultry sustainably.