horse manure – Page 4 – Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning Community

March 5, 2019March 6, 2019

Composting of Dairy Manure and Grape Vine Prunings as a Tool to Better Manage Both Industries Waste and Reduce Their Environmental Impact

Why Look at Grapevine Prunings As a Compost Feedstock?

The objectives of this research and Extension project were:

To determine the impact of mixing grape vine prunings with dairy manure in a compost mix on the composting process and final product.
In particular, we were interested in determining if nitrogen gets fixated into the compost mix with increased carbon content.
To evaluate if composting is a workable alternative to annual grape vine prunings burning. Stopping this annual burning will reduce vineyards environmental footprint.
To demonstrate three different on-farm composting techniques. Mechanically turned (MT), passive aerated (PA), and forced aerated composting (FA).

What did we do?

field day at compost piles We teamed up with a grape and a dairy producer and we built a series of windrows to showcase the three different composting techniques and to research the effects of mixing both waste streams. Grape vine prunings were grounded and mixed with open lot dairy manure. Carbon content of the mix was adjusted to meet organic production standards since the vineyard hosting the project was certified organic. Since the carbon to nitrogen ratio (C:N) of the grounded grape vine prunings was on the low side (80:1), horse stable sawdust and straw from the local county fairgrounds were also used to help increase the C:N. Three replications of each system (MT, PA, and FA) were built with the enhanced carbon mix. A third set of three replications with dairy manure as received (some straw but no added carbon) were built using the mechanically turned system (MTMA) to serve as a control and comparison for that system. In addition to collecting data to evaluate th e effects of the added carbon, the project included two field days where all the systems, how to construct them, and their advantages and challenges were showcased.

What have we learned?

carbon to nitrogen ration The initial feedstock mix C:N was significantly higher in the carbon enhanced windrows as expected, but the final C:N ratio of the compost was not significantly different among most systems and between the enhanced mix and the just manure mix (Figure 1). The C:N reduction between the initial mix and the final compost was significant in all systems of the carbon enhanced windrows, but not significant in the just manure mix (MTMA).

As expected, the initial mix total nitrogen (TN) was significantly lower in the carbon (C) enhanced windrows compared to the just manure windrows (Figure 2). TN in the finished compost had no significant difference among all the systems. The difference between the initial mix and final compost TN wasn’t significant among C enhanced windrows, but highly significant in net values (10.08 Lb/T of N on dry weight basis; p<0.0001) on the just manure windrows. This difference in TN, coupled with the no significant difference in C:N, suggests the loss of nitrogen as ammonia during the composting process in the windrows made of just manure. Net nitrogen loss was significantly lower in the C enhanced windrows (1.45 Lb/Ton).

salts Salts concentrations (mmhos) difference between initial mixes and final compost was significant in all windrows, with higher values in the final compost as expected due to the concentration effect that composting volume reduction has (Figure 3). Salt concentrations in the just manure windrows were significantly higher compared to the carbon enhanced mix. There is a dilution effect when carbon is added in the initial mix (lower manure mass per initial mix unit). Similar dilution trends were observed for phosphorous (P), potassium (K), and micronutrients. Carrying this dilution effect in the final compost can be beneficial when land applying compost since application rates can be increased, increasing the nitrogen and carbon content of the application (desirable conditions) by the time the limiting components in our soils (usually P, K, or salts) are reached.

Screening of the carbon enhanced windrows generated a refuse (bigger size particles) containing pieces of grape prunings that can be used as mulch to control weeds in the vineyard or other production units. When PFRP is achieved, plant pathogens in the mulch can be considered absent or inhibited, and the mulch will be usable on the same or similar plant species.

The PA and MT windrows with enhanced carbon mix reached USEPA-PFRP. FA system didn’t reach PFRP and had an incomplete composting process because of the lack of moisture in the initial mix due to problems with water supply during their construction. Other studies conducted by the authors using FA with similar feedstock had reached PFRP. MTMA windrows didn’t reach PFRP, a common event in the region due to the low carbon content of dairy manure.

Future Plans

This project demonstrated that composting of dairy and potentially other livestock manures mixed with woody wastes from the grape industry or similar agricultural products is not only feasible but beneficial for both industries. Further research is necessary to determine how different carbon and animal manures sources, especially harder woods, will affect the composting process and the final product.

Authors

Mario E. de Haro-Martí. Extension Educator. University of Idaho. mdeharo@uidaho.edu

Mireille Chahine, Extension Dairy Specialist
Tony McCammon, Extension Educator
Ariel Agenbroad, Extension Educator. University of Idaho

Additional information

Unpublished data. Please contact the author, Mario E. de Haro-Martí at mdeharo@uidaho.edu or 208-934-4417.

Acknowledgements

The authors want to thank the participating grape and dairy producers for their collaboration. This project was funded by an Idaho USDA-NRCS Conservation Innovation Grant (CIG).

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. 2015. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Seattle, WA. March 31-April 3, 2015. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

March 5, 2019July 13, 2020

Low Cost Aerated Static Composting Systems for Small Acreage Equine Operations

Why Study Low-Cost Composting?

The equine industry in Massachusetts, estimated to be over 50,000 animals, is of a size to make significant impact on non-point source pollution. An average horse generates about 45 lb. of manure per day, almost 10 tons per year as well as bedding. Thus, in Massachusetts approximately 500,000 tons of manure plus associated stall bedding are produced each year. Management of manure and mud on horse farms is a challenge for horse owners and equine facility managers. This is of particular concern at farms where horses are kept in stalls and land availability for manure spreading is limited. The growing number and size of unmanaged piles of manure seen on many properties is becoming an increasing concern due to greater public awareness and pressures in an increasingly urban society. Runoff from stables, manure piles and over grazed pastures has the potential to increase risks of non-point source pollution from nutrients, organic particles, fecal coliform bacteria, and other pathogens. Related: Small Farm Stewardship

What did we do?

aerated trash bins system

Figure 1: Aerated trash bins system

Perforated wood to be installed at the bottom of the bins for air flow

Figure 2: Perforated wood to be installed at the bottom of the bins for air flow

Composting pile with cover

Figure 3: Composting pile with cover

automated air blower connected to perforated PVC pipe

Figure 4: Automated air blower connected to perforated PVC pipe

Through a 319s grant funded by Massachusetts Department of Environment Protection, two Aerated Static Pile (ASP) composting systems, also known as forced aeration were installed to manage livestock manure and bedding produced on Blue Star Equiculture Farm in Palmer, Massachusetts. A community-based 501c3 non-profit organization, Blue Star Equiculture was established to provide retired and homeless working horses a sanctuary and the opportunity to improve their lives and be purposeful. The organization also offers equine and environmental awareness to the public through educational and healing opportunities.

Blue Star Equiculture currently manages their manure by hauling it to a nearby field. The Blue Star Equiculture has 30-40 horses at any time and expects an increase in number of animals. Considering an average of 45 lbs/day of raw manure, 35 horses generate a yearly mass of 575,000 lbs (287 tons) of raw manure that affects the Lower Ware River and Chicopee main stem. The current loading of nutrients by the Blue Star Equiculture herd is roughly 4000 lbs/year of nitrogen and 1200 lbs/year of phosphorus. This has implication on macrophyte growth and eutrophication of the Chicopee River.

The 30 herd horses in Blue Star Equiculture can contribute to 4.6 x 10¹² organisms/year of fecal coliform, and can lead to water quality impairment in the Chicopee and Connecticut rivers. The first system consisted of three plastic trash bins, each holding roughly 750 pounds of waste (Figures 1 and 2). The bins are connected to an air compressor/air blower which automatically turns on for roughly one minute every hour. The exact duration and frequency of the aeration varies and is controlled by a low cost credit card sized microcomputer with temperature sensors. It is calculated based on ambient and manure temperature and the composting phase. The automated adaptability increases the composting success and sustains the processes into the colder seasons. Furthermore an optional WIFI internet connection provides remote process monitoring and alerting. Finished compost is ready in 7-8 weeks including curing time. A layer of finished compost added to the top of the waste facilitates the process.

The wheels under the bins make collection of waste in the stall much easier. This simple and cost efficient system is especially applicable in facilities with 1-3 horses.

The second system consisted of one or more composting piles about 35 ft long (Figure 3). Each pile can be subdivided into three 10 ft section for frequent addition of fresh materials and/or removing finished compost. The composting materials are piled on a wood chip base with perforated PVC pipe running through the base and a 1 HP air pump which works for 1-2 minutes every hour. The pile is covered with a fabric which is impermeable to water. The compost in each subdivision is finished in 8-10 weeks including curing and finishing time. The same blower control and manure sensory system used for the bins was also utilized with the large pile setup.

What have we learned?

Both composting systems worked efficiently and compost was ready in eight weeks. Composting of horse waste at the Blue Star Equiculture significantly reduced pollution related to nutrients and pathogens. Aerated composting systems were used for hands on training workshops where over 400 horse owners learned about these systems and some of them implemented on their farm.

Future Plans

Similar system will be installed at University of Massachusetts Horse Farm to educate students of equine management as well as hundreds of visitors coming to the farm annually.

Authors

Masoud Hashemi, Extension Associate Professor, University of Massachusetts masoud@umass.edu

Atakan Kadi

Additional information

https://ag.umass.edu/crops-dairy-livestock-equine/fact-sheets/low-cost-aerated-static-composting-systems-for-small

Acknowledgements

This project has been financed partially with federal funds from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (the Department) under a s319 Competitive Grant. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA or of the Deparment, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

March 5, 2019March 6, 2019

Plant Nutrient and Carbon Content of Equine Manure as Influenced by Stall Management and Implications for Nutrient Management

Purpose

South Carolina’s equine industry is small compared to states like Texas (395,816 horses), Oklahoma (158,918 horses), and Kentucky (141,842 horses, USDA, 2013). However, the South Carolina equine industry has increased over the last twelve years.

The increase in interest and participation in horse ownership centers around several activities including trail riding, polo, fox hunting, Western and English competitions, shows, and training facilities of all kinds. These activities are facilitated by the hundreds of miles of riding trails available on public lands, the presence of a steeplechase track near Camden, SC, numerous polo fields near Aiken, SC, and large arenas for shows at Clemson University, and near Landrum, SC.

The increase in horse population also increased the amount of horse manure to be managed in a responsible manner. It has been estimated that about 30 kg (66 lb) of manure and soiled bedding is removed from a typical horse stall each day (Wheeler, 2006). Every 1000 kg of bedded horse manure contains about 6 kg of total-N, 2.5 kg of P₂O₅, and 4.5 kg of K₂O (Wheeler and Zajaczkowski, 2001). Horse manure also contains large amounts of carbon, organic matter, and many valuable minor plant nutrients, such as Ca, Mg, S, Zn, Cu, Mn, and Fe. However, little data is available in the literature concerning concentrations of minor plant nutrients in stall manure (Lawrence et al., 2003).

The large amount of carbon contained in horse manure has been shown to greatly reduce the availability of nitrogen following land application of horse manure. Several sources and studies have indicated that the large amounts of carbon can induce nitrogen deficiency due to immobilization of soluble nitrogen (e.g. James, 2003, Doesken and Davis, 2007). As a result, horse manure is typically not a good source of nitrogen as compared to poultry litter.

The goal of this project was to obtain equine manure composition data that can be used for the development of manure management plans. Given the wide variability in the daily use of stalls, the amount of bedding used in stalls, and other stall management factors it was hypothesized that stall management would have a significant impact on the composition of equine manure, and may have an impact on recommended manure utilization practices. The objectives to meet this goal were to: (1) collect as-removed bedded stall samples on six horse farms during routine stall cleaning, (2) obtain bedding-free manure samples from at least three farms, (3) classify each barn by stall management, and stall use, (4) determine if stall management had a significant impact on the solids and plant nutrient content of equine manure, (5) develop manure management recommendations and a table of characteristics to be used for manure management planning for equine facilities.

What did we do?

Six horse farms were selected that included facilities that ranged from small, pleasure horse barns to farms with multiple barns that provided intensively managed housing for race, and show horses. Each horse farm was visited once to obtain samples of bedded stall manure. Samples were collected as manure and fouled bedding was removed from the stalls according to normal daily stall management practices. During the site visit, the owner of the facility was asked questions about bedding practices, manure removal frequency, and stall use frequency. Based on these interviews and observations during the site visit, the farms were classified by stall use and bedding management categories as shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

On Farm 3 (see Table 1), bedded manure that was removed daily from stalls was stored in large, uncovered, windrows for extended periods of time prior to application to pastures. The owner called the piles compost piles. However, it was evident that very little heating was taking place. Samples were taken from several locations and depths in an old windrow of unknown age. These samples were well-mixed to provide a representative sample for analysis. The composition of these samples was to be compared with bedded manure as-removed from the stalls. While visiting Farms 2, 3, and 6 samples of horse manure without bedding were obtained from stalls to provide a comparison to heavily bedded horse manure.

Manure samples were collected from the stalls, or the uncovered windrow, using shovels and a wheel barrow. The manure was mixed well in the wheel barrow using a shovel and a pitch fork. Three, 2 to 3 L samples of the manure from each barn were placed in sealed, plastic containers, and were transported on ice to Clemson University for analysis at the Agricultural Service Laboratory. Three replicate analyses were performed for each of the 6 horse barns (Farms 1-6), bedding-free manure (one sample each from Farm 2, 3, and 6), and the uncovered pile (Farm 3). The plant nutrients concentrations measured were: total nitrogen (Total-N), total ammoniacal nitrogen (TAN = NH₄⁺-N + NH₃-N), nitrate-N, total P (expressed as P₂O₅), total K (expressed as K₂O), calcium, magnesium, sulfur, zinc, copper, manganese, iron, and sodium. The organic-N content was calculated as: Organic-N = Total-N – TAN – nitrate-N. Other characteristics measured included: moisture content, total carbon content, organic matter content (O.M.), pH, and electrical conductivity (EC). Standard laboratory procedures were used for all analyses and details are provided by Moore (2014).

What have we learned?

Statistical analysis of the organic matter, Total-N, P₂O₅, K₂O, and several minor plant nutrient concentrations (dry basis) indicated that the composition of manure collected from each of the barns, and the covered pile were significantly different in one or more characteristics. These results point out that data collected from individual facilities are needed to account for farm-to-farm differences in feed composition, use of mineral supplements, stall management, and stall use. A summary of the data is provided in Table 2.

Table 2.

Storage of manure in an uncovered pile resulted in very little active composting as indicated by an insignificant reduction in organic-N, and only a small reduction in carbon (3%). Uncovered storage also resulted in reductions in major and minor plant nutrient concentrations ranging from 33% (Mn) to 74% (K₂O). Therefore, nutrient content data obtained from bedded manure as-removed from a stall was shown to be inadequate to determine agronomic applications rates for manure removed from storage. In practice, separate data sets would be needed for management of as-removed horse manure, and manure removed from storage for development and implementation of a manure management plan.

In general, as the quality of stall management increased the amount of bedding provided per stall per day increased resulting in an increase in C:N. The C:N ranged from 23 to 48 for the barns sampled on the six farms. A correlation analysis was conducted to determine if the dry matter concentrations of organic matter, and plant nutrients were significantly correlated with C:N. The only measured characteristic that had a significant positive correlation with respect to C:N was the organic matter content. This was not surprising since bedding was the source of additional organic matter. The plant nutrients that had significant negative correlations with respect to C:N were: organic-N, total-N, P₂O₅, Ca, Mg, Zn, and Cu. It was apparent that one of the effects of additional bedding use was to dilute major and minor plant nutrient concentrations.

Electrical conductivity is often used as a general measure of the salt content in manure, compost, and other soil amendments. The eight different treatments included in this study had EC values ranging from 0.45 to 3.46 mmhos/cm. A correlation analysis was used to determine which of the conductive elements included in the analysis (Cu, Ca, Mg, Na, Zn, K₂O, Fe, Mn) were significantly related to EC. It was determined that the only plant nutrient that was a significant predictor of elevated EC values was K₂O content (dry-basis) with a correlation coefficient of 0.9727 and a coefficient of determination of 0.9462. Consequently, the high EC values observed were directly correlated to high levels of potassium and not harmful salts. These results demonstrate that EC alone cannot be used to determine if plant toxicity is likely, but sufficient analyses should be performed to determine if the elevated EC is from valuable nutrients or salts as suggested previously by others (e.g. Compost for Soils, 2011).

All of the horse manure samples collected on the six farms studied contained large amounts of carbon as indicated by C:N ratios ranging from 23 to 48. As a result, horse manure was not accessed to be a good source of nitrogen as compared to poultry litter. It may be best to compost horse manure to stabilize bioavailable carbon and nitrogen prior to use. After composting, the material should be applied based on agronomic rates for P₂O5, or K₂O while accounting for the organic nitrogen that will be slowly released.

Another alternative may be to apply horse manure based on agronomic rates for P₂O₅ or K₂O while adding additional nitrogen to offset induced nitrogen deficiency. If un-composted manure is spread on cropland or pasture a portion of the mineralized-N will be converted to organic-N and would be expected to release slowly later in the year, and a portion may be carried over into subsequent growing seasons. Estimation of available carry-over nitrogen is difficult due to uncertainties related to soil pH, moisture, temperature, rainfall, and microbial activity. However, the best method of estimation appears to be a series of organic-N availability factors provided by Wheeler (2006).

A complete report on this study is provided by Chastain and Moore (2014).

Future Plans

The results from this study will be used to develop extension classes and literature for owners of equine facilities. These data will also provide valuable information for nutrient management planning.

Authors

John P. Chastain, Ph.D., Professor and Extension Agricultural Engineer, Clemson University jchstn@clemson.edu

Kathy P. Moore, Ph.D., Director, Agricultural Service Laboratory, Clemson University

Additional information

References Cited

Chastain, J.P. & K.P. Moore. 2014. Plant Nutrient and Carbon Content of Equine Manure as Influenced by Stall Management in South Carolina. ASABE. Paper No. 1908331. ASABE, 2950 Niles Rd., St. Joseph, MI 49085-9659.

Compost for Soils. (2011). Compost Characteristics. Factsheet published by Compost for Soils, A Division of the Austrailian Organics Recycling Association. Retrieved from: http://compostforsoils.com.au/images/pdf/practical%20compost%20use/compo….

Doesken, K. C., & Davis, J. G. (2007). Determining plant available nitrogen from manure and compost topdressed on an irrigated pasture. In Proc. International Symposium on Air Quality and Waste Management for Agriculture. ASABE Publication Number 701P0907cd. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASABE.

James, R.E. (2003). Horse Manure Management: The Nitrogen Enhancement System. AGF-212-03. Ohio State University Extension, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. Retrieved from: http://ohioline.osu.edu/agf-fact/0212.html.

Moore, K.P. (2014). Compost Analysis Procedures. Clemson, SC: Agricultural Service Laboratory, Clemson University. Available at: Available at: http://www.clemson.edu/agsrvlb/procedures2/compost.htm.

Wheeler, E.F, and J.S. Zajaczkowski. (2001). Horse Stable Manure Management (G-97). Penn State University Extension. Available at: http://panutrientmgmt.cas.psu.edu/pdf/G97.pdf.

Wheeler, E. F. (2006). Manure Management, In Horse Stable and Riding Arena Design, (pp 91-93). Ames, Iowa: Blackwell Publishing.

Acknowledgements

Support for this work was provided by the Confined Animal Manure Management Program of Clemson Extension, Clemson University, Clemson, SC.

March 5, 2019March 5, 2019

Horse Manure Composting: Facilities and Methods

Managing horse manure may involve mechanical equipment, physical labor and conveying of manure. It is generally practiced outdoors in all types of weather. Composting is the aerobic decomposition of organic materials by microorganisms under controlled conditions. Microorganisms consume oxygen while feeding on organic matter and as a result, give off heat and CO2. In conventional composting, composters manage the process variables, feedstock, air, moisture and shelter, to optimize the natural decay process. Green, wet, nitrogenous feedstocks are mixed with brown, dry, carbonaceous material creating a carbon to nitrogen (C:N) ratio in the range of 20 to 30:1 along with the proper amount of moisture.

Horse manure happens to be one of the easiest manures to compost. There are several methods in and out of structures that can facilitate the compost process. The process can be simple properly shaped static piles, aerated and turned; and you can even compost to capture and use the heat or energy. Imagine capturing the heat from your manure to warm barns! The windrows or piles are then managed via monitoring and/or turning for proper air-flow and temperature in order to speed up decomposition, eliminate odors and destroy pathogens and weed seeds. Composting horse manure can be as simple or complicated as you choose. It can be used on site or exported for sale.

Authors

Bonhotal, Jean jb29@cornell.edu Cornell Waste Management Institute

Additional Information

March 5, 2019March 6, 2019

Composting Horse Mortality and Mortality Disposal Alternatives

With the decline of the rendering industry, managing routine livestock mortality in an effective, economical and environmentally sound manner has become more difficult. Over 900,000 horses have to be properly managed annually in the US. Disposal should be done in a manner that is most acceptable to the owner, protects public health and safety, does not create a nuisance, prevents the spread of disease, or have adverse effects on water and air quality.

Composting mortality is an option when done properly. It requires a carbon source such as wood chips or other chunky carbon and should be located in a well-drained area along field edges or other dry convenient areas. The carcass is then covered and left to passively compost. When managed properly, composting will deter domestic and wild animals from scavenging carcasses. Mortality composting, has been proven effective in deactivating pathogens, limits the risk of groundwater and air pollution contamination, and on-site composting reduces the potential for farm to farm disease transmission. On site composting also decreases transportation costs and tipping fees associated with off-site disposal. There is also the added benefit of producing a usable product. As with any farm operation health and safety issues exist in mortality composting. Proper training is the best means to reduce those health and safety issues.

In addition to routine mortality, every year we face animal related disasters including barn collapses, fires, lightning strikes, floods and winter storms. Composting provides an alternative to traditional carcass disposal as it is self-sufficient and can be “biosecure”. The temperatures achieved through the composting process will eliminate or greatly reduce pathogens, hindering the spread of disease. Research continues to demonstrate effective destruction of nearly all livestock diseases of concern. Being prepared ahead of time and considering the “what if’s” is important.

Authors

Bonhotal, Jean jb29@cornell.edu Cornell Waste Management Institute

For Additional Information

[archived webinar] Livestock and Poultry Mortality Composting
Managing Livestock and Poultry Mortalities (explores several options, including composting)

March 5, 2019March 6, 2019

Converting Manure, Food Wastes and Agricultural Production Wastes into Bio-Secure Fertilizer, feed, and/or beeding

Purpose

To find a way to completely eliminate bio-hazards in manure, food wastes, municipal sludge, and agricultural production wastes.

What did we do?

We adapted existing dry extrusion technology to bio-hazard agricultural wastes. To test the hypothesis we developed [ Dry Extrusion Technology can be adapted to convert bio-degradable hazardous wastes into Bio-Secure class “A” fertilizer, feed, and/or bedding more economically, with less environmental impact, greater sustainability, and in less time with a smaller foot print]

Once we proved our Hypothesis we further developed the process to allow the technology to be utilized in a large stationary plant suitable for a large waste generator and in a portable plant that can be used to assist smaller waste generators, such as, most agricultural producers and smaller municipalities.

What have we learned?

Our tests showed that we could validate our hypothesis by:

1) utilizing finely ground dry agricultural production wastes, mixed with the wet food and manure to reduce the moisture content of the wet wastes to a level compatible to the requirements of the dry extruder,
2) The Dry extruder effectively sterilized the wastes by high temperature, high pressure inside the extruder, and sudden drop in atmospheric pressure inside the cell walls of all the materials when exiting the Dry Extruder, thereby destroying the cell walls of not only the bio-mass materials but also of all micro organisms ova, and pathogens inside the final product.

Future Plans

Develop new niche markets for agricultural waste generators by adding additional value to their wastes.

Authors

Joe E. Busby joebusby@wfeca.net

Moses Braxton, Bill Ansley, William Andrews, Duncan Nesbit, and Dr. Carm Parkhurst

Acknowledgements

Insta Pro International, North Carolina State University

March 5, 2019August 31, 2021

Markets for Composted Agricultural Waste

Why Consider Composting Manure?

Enforcement of nutrient management regulation has forced Maryland farms and agricultural facilities to adopt new waste management practices. Few options exist that are financially sustainable. Regulatory agencies witnessed the unexpected consequence of closing small and mid-sized farms who could not afford to institute new waste management technologies. To counter that consequence, Maryland Department of Agriculture offered grants to subsidize the development of innovative technology and business practices. These new systems and business models had to offer both financial and environmental sustainability.

What Did We Do?

The first step in this project (supported by the Maryland Department of Agriculture, 2014) was to identify the biological make up and characteristics of the stable waste both before and after processing. We measured nutrient content and form (N, P, K), porosity, moisture absorption and C: N ratio. By understanding what the material consisted of pre-processing, we were able to determine what effects different controls during processing would have on the end product. As an example, when using stable waste for bedding re-use the material is run through the composting system as quickly as possible. A shorter composting period with auger mixing technology allowed the biological activity to breakdown the manure balls, support the transformation of the waste nutrients and yet protect the integrity of the shavings for second use. Related: Managing Manure on Horse Farms

Next, the local markets were studied:

- Soil types and needs: compost to add porosity, water retention, nutrients to soil
- Weather patterns and created needs: compost added for water retention, binding material to diminish run off
- Population centers for urban market: compost for landscape needs, potting medium
- Rural character for on farm market: compost for nutrient replacement, bedding re-use
- Cost of operations on local farms: cost of bedding, cost of disposal, cost of landscape material, cost of synthetic or imported fertilizer
- Wholesale market needs: compost for distribution centers (Scotts products), soil specialty companies, land reclamation sites, Department of Transportation needs, green house growers

Identifiable, viable market channels to move the processed stable waste were necessary components of a business model. Uses for the processed waste were identified both on site and off site.

On site uses were identified as:

- Land application: field enhancement
- Bedding re-use
- Landscape use
- Improved footing arenas
- Land reclamation
- Pelletized for heat systems

Off site uses were identified as:

- Soil amendment
- Land reclamation
- Potting Medium
- Food Waste Bulking agent
- Whole sale distribution centers
- Soil Specialty companies

What Did We Learn?

Data was gathered and studied from equine facilities with existing composting operations to illustrate what the benefits and challenges can be. IOS Ranch on Bainbridge Island Washington is a sustainably designed 7.5 acre property that supports 20-25 stalled horses. The design concentrates the structures, indoor arena, stall, office and supporting buildings, so there could be surrounding pasture turn out and an outdoor arena. The facility was paying high waste disposal fees. Their decision to bring composting technology to the farm was an effort to eliminate disposal fees and diminish their bedding cost through bedding re-use. However, once the system was installed a local landscaper visited the site and saw value in the compost. The material is now sold for $30/yard wholesale and $45/yard retail to local landscapers and gardeners. With the price of shavings for bedding delivered at $7.50/yard the business decision to sell the compost was an obvious one. The property was formerly a gravel pit with large areas of exposed pit run. Once realizing the value of the compost for land application, the owner spread on the exposed areas greatly improving grass performance in the turnout fields. This farm was saving $100-$140/day producing compost because of the reduced disposal fees plus profits from marketing, allowing for a breakeven on investment in 3 years.

manure composting operation on horse farm

Joint Base Myer Henderson Hall hosted a pilot project for composting of food waste on remote contingency bases. On this base the Army’s Caisson horses are housed in a 50+ stall barn. After the pilot was completed the in vessel composting system will revert to the base for processing the stable waste. The base has the choice of bedding re-use or using the compost for landscape needs on base and/or in the adjacent Arlington National Cemetery. Outside contractors were supplying the base with compost at nearly $400,000 per year. The project could pay for itself in the first year. Thorough lab analysis showed the compost to be consistently of high quality, pathogen free, and weed seed free.

army base horse manure composting photos

Currently two sites in Maryland are being studied; one an equine rescue facility housing 50-80 horses, and the other a dairy with 240 head. The use of composted stable waste as a peat moss replacement will bring value to the equine and dairy farms and to the large, local greenhouse industry. Currently 80% of the peat moss used in Maryland is imported from Canada. The farms selected are large enough that they can produce enough material for bedding re-use (savings of nearly 20% of operating budget) and/or sell the material to wholesale buyers. The composting material from both sites show the favorable attributes of peat moss, porosity and moisture retention. Blending can alter the nutrient levels to what the market needs by using the more nutrient rich dairy waste. The collection of compost and blending can be done on on site or at an off site location in cooperation with other local farms, this may help meet larger volume needs of wholesale buyers.

horse manure composting operation in Maryland

Future Plans

The Maryland projects are both two years in duration with continual data gathering and recording. The next step is the location and operation of a collection yard for multiple local farms to send their processed stable waste. Such a yard allows for mixing to meet differing market needs and the creation of large quantities of homogenous product for local greenhouse growers.

Authors

Mollie Bogardus, owner, Aveterra and representative of Green Mountain Technologies, Inc. mollie@compostingtechnology.com

Additional Information

http://news.maryland.gov/mda/press-release/2014/08/15/mda-awards-1-million-for-innovative-manure-management-technologies-demonstration-projects-in-howard-frederick-and-worcester-counties-recognized/

Acknowledgements

Dr. Pat Millner, USDA Beltsville, Research Microbiologist is lead researcher and mentor on these projects in Maryland.

March 5, 2019March 5, 2021

Making Sense of Smells – Communicating Odors to Diverse Audiences

Waste to Worth home | More proceedings….

Example of odor visualization system using colors and shapes to replace chemical jargon.

Why Is Smell and Odor Important to Animal Agriculture?

Smell is perhaps the least understood of our five senses. Yet, the human perception of odor may mean the difference between war and peace for a livestock farmer and his neighbors. Because the science of smells is complex, there is a tendency to run straight for the organic chemistry book when we try to describe farmstead odors. This approach goes right over the heads of most people. There must be a better way to communicate odors to diverse audiences. This workshop can be utilized by teachers or extension staff to teach about communication of a topic that is frequently encountered by farmers, ag professionals, and others. To see the presentation slides, scroll to the bottom of the page.

Learning Objectives

This two hour workshop will explain how to use an innovative visual technique to describe farmstead odors to general audiences without resorting to chemical jargon. The visualization technique based on shapes and colors was developed at Oklahoma State University in the mid 1990s, and has been used to talk about odors with many diverse audiences. The method demonstrates that odors have “structure”, and can be measured using the four concepts: character, concentration, intensity, and persistence.

Students will also participate in a mock laboratory exercise to demonstrate how odor intensity and pleasantness are measured. Results of the exercise will be analyzed in “real time”. Further analyses of previous exercise runs will be compared and contrasted to the workshop results. This laboratory has been presented to over 250 college freshmen and their results are presented in this recording.

Workshop Introduction

What is an Odor?

Measuring Odors

Odor Experiment

Another Odor Experiment

Physiology of Smell

Author

Douglas W. Hamilton, Associate Professor and Extension Waste Management Specialist, Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service dhamilt@okstate.edu

Doug Hamilton is an associate professor of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering at Oklahoma State University. He has three degrees in Agricultural Engineering from the University of Arkansas, Iowa State University, and Penn State University. His sense of smell remains keen despite the fact he has worked with livestock manure for nearly 34 years.

For More Information

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. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Making Sense of Smells – Communicating Odors to Diverse Audiences – Part 1 from LPE Learning Center

Making Sense of Smells – Communicating Odors to Diverse Audiences – Part 2 from LPE Learning Center

Making Sense of Smells – Communicating Odors to Diverse Audiences – Physiology from LPE Learning Center

March 5, 2019March 21, 2019

Efficient Utilization of Equine Manure

Waste to Worth home | More proceedings….

Abstract

South Carolina is home to an estimated 18,000 horse owners, many of which own or house less than ten horses on their property. Owners of such small facilities regularly obtain assistance from the Clemson Extension service concerning soil fertility, forage options, and in some cases nutrient testing, but there is very little information available concerning efficient utilization of the manure produced from their facility. In many cases the manure and bedding removed from stalls is viewed as something to be disposed of rather than a possible nutrient source than can be utilized with proper management. This presentation provides an overview of horse manure production and nutrient content for the small horse facility owner, and addresses the best management techniques to utilize produced manure, including the benefits of composting the manure before utilization.

Purpose

What Did We Do?

Several County Extension agents offer multi-week Equine Management seminars covering a range of topics primarily for the horse owner with a small number of horses. We added a segment on horse manure production and utilization, developing a presentation detailing the manure production amounts and nutrient content of typical horse manure, and best management strategies for utilizing that manure.

What Have We Learned?

This presentation has been provided to four Equine Management Seminars to date. In each case the horse owners were surprised in the lack of immediate availability of nitrogen in the manure, and were glad to learn of methods that provide sustainable uses for their horse manure while also helping to minimize potential disease issues and other impacts. They also mentioned that they now view the manure as a resource, not as “something to be dealt with.”

Future Plans

We plan to offer this training during future Equine Management seminars and as a single-event program.

Authors

W. Bryan Smith, M.S., Area Extension Agent – Agricultural Engineer, Clemson Cooperative Extension Service, wsmth@clemson.edu

John P. Chastain, Ph.D., Professor and Extension Agricultural Engineer, Clemson University
Gary L. Heusner, Ph.D., Professor and Extension Specialist, University of Georgia

Additional Information

The South Carolina Confined Animal Manure Manager website – http://www.clemson.edu/camm

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. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Efficient utilization of equine manure from LPE Learning Center

March 5, 2019July 15, 2020

Feasible Small-Scale Anaerobic Digestion – Case Study of EUCOlino Digestion System.

* Presentation slides are available at the bottom of the page.

Waste to Worth home | More proceedings….

Abstract

While large-scale farms have typically been the focus of anaerobic digestion systems in the U.S., an emerging need has been identified to serve smaller farms with between 50 and 500 head of cattle. Implementing such a small, standardized, all-in-one system for these small farm applications has been developed. Small-scale digesters open the playing field for on-farm sustainability and waste management.

Unloading the first biodigester unit.

This presentation on small-scale digestion would discuss the inputs, processing, function, and outputs of BIOFerm™ Energy Systems’ small agitated plug flow digester (EUCOlino). This plug-and-play digester system has the ability to operate on dairy manure, bedding material, food waste, or other organic feedstocks with a combined total solids content of 15-20%. A case study would be presented that describes the site components needed, the feedstock amount and energy production, as well as biogas end use. Additional details would include farm logistics, potential sources of funding, installation, operation, and overall impact of the project.

This type of presentation would fill an information gap BIOFerm™ has discovered among dairy farmers who believe anaerobic digestion isn’t feasible on a smaller scale. It would provide farmers who attend with an understanding of the technology, how it could work on their specific farm and hopefully reveal to them what their “waste is worth”.

Why Study Small-Scale Anaerobic Digestion

To inform and educate attendees about small-scale anaerobic digestion surrounding the installation and feasibility of the containerized, paddle-mixed plug flow EUCOlino system on a small dairy farm <150 head.

Biodigester unit being installed at Allen Farms.

What Did We Do?

Steps taken to assist in financing the digestion system include receiving grants from the State Energy Office and Wisconsin Focus on Energy. Digester installation includes components such as feed hopper, two fermenter containers, motors, combined heat and power unit, electrical services, etc…

What Have We Learned?

Challenges associated with small project implementation regarding coordination, interconnection, and utility arrangements.

Future Plans

Finalize commissioning phases and optimize operation.

Authors

Amber Blythe, Application Engineer, BIOFerm™ Energy Systems blya@biofermenergy.com

Steven Sell, Biologist/Application Engineer, BIOFerm™ Energy Systems

Gabriella Huerta, Marketing Specialist, BIOFerm™ Energy Systems

Additional Information

Readers interested in this topic can visit www.biofermenergy.com and for more information on our plants, services and project updates please visit us on our website at www.biofermenergy.com. You will also see frequent updates from us in industry magazines (BioCycle, REW Magazine, Waste Age). BIOFerm will also be present at every major industry conference or tradeshow including the Waste Expo, Waste-to-Worth and BioCycle– stop by our booth and speak with one of our highly trained engineers for further information.

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. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Feasible Small-Scale Anaerobic Digestion – Case Study of EUCOlino Digestion System from LPE Learning Center