Coarse Particulate Matter Emissions from Cattle Feedlots in Australia

McGinn, S. M.; Flesch, Thomas K.; Chen, Deli; Crenna, Brian P.; Denmead, O. T.; Naylor, Travis A; Rowell, Doug

doi:10.2134/jeq2009.0240

Cited by 27 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During the 17‐mo measurement period, hourly PM 10 flux ranged from ~0 to 272 mg m −2 h −1 , with an overall median value of 36 mg m −2 h −1 . Based on days with at least 12 hourly fluxes ( n = 44), the overall median daily PM 10 flux was 1.81 g m −2 d −1 , which was slightly higher but within range of those recently published for beef cattle feedlots (McGinn et al, 2010; Bonifacio et al, 2012). McGinn et al (2010) reported values of 1.45 and 1.61 g m −2 d −1 for Australian feedlots based on inverse dispersion modeling with WindTrax.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Based on days with at least 12 hourly fluxes ( n = 44), the overall median daily PM 10 flux was 1.81 g m −2 d −1 , which was slightly higher but within range of those recently published for beef cattle feedlots (McGinn et al, 2010; Bonifacio et al, 2012). McGinn et al (2010) reported values of 1.45 and 1.61 g m −2 d −1 for Australian feedlots based on inverse dispersion modeling with WindTrax. Bonifacio et al (2012) reported median PM 10 emissions of 1.10 and 1.60 g m −2 d −1 for Kansas feedlots based on a reverse dispersion modeling technique with AERMOD.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Statistics on the hourly PM 10 fluxes at the feedlot are summarized in Table 3. During a day, PM 10 emissions at the feedlot remained relatively high and steady from 0900 to 2100 h. This trend was different from other cattle feedlot studies: the highest PM 10 emissions during a day were observed in the afternoon (1000-1700 h) at two Kansas cattle feedlots (Bonifacio et al, 2012) and in the early evening at two Australian feedlots (McGinn et al, 2010). Still, similar to these previous studies, an increase in PM 10 emissions was observed during the early evening period (2000-2100 h).…”

Section: Particulate Matter Emissioncontrasting

confidence: 69%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Particulate Emissions from a Beef Cattle Feedlot Using the Flux-Gradient Technique

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data on air emissions from open-lot beef cattle () feedlots are limited. This research was conducted to determine fluxes of particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter ≤10 μm (PM) from a commercial beef cattle feedlot in Kansas using the flux-gradient technique, a widely used micrometeorological method for air emissions from open sources. Vertical PM concentration profiles and micrometeorological parameters were measured at the feedlot using tapered element oscillating microbalance PM samplers and eddy covariance instrumentations (i.e., sonic anemometer and infrared hygrometer), respectively, from May 2010 through September 2011, representing feedlot conditions with air temperatures ranging from -24 to 39°C. Calculated hourly PM fluxes varied diurnally and seasonally, ranging up to 272 mg m h, with an overall median of 36 mg m h. For warm conditions (air temperature of 21 ± 10°C), the highest hourly PM fluxes (range 116-146 mg m h) were observed during the early evening period, from 2000 to 2100 h. For cold conditions (air temperature of -2 ± 8°C), the highest PM fluxes (range 14-27 mg m h) were observed in the afternoon, from 1100 to 1500 h. Changes in the hourly trend of PM fluxes coincided with changes in friction velocity, air temperature, sensible heat flux, and surface roughness. The PM emission was also affected by the pen surface water content, where a water content of at least 20% (wet basis) would be sufficient to effectively reduce PM emissions from pens by as much as 60%.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Particulate Matter Emissioncontrasting

confidence: 69%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Particulate Emissions from a Beef Cattle Feedlot Using the Flux-Gradient Technique

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A widely used approach involves measuring upwind and downwind concentrations combined with reverse modeling with atmospheric dispersion models McGinn et al, 2010;National Research Council, 2003;Wanjura et al, 2004). Currently, several dispersion models are available, with the American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) as the latest Gaussian model recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for regulatory purposes (CFR, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several PM emission estimates for cattle feedlots are available from studies using dispersion models, including simple box models (e.g., SJVAPCD, 2006), Gaussian dispersion models (e.g., Wanjura et al, 2004), and Lagrangian stochastic models (e.g., McGinn et al, 2010). For inventory purposes, U.S. EPA is currently using a PM 10 emission factor of 17 tons/1000 head (hd) throughput (Midwest Research Institute, 1988)(equivalent to 82 kg/1000 hd-day at 2 throughput/yr); this factor was apparently obtained using a simple Gaussian model and PM measurements from California feedlots (Grelinger and Lapp, 1996;U.S.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Particulate matter emission rates from beef cattle feedlots in Kansas—Reverse dispersion modeling

Bonifacio

Maghirang

Auvermann

et al. 2012

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open beef cattle feedlots emit various air pollutants, including particulate matter (PM) with equivalent aerodynamic diameter of 10 microm or less (PM10); however limited research has quantified PM10 emission rates from feedlots. This research was conducted to determine emission rates of PM10 from large cattle feedlots in Kansas. Concentrations of PM10 at the downwind and upwind edges of two large cattle feedlots (KS1 and KS2) in Kansas were measured with tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) PM10 monitors from January 2007 to December 2008. Weather conditions at the feedlots were also monitored. From measured PM10 concentrations and weather conditions, PM10 emission rates were determined using reverse modeling with the American Meteorological Society/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD). The two feedlots differed significantly in median PM10 emission flux (1.60 g/m2-day for KS1 vs. 1.10 g/m2-day for KS2) but not in PM10 emission factor (27 kg/1000 head-day for KS1 and 30 kg/1000 head-day KS2). These emission factors were smaller than published U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emission factor for cattle feedlots.

show abstract

Animal Production and Animal Manure Management

Sommer¹,

Christensen²

2013

Animal Manure Recycling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Societies will inevitably have to recognise that animal excreta are not just a waste material requiring disposal, but a crucial raw material needed to boost plant production to feed a growing world population. If used appropriately, animal excreta can replace significant amounts of mineral fertilisers in areas with livestock production. Manure comprises animal excreta dissolved in water or mixed with straw, a substance made up of organic matter and used as an organic fertiliser in agriculture, where it contributes to the fertility of the soil by adding plant nutrients and organic matter (Figure 1.1). In the management chain before it is applied to soil, manure can also be used for energy production. The increasing focus on developing and using new technologies and management methods for manure handling is the consequence of both a huge increase in livestock production worldwide and specialisation in agriculture. Thus, in new production systems, traditional farms with a mixture of livestock and crop production are often replaced with landless livestock production units. These new livestock production systems may not have the capacity to recycle manure on-farm, which was a feature of many farming system in the past. The plant nutrients in manure can, if used appropriately, replace significant amounts of mineral fertilisers, and the organic matter can boost soil fertility (Text Box-Basic 1.1) and can be used for energy production. On the other hand, improper management and utilisation of manure results in loss of plant nutrients (Bouwman et al., 2012)(Figure 1.2), which are a limited resource, and this can be a risk to the global feed and food supply. For example, phosphorus (P) is a limited resource, with the mineable phosphate-rich rocks used for P fertiliser production projected to become exhausted within the next 60-130 years (Figure 1.3). In a 14-month period during 2007-2008, the global food crisis led to phosphate rock and fertiliser demand exceeding supply and prices increased by 700% (Cordell et al., 2009). This increase in cost may be mitigated by reducing P

show abstract

Coarse Particulate Matter Emissions from Cattle Feedlots in Australia

Cited by 27 publications

References 21 publications

Particulate Emissions from a Beef Cattle Feedlot Using the Flux-Gradient Technique

Particulate Emissions from a Beef Cattle Feedlot Using the Flux-Gradient Technique

Particulate matter emission rates from beef cattle feedlots in Kansas—Reverse dispersion modeling

Animal Production and Animal Manure Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About