Determination of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide emissions from a commercial dairy farm with an exercise yard and the health-related impact for residents

Abstract

Airborne emissions from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) have the potential to pose a risk to human health and the environment. Here, we present an assessment of the emission, dispersion, and health-related impact of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide emitted from a 300-head, full-scale dairy farm with an exercise yard in Beijing, China. By monitoring the referred gas emissions with a dynamic flux chamber for seven consecutive days, we examined their emission rates. An annual hourly emission time series was constructed on the basis of the measured emission rates and a release modification model. The health risk of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide emissions around the dairy farm was then determined using atmospheric dispersion modeling and exposure risk assessment. The body mass-related mean emission factors of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide were 2.13 kg a−1 AU−1 and 24.9 g a−1 AU−1, respectively (one animal unit (AU) is equivalent to 500 kg body mass). A log-normal distribution fitted well to ammonia emission rates. Contour lines of predicted hourly mean concentrations of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide were mainly driven by the meteorological conditions. The concentrations of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide at the fence line were below 10 μg m−3 and 0.04 μg m−3, respectively, and were 2–3 orders of magnitude lower than the current Chinese air quality standards for such pollutants. Moreover, the cumulative non-carcinogenic risks (HI) of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide were 4 orders of magnitudes lower than the acceptable risk levels (HI = 1). Considering a health risk criterion of 1E-4, the maximum distance from the farm fence line to meet this criterion was nearly 1000 m towards north-northeast. The encompassed area of the contour lines of the ambient concentration of ammonia is much larger than that of hydrogen sulfide. However, the contour lines of the ammonia health risk are analogous to those of hydrogen sulfide. In general, the ammonia and hydrogen sulfide emissions from the dairy farm are unlikely to cause any health risks for the population living in the neighborhood.

Microbial agent spraying in pig housing and slurry can potentially reduce harmful gas emissions – a preliminary study

“…H 2 S is a chemically unstable reducing agent, easily oxidised, and produces toxic sulphuric byproducts upon combustion (Habeeb et al, 2017). It has been reported that NH 3 and H 2 S emissions can pose a health risk, given their malodorous and hazardous properties, contributing to ecosystem acidification (Wu et al, 2020). Our findings in Exp.…”

Emissions of hydrogen sulfide from a western open‐lot dairy

“…However, emissions measure using open‐path techniques at this dairy were much higher than those estimated from flux chamber measurements for both winter and summer, with mean winter emissions greater by a factor of 52 and mean summer emissions greater by a factor of 53. Mean spring emissions for the entire dairy were also much higher (by a factor of 38) than short‐term May H 2 S emissions of the feedlot pen in China (Wu et al., 2020). However, summer mean emissions of the entire dairy were much less than the 2,883 g H 2 S d −1 m −2 reported for a Texas cattle feedlot (Baek et al., 2003).…”

“…Emissions of the corral surface of a Texas dairy, assessed using flux chambers, had similar summer and winter emissions, averaging 22.3 g H 2 S d −1 hd −1 (Muktar & Mutlu, 2008). Flux chamber measurements of H 2 S emissions of the surface of a feedlot pen of a Chinese dairy in May averaged 0.085 g H 2 S d −1 hd −1 (Wu et al., 2020). Similar flux chamber measurements of H 2 S emissions of a Texas feedlot surface over 8 d in August were lower than these open dairy lots, ranging from 0.011 to 0.039 g H 2 S d −1 hd −1 (Baek et al., 2003).…”

Particulate Matter Emission Factors for Dairy Facilities and Cattle Feedlots during Summertime in Texas

“…Since there are limitations of water resources in the High Plains where most feedlots are located, potential alternative options need to be studied for PM emission control. It is worth noting that gaseous pollutants, i.e., NH 3 , hydrogen sulfide, and VOC along with GHGs are also largely emitted from the CAFOs alongside PM, causing air quality issues in the atmosphere [ 45 ]. Reasonably, it is important to conduct more experiments on the gaseous pollutants using advance technologies for simpler emission monitoring and quicker control actions.…”