Airborne Particulate Matter and Culturable Bacteria Reduction from Spraying Slightly Acidic Electrolyzed Water in an Experimental Aviary Laying-Hen Housing Chamber

Zheng, Weichao; Zhao, Yang; Xin, Hongwei; Gates, Richard S.; Li, Baoming; Zhang, Yuanhui; Soupir, Michelle L.

doi:10.13031/trans.57.10306

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ionization application in poultry houses suggested that only reducing PM emission did not have a significant effect on microorganism emission reduction (Cambra-López et al 2009). An experiment of spraying SAEW or water in a layer housing chamber demonstrated that airborne CB were reduced more by the bactericidal effect of SAEW than by the reduction in airborne PM (Zheng et al 2014). Similar results were found in this study that using EW could greatly increase airborne CB removal efficiency compared with tap water for this spray wet scrubber.…”

Section: Effects Of Ph and Acc Of Ew On Airborne Culturable Bacteria supporting

confidence: 87%

Optimization of a wet scrubber with electrolyzed water spray—Part II: Airborne culturable bacteria removal

Zheng

et al. 2019

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Airborne microorganisms, especially the pathogenic microorganisms, emitted from animal feeding operations (AFOs) may harm the environment and public health and threaten the biosecurity of the farm and surrounding environment. Electrolyzed water (EW), which was considered to be an environmentally friendly disinfectant, may be a potential spraying medium of wet scrubber for airborne microorganism emission reduction. A laboratory test was conducted to investigate the airborne bacteria (CB) removal efficiency of the wet scrubber by EW spray with different designs and operating parameters. Both the available choline (AC) initial loss rate and AC traveling loss rate of acidic electrolyzed water (AEW; pH = 1.35) were much higher than those of slightly acidic electrolyzed water (SAEW; pH = 5.50). Using one spraying stage with 4 m sec −1 air speed in the duct, the no detect lines (NDLs) of SAEW (pH = 5.50) for airborne Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, and Salmonella enteritidis removal were all 50 mg L −1 , whereas the NDLs of AEW (pH = 1.35) for airborne E. coli, S. aureus, and S. enteritidis removal increased to 70, 90, and 90 mg L −1 , respectively. The NDLs of SAEW (pH = 5.50) for airborne E. coli, S. aureus, and S. enteritidis were lower than those of AEW (pH = 1.35) at single spraying stage. Increase in the number of stages lowered the NDLs of both SAEW (pH = 5.50) and AEW (pH = 1.35) for airborne E. coli, S. aureus, and S. enteritidis. EW with a higher available chlorine concentration (ACC) was needed at air speed of 6 m sec −1 to reach the same airborne CB removal efficiency as that at air speed of 4 m sec −1. The results of this study demonstrated that EW spray wet scrubbers could be a very effective and feasible airborne CB mitigation technology for AFOs. Implications: It is difficult to effectively reduce airborne bacteria emitted from animal feeding operations (AFOs). Electrolyzed water (EW) with disinfection effect and acidity is a potential absorbent for spray in wet scrubber to remove microorganisms and ammonia. Based on the field test results, a laboratory experiment we conducted this time was to optimize the design and operation parameters to improve the airborne bacteria removal efficiency. A better understanding of the EW application in the wet scrubber can contribute to the mitigation of airborne bacteria from animal houses and improve the atmosphere air quality.

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Ph and Acc Of Ew On Airborne Culturable Bacteria supporting

confidence: 87%

Optimization of a wet scrubber with electrolyzed water spray—Part II: Airborne culturable bacteria removal

Zheng

et al. 2019

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The NEW was produced using an electrolyzing container with 0.1% NaCl solution (Zhao et al, 2014). Free chlorine (FC) was produced at a rate of 4.9 mg L was generated and used in the current study.…”

Section: Litter Handling and New Preparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, reducing NH 3 and PM levels in CF houses is more complex than in manure-belt cage or EC houses. Spraying a liquid agent such as electrolyzed water (EW) has been shown to be conducive to suppressing PM and airborne bacteria (AB) from litter in CF settings (Zhao et al, 2014;Zheng el al., 2014;Chai et al, 2017). The reduction efficiencies for PM and AB reached 50% to 70% after spraying acidic EW at dosages of 80 to 125 mL m -2 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigating Ammonia and PM Generation of Cage-Free Henhouse Litter with Solid Additive and Liquid Spray

Chai¹,

Xin²,

Zhao³

et al. 2018

Transactions of the ASABE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of chain restaurants, retailers, and grocers in the U.S. have pledged to source only cage-free (CF) eggs in the foreseeable future (e.g., by 2025) due to marketing reasons or concerns over animal welfare. However, CF housing has some inherent challenges, and a predominant one is poor air quality, i.e., ammonia gas (NH3) and particulate matter (PM), and increased emissions. Spraying a liquid agent such as electrolyzed water (EW) can effectively suppress PM generation of CF henhouse litter. However, liquid spray can enhance NH3 generation because it increases the litter moisture content (LMC). Application of acidic liquid to the litter would help control NH3 while suppressing PM, but con-cerns arise about the potential corrosive effect of acidic liquid on housing equipment. To overcome this dilemma, this study evaluated the effect of applying PLT, a commercial poultry litter additive (LA), on NH3 emissions of CF hen litter while spraying it with neutral EW (NEW) at a rate of 25 mL kg-1 dry litter d-1. The PLT application rates were 0.3, 0.6, and 0.9 kg m-2, denoted as Low-LA, Med-LA, and High-LA, respectively. CF litter was placed inside dynamic emission chambers and automatically stirred to mimic hen scratching. PLT was topically applied onto the litter on day 1; NEW was sprayed daily for 11 d, followed by a 3 d non-spray period (i.e., 14 d per trial); and each regimen was replicated four times. The ammonia emission rate (ER) of the control (no LA), Low-LA, Med-LA, and High-LA regimens (mean SE) was, respectively, 0.76 0.05, 0.55 0.06, 0.37 0.04, and 0.16 0.02 g kg-1 dry litter d-1, i.e., 28% to 79% reduction by the treatments. The NH3 reduction efficiency was linearly proportional to the PLT application rate, with higher application rate resulting in lower litter pH (p < 0.05). At the end of each trial (d14), the Med-LA and High-LA regimens still showed relatively low NH3 emissions, suggesting the need for a longer measurement period in future studies. The NEW spray increased LMC by up to 60% after 11 once-a-day sprays, which reduced PM2.5, PM10, and TSP levels from 3.83, 6.39, and 7 mg m-3 to 0.07, 0.14, and 0.15 mg m-3, respectively. After a 3 d spray suspension, the PM levels rebounded to 0.72, 1.02, and 1.12 mg m-3 for PM2.5, PM10, and TSP, respectively, due to decreased LMC. Field verification of the mitigation efficacy and an economic assessment of the method are warranted.

show abstract

“…Zheng et al (2014) sprayed both regular tap water and slightly acidic electrolyzed water (SAEW) onto laying hen litter and found no difference between tap water and AEW in PM reduction. However, spraying AEW at a dosage of 80 mL m -2 reduced airborne bacteria (>2.1 μm) by up to 49%, whereas spraying tap water showed no reduction in bacteria.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Reduction of Particulate Matter and Ammonia by Spraying Acidic Electrolyzed Water onto Litter of Aviary Hen Houses: A Lab-Scale Study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Airborne Particulate Matter and Culturable Bacteria Reduction from Spraying Slightly Acidic Electrolyzed Water in an Experimental Aviary Laying-Hen Housing Chamber

Cited by 5 publications

References 33 publications

Optimization of a wet scrubber with electrolyzed water spray—Part II: Airborne culturable bacteria removal

Optimization of a wet scrubber with electrolyzed water spray—Part II: Airborne culturable bacteria removal

Mitigating Ammonia and PM Generation of Cage-Free Henhouse Litter with Solid Additive and Liquid Spray

Reduction of Particulate Matter and Ammonia by Spraying Acidic Electrolyzed Water onto Litter of Aviary Hen Houses: A Lab-Scale Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About