Characterization of provincially inspected slaughterhouse wastewater in Ontario, Canada

Mittal, Ping F. Wu And Gauri S.

doi:10.7451/cbe.2012.54.6.9

Cited by 27 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The available literature data for the total phosphorus concentrations are variable, but generally, the concentrations observed by this study are within the ranges reported by Banks and Wang (2005); Wu and Mittal (2012); and Bustillo-Lecompte and Mehrvar (2017). However, the observed total phosphorus concentrations are higher than the concentrations reported by U.S. EPA (2008).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 83%

Characterization of Wastewater in Two U.S. Cattle Slaughterhouses

Ziara

Subbiah

et al. 2018

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent changes related to antimicrobial intervention technologies and reduction in product loss have affected cattle slaughterhouse wastewater streams. In this study, wastewater samples were collected from two cattle slaughterhouses located in the Midwest of the United States, focusing on the overall wastewater, antimicrobial interventions, and viscera and offal processing. The wastewater concentrations were affected by the water use, dilution, processes, and wastewater pretreatment that occurs within the slaughterhouse. Even though there were differences in the wastewater concentrations, the overall wastewater loads for both slaughterhouses were similar. The overall mean total solids (TS), volatile solids (VS), 5-day biological chemical demand (BOD5), and chemical oxygen demand (COD) wastewater loads for the two slaughterhouses were 16.8, 10.0, 4.7, and 12.5 kg/1000 kg live weight killed, respectively. Wastewater streams from antimicrobial interventions have low pH and are potential sources of shock loadings. Wastewater from viscera and offal processing has high nutrient concentration; therefore, any improvement in this process could enhance the sustainability the industry.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 83%

Characterization of Wastewater in Two U.S. Cattle Slaughterhouses

Ziara

Subbiah

et al. 2018

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…SWW is considered detrimental worldwide due to its complex composition of fats, proteins, and fibers from the slaughtering process (Johns, 1995;Ruiz et al, 1997;Wu and Mittal, 2011;Bustillo-Lecompte et al, 2014). The major part of the contamination is caused by blood and by stomach and intestinal mucus (Tritt and Schuchardt, 1992).…”

Section: Characterization Of Slaughterhouse Wastewatermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…SWW is usually evaluated in terms of bulk parameters due to the specific amounts of SWW and pollutant loads related to the animals slaughtered and processed that vary among the meat processing industry, usually containing considerable amounts of total phosphorus (TP), total nitrogen (TN), total organic carbon (TOC), chemical oxygen demand (COD), total suspended solids (TSS), and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) (Tritt and Schuchardt, 1992;Johns, 1995;Mittal, 2006;Cao and Mehrvar, 2011;Wu and Mittal, 2011;Barrera et al, 2012;BustilloLecompte et al, 2013BustilloLecompte et al, , 2014.…”

Section: Characterization Of Slaughterhouse Wastewatermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Slaughterhouse wastewater characteristics, treatment, and management in the meat processing industry: A review on trends and advances

Bustillo-Lecompte

Mehrvar

2015

Journal of Environmental Management

342

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The GHG emissions from energy use were found to be 69 g CO 2 e per kg SLW using the LCA software. Additionally, GHG emissions have also been calculated for water use, assuming an average rate of 2.7 L per kg SLW, i.e., 1.6 m 3 per head [50,51] and from wastewater treatment, assuming an average 20% volume loss from water input, and Canadian beef slaughterhouse wastewater characteristics [52]. Wastewater GHG emissions were estimated at 54 g CO 2 e per kg SLW.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbon Footprint of Beef Cattle

Desjardins

Worth

Vergé³

et al. 2012

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The carbon footprint of beef cattle is presented for Canada, The United States, The European Union, Australia and Brazil. The values ranged between 8 and 22 kg CO 2 e per kg of live weight (LW) depending on the type of farming system, the location, the year, the type of management practices, the allocation, as well as the boundaries of the study. Substantial reductions have been observed for most of these countries in the last thirty years. For instance, in Canada the mean carbon footprint of beef cattle at the exit gate of the farm decreased from 18.2 kg CO 2 e per kg LW in 1981 to 9.5 kg CO 2 e per kg LW in 2006 mainly because of improved genetics, better diets, and more sustainable land management practices. Cattle production results in products other than meat, such as hides, offal and products for rendering plants; hence the environmental burden must be distributed between these useful products. In order to do this, the cattle carbon footprint needs to be reported in kg of CO 2 e per kg of product. For example, in Canada in 2006, on a mass basis, the carbon footprint of cattle by-products at the exit gate of the slaughterhouse was 12.9 kg CO 2 e per kg of product. Based on an economic allocation, the carbon OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2012, 4 3280 footprints of meat (primal cuts), hide, offal and fat, bones and other products for rendering were 19.6, 12.3, 7 and 2 kg CO 2 e per kg of product, respectively.

show abstract

Characterization of provincially inspected slaughterhouse wastewater in Ontario, Canada

Cited by 27 publications

References 8 publications

Characterization of Wastewater in Two U.S. Cattle Slaughterhouses

Characterization of Wastewater in Two U.S. Cattle Slaughterhouses

Slaughterhouse wastewater characteristics, treatment, and management in the meat processing industry: A review on trends and advances

Carbon Footprint of Beef Cattle

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About