Quality Assured Measurements of Animal Building Emissions: Odor Concentrations

Jacobson, Larry D.; Hetchler, Brian P.; Schmidt, David; Nicolai, R. E.; Heber, Albert J.; Ni, Ji-Qin; Hoff, Steven J.; Kozieł, Jacek A.; Zhang, Yuanhui; Beasley, David B.; Parker, David B.

doi:10.3155/1047-3289.58.6.806

Cited by 24 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to the European standard the pulse duration can be a maximum of 15 s, but in practice it is often only a few seconds. The typical odor concentrations measured in animal production is often below a few thousand odor units (OU/m 3 ) [9–11], and a low recovery of odorants during the dilution in an olfactometer may have a significant influence on the results causing underestimation of the odor concentration. It is therefore of great interest to investigate the recovery of odorants from animal production in an olfactometer designed according to the European standard for olfactometry [1], and how long the pulse duration should be to reach maximum recovery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovery of Odorants from an Olfactometer Measured by Proton-Transfer-Reaction Mass Spectrometry

Hansen

Adamsen

Feilberg

2013

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present study was to examine the recovery of odorants during the dilution in an olfactometer designed according to the European standard for dynamic olfactometry. Nine odorants in the ppmv-range were examined including hydrogen sulfide, methanethiol, dimethyl sulfide, acetic acid, propanoic acid, butanoic acid, trimethylamine, 3-methylphenol and n-butanol. Each odorant was diluted in six dilution steps in descending order from 4,096 to 128 times dilutions. The final recovery of dimethyl sulfide and n-butanol after a 60-second pulse was only slightly affected by the dilution, whereas the recoveries of the other odorants were significantly affected by the dilution. The final recoveries of carboxylic acids, trimethylamine and 3-methylphenol were affected by the pulse duration and the signals did not reach stable levels within the 60-second pulse, while sulfur compounds and n-butanol reach a stable signal within a few seconds. In conclusion, the dilution of odorants in an olfactometer has a high impact on the recovery of odorants and when olfactometry is used to estimate the odor concentration, the recoveries have to be taken into consideration for correct measurements.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovery of Odorants from an Olfactometer Measured by Proton-Transfer-Reaction Mass Spectrometry

Hansen

Adamsen

Feilberg

2013

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The large number of animals raised in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) can affect air quality by emissions of odor, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), NH 3 , H 2 S, greenhouse gases (GHGs), and particulate matter (PM) (National Research Council [NRC], 2003;Heber et al, 2006aHeber et al, , 2006bJacobson et al, 2008;Hoff et al, 2009). Air pollution and odor nuisance are a major challenge for livestock production (NRC, 2003;Kim et al, 2007;Parker et al, 2012;Cai et al, 2015;Zhang et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing odorants recovery from a novel metallized fluorinated ethylene propylene gas sampling bag

Wen-da

Kozieł

Cai

et al. 2015

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Industry-standard Tedlar bags for odor sample collection from confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) have been challenged by the evidence of volatile organic compound (VOC) losses and background interferences. Novel impermeable aluminum foil with a thin layer of fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) film on the surface that is in contact with a gas sample was developed to address this challenge. In this research, Tedlar and metallized FEP bags were compared for (a) recoveries of four characteristic CAFO odorous VOCs (ethyl mercaptan, butyric acid, isovaleric acid and p-cresol) after 30 min and 24 hr sample storage time and for (b) chemical background interferences. All air sampling and analyses were performed with solid-phase microextraction (SPME) followed by gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy (GC-MS). Mean target gas sample recoveries from metallized FEP bags were 25.9% and 28.0% higher than those in Tedlar bags, for 30 min and 24 hr, respectively. Metallized FEP bags demonstrated the highest p-cresol recoveries after 30-min and 24-hr storage, 96.1 ± 44.5% and 44.8 ± 10.2%, respectively, among different types of sampling bags reported in previous studies. However, a higher variability was observed for p-cresol recovery with metallized FEP bags. A 0% recovery of ethyl mercaptan was observed with Tedlar bags after 24-hr storage, whereas an 85.7 ± 7.4% recovery was achieved with metallized FEP bags. Recoveries of butyric and isovaleric acids were similar for both bag types. Two major impurities in Tedlar bags' background were identified as N,N-dimethylacetamide and phenol, while backgrounds of metallized FEP bags were significantly cleaner. Reusability of metallized FEP bags was tested. Implications: Caution is advised when using polymeric materials for storage of livestock-relevant odorous volatile organic compounds. The odorants loss with storage time confirmed that long-term storage in whole-air form is ill advised. A focused short-term odor sample containment should be biased toward the most inert material available relative to the highest impact target odorant. Metallized FEP was identified as such a material to p-cresol as the highest impact odorant from confined animal feeding operations. Metallized FEP bags have much cleaner background than commercial Tedlar bags do. Significantly higher recoveries of methyl mercaptan and p-cresol were also observed with metallized FEP bags. IntroductionIn recent decades, intensive large-scale livestock production has grown rapidly in the United States and other parts of the world. The large number of animals raised in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) can affect air quality by emissions of odor, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), NH 3 , H 2 S, greenhouse gases (GHGs), and particulate matter (PM) (National Research Council [NRC], 2003;Heber et al., 2006aHeber et al., , 2006bJacobson et al., 2008;Hoff et al., 2009). Air pollution and odor nuisance are a major challenge for livestock production (NRC, 2003;Kim et al., 2007;Parker et al., 2012;Cai et al., 20...

show abstract

“…The PM 10 concentration was measured continuously by the TEOM but PM 2.5 and total suspended particulates (TSP) were also measured periodically with the TEOM (Heber et al, 2006b;Jerez et al, 2006). Odor samples are taken biweekly to determine odor emissions (Jacobson et al, 2008).…”

Section: Experimental Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Air Pollutant Emissions from Confined Animal Buildings (APECAB) Project Summary

Jacobson¹,

Hetchler²,

Akdeniz³

et al. 2011

Air Pollutant Emissions From Confined Animal Buildings (APECAB) Project

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To address the need for gas, odor, and particulate matter (PM) emission from animal production buildings, funding was secured in the fall of 2001 by a six-state research team for a USDA project entitled "Air Pollutants Emissions from Confined Animal Buildings," or APECAB. The main objective of the APECAB project was to quantify long-term (yearly) air pollutant emissions from confined animal buildings and establish methodologies for real time measurement of these emissions and build a database of air emissions for US livestock and poultry buildings.The APECAB study was a collaboration of land-grant universities in Minnesota (lead institution), Indiana, Illinois, Texas, Iowa, and North Carolina. Extensive planning occurred during the first nine months for protocol development and equipment selection and purchase. Data collection began at various times during the fall of 2002 for each of the cooperating universities and ended at various times in 2004. The immediate goal of the study was a 15-month sampling period to assure that long-term emissions from actual animal production buildings were determined. Long-term measurements revealed the variations in air emissions due to seasonal effects, animal growth cycles, diurnal variations, and manure handling systems.

show abstract

Quality Assured Measurements of Animal Building Emissions: Odor Concentrations

Cited by 24 publications

References 0 publications

Recovery of Odorants from an Olfactometer Measured by Proton-Transfer-Reaction Mass Spectrometry

Recovery of Odorants from an Olfactometer Measured by Proton-Transfer-Reaction Mass Spectrometry

Testing odorants recovery from a novel metallized fluorinated ethylene propylene gas sampling bag

Air Pollutant Emissions from Confined Animal Buildings (APECAB) Project Summary

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About