Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Water Quality Issues from Dairy Farms in the Northeast Peter Wright, State Conservation Engineer Natural Resources Conservation Service Syracuse NY Curt.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Water Quality Issues from Dairy Farms in the Northeast Peter Wright, State Conservation Engineer Natural Resources Conservation Service Syracuse NY Curt."— Presentation transcript:

1 Water Quality Issues from Dairy Farms in the Northeast Peter Wright, State Conservation Engineer Natural Resources Conservation Service Syracuse NY Curt Gooch, PRO-DAIRY Environmental Specialist Cornell University

2

3 Dairy Farm Polluted Water Sources Concentrated Sources: Waste Wash water Barnyard runoff Silage Leachate Manure Storage Spreading

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Concentrated Sources Amounts and concentrations vary daily seasonally from farm to farm They can be Managed When Rain Driven the impact is less diluted not observed

12 NP Milking Center400 ppm60 ppm Silage Leachate4, Barnyard1, Manure5, Domestic Waste307 Concentrations

13 Annual Load from Concentrated Sources NP Milking Center3,000 lb30 lb Silage Leachate3, Barnyard Manure31,6005,000 Domestic Waste7022

14 Conclusions Concentrated sources need to be controlled Prevention is key Look for low cost alternatives to treatment

15 Prevention Eliminate Reduce Reuse

16 Wash Water Reduction Eliminate Leaks and Spills Manually rinse or scrape first Reuse gray water Design system for easy cleaning

17 Quantities Range1-40 gal/cow/day Typical2-5 gal/cow/day

18 Reduce at the Source Feed Milk First flush Colostrum, treated milk Scrape Manure Parlor and holding area floors Correct Soap Amounts No Precooler Water

19 Reuse Wash parlor and holding area floors Water savings Wash cycle water recycled Water savings Soap savings Heat savings

20 Treatment Aerobic – with oxygen Low odors Fast rate By products - Carbon dioxide and water

21 Treatment Anaerobic – without oxygen Odors produced Slow rate By products - plug soil pores

22 Liquid Manure System Advantages Easy Low pollution potential Helps manure flow Disadvantages More to haul Larger storage needed

23 Liquid Manure System 1,000 gal. of milkhouse wastes may contain: 1.67 lbs. Nitrogen 0.83 lbs. Phosphorus 2.50 lbs. Potassium 5.00 lbs. of $0.25/lb. = $1.25 Spreading costs: 1,000 $0.005 per gal. = $5.00

24 Grass Filter Advantages Lower cost Efficient treatment Small space Disadvantages Needs O&M Extreme cold weather problems

25

26

27

28 Settling Tank and Pump

29

30 Milking Center Waste Estimated Nitrogen Fate Immobilized Soil OM 21% Denitrified30% Crop Uptake32% Leaching17% Total100%

31 Milking Center Waste Estimated Nitrogen Fate Immobilized Soil OM 68 Lbs. Denitrified98 Lbs. Crop Uptake104 Lbs. Leaching55 Lbs. Total325 Lbs.N/Acre 1.3 Lbs N/cow /year250 Cows

32 Barnyards Eliminate Reduce the size Reduce the runoff Exclude outside water Pavement increases runoff Vital to control runoff flow

33 NRCS Standard Source Control Scrape, time in barnyard, waterers Solid removal 15 minutes of 2 yr 24 hr rainfall Cleaned out Filter area larger of: 15 min. flow time for 25 yr 24 hr storm 0.5 inches deep OR 500Lbs N per acre per year

34 Abuse Areas Purpose? Increased loading Fences can be moved Image

35

36 Barnyards Sized correctly Clean surface water diverted Paved and curbed Runoff controlled

37

38 Vegetated filter strip to treat BOTH: barnyard runoff and milkhouse wastewater

39 VFS has Two Discharge Points Milkhouse wastewater P concentrations Avg - 16 mg/L, Range from 10 to 21 mg/L

40 Screens and Collector Drop Box

41 Grass VFS Performance as Percent P Removal

42 Barnyard Runoff Estimated Nitrogen Fate Immobilized Soil OM 20% Denitrified20% Volatilization20% Crop Uptake30% Leaching10% Total100%

43

44 Barnyard Runoff Estimated Nitrogen Fate Immobilized Soil OM 100 Lbs. Denitrified100 Lbs. Volatilization100 Lbs. Crop Uptake150 Lbs. Leaching 50 Lbs. Total500 Lbs. N/Acre

45 Barnyard Runoff Assumptions: 20 gallons manure /cow per day 32 Lbs. N/1000 gallons of manure 230 Lbs. N / cow per year Time in barnyard proportional to manure left Daily cleaning leaves 10% available to flow Settling removes 25% of N

46 Barnyard Runoff 230 Lbs. N / cow per year 10% Time in barnyard 23 Lbs. N/cow/yr. Daily cleaning leaves 10% available to flow 2.3 Lbs. N/cow/yr. Settling removes 25% of N 1.7 Lbs. N/cow/yr.

47 Pollution Prevention Eliminate Reduce Recycle

48 Barnyard Purpose? Holding Feeding or water Resting Exercise Heat detection Eliminate!!

49 Bunk Silos Storage of: Silage juice Runoff Drainage water 25 year 24 hour storm Silage leachate is very high in BOD, N and P

50 Solutions Catch and store it all –Then spread according to a NMP Roof the Storage Collect only the concentrated low flow –Treat dilute high flows in a grass filter

51 Effluent Varies Silage juice Dry matter Runoff from rainfall Outside water Amount of empty bunk area Evaporation Other commodities

52 Conclusions: Concentrated Sources Need to be Controlled Prevention is Key Look for Low Cost Alternatives to Treatment

53 Why Do We Store Manure? To reduce the need for frequent hauling and land spreading To allow land spreading at a time when soil and climatic conditions are suitable To allow nutrient application at or near the crop’s growing season

54

55 Spreading Costs

56 Capital Costs

57 Spreading Cost

58 Net Cost of Storage Systems

59 Basics of Separation Solid-Liquid Separator Solid Effluent (20-30% dry matter) Liquid Effluent (1-8% dry matter) Influent 1-15% dry matter Energy

60 Potential Goals of Separation Remove a portion of solids for pumping ease Reclaim separated solids for bedding Partition nutrients for application to far off fields or export Reduce the size or extend the use of a long term storage

61 Needed Information The impact of separation on Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) The quantity and quality of reclaimed manure solids so accurate economic projections can be made with respect to their end use Nutrient partitioning between separated solid and liquid effluents to determine the potential for nutrient export

62 Example Test Methods for Nutrients and Solids Sampling / Monitoring ParameterTest Method Total Solids (TS)EPA Total Volatile Solids (TVS)EPA Total Phosphorous (Total P)EPA Ortho Phosphorous (Ortho P)EPA Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)EPA Ammonia-Nitrogen (NH 3 -N)SM F Organic Nitrogen (ON)By subtraction Total Potassium (Total K)EPA SW

63

64 Anaerobic Digestion Systems Biological Manure and Effluent Handling Separation Gas Collection Conditioning Engine Electric Heat Management

65 Soluble organic compounds Acid forming bacteria Volatile organic acids Methane forming bacteria Biogas Stabilized low odor anaerobic effluent Hydrolysis Manure Anaerobic Digestion of Dairy Manure

66

67

68 Johnes Disease Organism

69 Costs for AA Dairy Anaerobic Digestion Manure Handling System (Wright and Perschke)

70

71 Centralized Digestion Advantages Economics of sale Equipment Management Disadvantages Manure transportation Electric utilization CNMP/CAFO - biosecurity

72 Anaerobic Digestion Systems Biological Manure and Effluent Handling Separation Gas Collection Conditioning Engine Electric Heat Management

73 Conclusions Alternative Systems depend on farm situation Maximize By-Product Use Maximize profits or lower costs Integrate with other enterprises More Research is Needed

74 Summary Producers generally do not know the annual cost for handling manure on their farm. The projected annual economic cost for the analyzed system is $427,000 or $127 per cow. A complete analysis should include cost of conveying manure to the SMS and the cost of applying processed effluent to crop land. A complete analysis also needs to include the nutrient value cost/benefit for the cropping enterprise.


Download ppt "Water Quality Issues from Dairy Farms in the Northeast Peter Wright, State Conservation Engineer Natural Resources Conservation Service Syracuse NY Curt."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google