John W. Worley

Co-authors Casey W Ritz

Poultry Science Dept., University of Georgia

Mike Czarick

Poultry Science Dept., University of Georgia

Brian D Fairchild

Poultry Science Dept., University of Georgia

Luke P Naeher

Env. Health Science Dept., University of Georgia

The Problem Much work has been done on emissions from PH

Much less done on what happens once they leave the house

Previous work on downwind Ammonia

Previous work on PM

Challenge with sensitivity and wind direction

Continuous vs. gravimetric

Objective Measure PM2.5 concentration at various distances

from typical broiler production houses

Measure continuously

Measure daily (gravimetrically)

Compare to “background levels”

Facilities

Facilities

PM Sampling Station (30 m from house)

Facilities

PM Sampling Station (30 m from house)

Facilities Four tunnel-ventilated broiler houses

July/August 2007

Last 4 weeks of 8-week-old broilers

23,500 birds/house

2-flock built up litter

Instrumentation - Triplex Cyclone

Instrumentation – DustTrak 8520

Instrumentation – Sampling Station

Instrumentation

Continuous Monitoring

DustTrak 8520 aerosol monitors

15 minute averages –

eliminate if data not available from each distance

Eliminate days with less than 2/3 of data

Gravimetric Monitoring

Triplex Cyclones – EPA procedures

Results – Continuous Ambient

Results – Continuous Downwind

Daily (Grav. In-house and ambient)

Daily (Grav. Downwind)

Results – Avg. by distance (grav)

Results - Observations PM levels declined as distance from house increased

No stat. diff. beyond 100 ft from house

Readings above EPA Ambient Air standard of 35 µg/m3 were observed

Background levels were also above standard

Highest days, wind from west – from Athens and metro-Atlanta

Conclusions Background levels of PM were largest influence on

levels

Increased PM levels near the houses

No statistical difference beyond 30m (100 ft.)

Questions?

jworley@uga.edu