http://www.extension.org/67575 In 2011, the production rate of broilers was 8.6 billion with a value of $23.2 billion (USDA 2012). Both CERCLA and EPCRA have reporting requirements for ammonia (NH3) of 100 lb of NH3/d or 18.3 tons/yr, a level that may affect large animal production facilities (NRC 2003). Although USEPA (2009) has provided an exemption for animal waste producing farms under CERCLA for reporting hazardous air emissions, it is expected that this exemption will be revoked once valid methodologies are established for monitoring. Two of the 24 sites in the NAEMS monitoring study reported similar NH3 emissions of 3.6 – 5.3 tons of NH3 per house per year (Burns et al. 2009, Heber 2010). Emissions of this level indicate a need for developing technologies that can reduce the NH3 levels produced by broiler operations. This research is focused on the use of broiler litter as activated carbon (BAC) to reduce aerial NH3 generated by litter, an opportunity to not only reuse the manure, but also treat the emissions from or within broiler houses. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of BAC to remove NH3 volatilized from litter samples in a laboratory acid-trap system. Preliminary studies using NH3/air mixture indicated that the BAC capacity to adsorb NH3 was approximately double that of Vapure 612, a commercial carbon. In the litter emission study, the BAC and Vapure performance was comparable. Breakthrough for both carbons occurred within 14 hours of the test start. At the end of the 3 day test, the NH3 emission for BAC was 75% of the litter only control, whereas, the Vapure emission was 64% of the control. The results of the study demonstrate the potential for a cyclical waste utilization strategy in using broiler litter activated carbon to capture NH3 volatilized from litter.

1. LITTER GENERATED
AMMONIA CAPTURED BY
ACTIVATED CARBON
DERIVED FROM BROILER
LITTER
Kari Fitzmorris Brisolara, ScD, MSPH
Louisiana State University,
Health Sciences Center
Dana M. Miles, PhD and Isabel M. Lima, PhD
USDA Agricultural Research Service

2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
 Analyze waste sources for their potential as activated
carbons
 Create activated carbons and char from broiler litter
using steam activation to minimize cost and waste
production.
 Assess the physical properties of the carbons
 Determine the efficacy of the activated carbon and
char with regard to ammonia adsorption using
laboratory-based direct-measurement experiments
followed by manure emissions studies.

3. COLLECTION

4. CARBON

5. ACTIVATED
CARBONS
Poultry Cake Carbon 2500x Poultry Litter Carbon 250x

6. COST OF SOURCE MATERIAL FOR
ACTIVATED CARBON
Biosolid cost $3 to 10 / ton plus binder - pelletized.
Bituminous coal $60 to 80 / ton plus binder -
pelletized.
 (2010 average $60.88/ton)
Saving of >6 times in source material for activated
carbon

8. ACTIVATED CARBON MARKET
It is anticipated world demand for virgin activated carbon will rise 9.9 -
17 percent yearly through 2014.
The global market for activated carbon is forecast to reach a market
size of 2.3 million metric tons by the year 2017
One of the main drivers of growth is mercury control technology for
industrial air purification applications to meet new emissions
standards
The primary uses are currently water treatment and air purification
3 largest players in the industry – Calgon, Norit & MeadWestvaco.
Calgon reported cost of products sold increased 8.4% to $95.5 million in the third
quarter of 2011.
There are NO carbons with good metals adsorbing properties
currently on the market.
Current value for a high quality carbon is about $1.50+/lb.

9. COMMON SOURCES FOR ACTIVATED
CARBON
Bituminous coal
Coconut shells
Alternative Sources
 Nut shells (pecan, walnut)
 Sugarcane bagasse
 Soybean hulls

10. ACTIVATED CARBON FROM WASTE
Biosolids
 Most studies only examined pyrolyzed municipal
wastes – no activation
Other wastes
 Tires
 Paper mill waste

11. COMPARISON WITH OTHER
CARBONS
Sample Sample Description
Our carbons Made from pelletized manure, steam activated under N2
Coal, coconut
shell or wood
based
PUR RF Replacement Filter, coal derived, 10x20 mesh, originally in block for
Calgon F300 Filtrasorb 300, GAC by Calgon Carbon for removal of organic
pollutants from munic/indust wastewaters. Made from
bituminous coal.
Made from pelletized coal, ground coconut
shells/sawdust, steam activated under N2
Norit Darco Hg Powdered (<45 μm)
activated carbon made
from lignite coal.

12. ACTIVATED CARBON
Sources
 Poultry Litter
 Mississippi State University
 Includes bedding material (pine shavings)
 Pre-windrowed Poultry Litter
 North Louisiana private farm
 Includes bedding material (rice hulls)

13. ACTIVATED CARBON RESULTS
Pyrolysis and Activation
Chemical and Physical Properties
Ammonia:
Preliminary Study
Recent Results

14. CARBON CHARACTERIZATION
Physical properties
• Carbon yields, surface area, attrition resistance, bulk
density, particle size distribution, SEM characterization
Chemical properties
 Total surface
charge, pH, compositional
analysis, ash content, X-ray
analysis, NMR
Adsorptive properties
 Adsorption isotherms, kinetic studies, batch and column modes, for several
compounds

15. Pellet Mill FurnacePelletized Manure

16. PYROLYSIS AND ACTIVATION
700oC under nitrogen gas for 1 hr
Steam activation
 Flow rate 3 mL/min
800oC for 45 min
Acid washed (1hr 0.1M HCl)
Ground to 18 x 40 mesh

17. PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL PROPERTIES
Percent yield
Bulk density
Surface area
Surface charge
Elemental
analysis
Carbon
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
Sulfur

18. PHYSICAL/
CHEMICAL
PROPERTIES
OF MANURE
AND
RESULTING
ACTIVATED
CARBONS.
MS
Litter
LA
Litter
% Yield (%) 22.2 20.0
BET Surface Area (m2/g) 461.2 523.8
Element mg/g
Calcium Raw 23.3 37.3
Activated
Carbon
62.8 114
Copper Raw 0.47 0.56
Activated
Carbon
2.20 3.06
Iron Raw 1.98 2.09
Activated
Carbon
7.42 12.3
Magnesium Raw 6.39 14.5
Activated
Carbon
15.3 47.4
Phosphoru
s
Raw 13.9 12.1
Activated
Carbon
34.8 48.2
Sulfur Raw 7.73 19.1
Activated 13.7 49.0

19. CARBON PHYSICAL
PROPERTIES
Yield Surface Area Attrition
% m2
/ g %
Broiler Litter 22.7 441 17.9
Broiler Cake 11.0 395 24.0
Turkey Litter 21.1 414 20.0
Turkey Cake 16.4 394 25.8
PUR RF - 474 32.0
Coal 70.0 0 13.8
Coconut Shell 22.7 843 22.3
Wood 17.9 849 15.6
Swine 17.0 419 20.6
Dairy 26.8 318 22.1
pH
7.9
8.2
8.0
8.1
4.9
3.1
2.9
6.9
9.0
6.4

20. PRELIMINARY AMMONIA STUDY
 Preliminary studies show the carbon from broiler litter (BAC)
performed better than the commercial carbon with regard to NH3
adsorption
 The broiler litter carbon resisted breakthrough 21% longer than
the Vapure 612, the commercial carbon.
 The concentration of the NH3 gas was 7.05 mg N/min for the
broiler litter assessment and 6.87 mg N/min for the Vapure trial.
 The removal rates were 0.98 mg N/min for the BAC which was
the maximum allowed by the experimental flow rates for 20
minutes.
 The rate of adsorption of the Vapure carbon at 0.42 mg N/min was
less than half of that of the BAC.

23. PRELIMINARY AMMONIA RESULTS
Sample ID Total
Adsorption
(mg N)
mg N
Adsorbed/
gram
Carbon
Breakthrough
Time
(seconds)
BAC 19.6 2.07 63
Vapure 8.3 1.02 50

24. CUMULATIVE LITTER AMMONIA EMISSION FOR THE LITTER ONLY
(CONTROL), BROILER ACTIVATED CARBON COLUMN (BAC), AND
COMMERCIAL CARBON COLUMN (VAPURE).
A,B MEANS HAVING DIFFERENT SUPERSCRIPTS DIFFER SIGNIFICANTLY BASED ON LSD COMPARISONS
(P≤0.05).
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 24 48 72
Time (hr)
CumulativeLitterAmmoniaEmitted(mgN)
Control
BAC
Vapure
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
a
b
b
c

25. RECENT RESULTS - SCHEMATIC

26. PRE-WINDROW CARBON ADSORPTION
PERFORMANCE WITH 1000 PPM
AMMONIA
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1,000
0 50 100 150 200
Ammonia(ppm)
Time (minutes)
10g 5g 2g 1g

27. CONCLUSIONS
Waste sources tested result in carbons with
low surface areas and low percent yields as
compared to commercial grade carbons
Activated carbon made from broiler litter is
efficacious for NH3 adsorption originating from
litter
Broiler activated carbon performed better than
commercial Vapure carbon in preliminary
tests, but was comparable to the commercial
carbon in the litter emission study
The BAC represents the re-use of a waste
material, deriving inherent value not only from
its role as a carbon, but also as a disposal
mechanism for the poultry waste itself

28. RECOMMENDATIONS
Analysis of the surface properties of the
carbons
Surface functional groups
Equalize the driving force for accurate
comparison
Assessment of the feasibility of the use of
the carbons in granular form
 Adsorption
 Regeneration/attrition