test protocol - vera-verification€¦ · vera test protocol 3 foreword to meet the environmental...

Test Protocolfor

Livestock Housing and Management Systems

Version 2 / 2011-29-08 Copyright VERA Secretariat

VERA TEST PROTOCOL 2

Test Protocol for Livestock Housing and Management Systems

Table of contents

Foreword .................................................................................................................................................................3List of abbreviations ..............................................................................................................................................4Summary ................................................................................................................................................................51. Introduction .....................................................................................................................................................62. Scope ..................................................................................................................................................................83. Terms and definitions .....................................................................................................................................94. System description .........................................................................................................................................135. Requirements .................................................................................................................................................15 5.1 Pre-testing or full testing of a technology ........................................................................................15 5.2 Requirements on organisation of the test activities ........................................................................15 5.3 Requirements on the test facility ........................................................................................................17 5.4 Requirements for the test organisation .............................................................................................19 5.5 Test design and sampling strategy .....................................................................................................19 5.6 Measurement parameters ....................................................................................................................24 5.7 Data treatment, calculation and evaluation of emissions ...............................................................296. Test report and evaluation ............................................................................................................................33Bibliography .........................................................................................................................................................37Annexes ................................................................................................................................................................38 Annex A (informative): Template for a test plan .......................................................................................38 Annex B (informative): Example of a contract ..........................................................................................41 Annex C (informative): Ammonia emission factors for different animal categories ..........................45 Annex D (informative): Odour emission factors for different animal categories ............................... 48 Annex E (informative): Dust (PM10) emission factors for different animal categories ......................50 Annex F (informative): Example of distribution of sampling days for broilers during one-year test ...................................................................................................................................................52 Annex G (informative): Feeding parameters .............................................................................................54


Foreword

To meet the environmental challenges in livestock production, new technologies are being developed within the EU member states and elsewhere. These so-called environmental technologies are designed for different stages of the livestock production chain and may potentially enhance the eco-efficiency of livestock production by reducing material inputs, emissions of pollutants and energy consumption, recovering valuable by-products and minimising waste disposal problems.

However, central stakeholders, such as farmers and authorities, only have limited information about the performance of the environmental technologies, which hampers the diffusion of these technolo-gies in the livestock production sector. The Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, the German Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection, the German Federal Envi-ronment Agency and the Danish Ministry of Environment, in cooperation with experts from Wagen-ingen University & Research Centre in the Netherlands, the German Association for Technology and Structures in Agriculture (KTBL), the German Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries, the German Agricultural Society DLG, University of Hohenheim and Kiel University in Germany, the University of Aarhus in Denmark, the Danish Institute for Agro Technology and Food Innovation (AgroTech) and Danish Pig Production, have therefore decided to develop common test protocols for testing and verification of a number of these environmental technologies for livestock production. The development of test protocols was initiated in October 2008 and the first version of the protocol was finalised in December 2009. This version 2 of the protocol was finalised in June 2011. The VERA test protocols are designed to test the environmental performance and operational stabil-ity of a range of environmental technologies for livestock production. Basically, the test protocols can therefore be used to provide reliable and comparable information about the performance of new technologies to farmers, authorities and other stakeholders. The ground may therefore be prepared for these technologies to be used to a higher extent in meeting the environmental challenges of livestock production within the EU.

Questions and comments on the test protocols should be sent to

VERA SecretariatKollegievej 6DK-2920 [email protected]


List of abbreviations

a Annus, Latin for yearA AnimalC CarbonCIGR International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems EngineeringCH4 MethaneCO2 Carbon dioxideCF Crude fibreCP Crude proteinDM Dry matterDLG Deutsche Landwirtschafts- Gesellschaft – German Agricultural SocietyFTIR Fourier transform infrared spectroscopyGC-ECD Gas chromatography – electron capture detectorGC-FID Gas chromatography – flame ionisation detectorGC-HWD Gas chromatography – hot wire detectorGHG Greenhouse gasesIVB International VERA boardIVC International verification committeeK PotassiumKTBL Kuratorium für Technik und Bauwesen in der LandwirtschaftLU Livestock unitME Metabolic energyN NitrogenNDIR Non dispersive infrared sensor NH3 AmmoniaN2O Nitrous oxideNOx Refers to NO (nitric oxide) and NO2 (nitrous oxide) OU Odour unitOUE European odour units P Phosphorus PM Particulate matter ppm Parts per millionTAN Total ammoniacal nitrogenTDL Tunable diode laserVERA Verification of Environmental Technologies for Agricultural Production


Summary

This test protocol for livestock housing and management systems was developed within VERA – Veri-fication of Environmental Technologies for Agricultural Production. The protocol is a joint initiative between environmental authorities and experts from Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany with the purpose of providing a framework for independent verification of the environmental efficiency and operational stability of livestock housing and management systems. This test protocol is also intended to help promote an international market for environmental technologies for agricultural production.

Livestock housing and management system is defined in this protocol as a unit with the primary func-tion of providing housing for a specific animal category, and with a specific design, equipment and management that determines its environmental performance. In principle, all elements in an animal house that affect the external environment may be included in a definition of such a system.

This protocol outlines the conditions for testing primary and conditional test parameters related to the environmental efficiency and operational stability of livestock housing and management systems. Am-monia, odour and dust are the primary test parameters of this protocol.

A VERA test of a livestock housing or management system must be carried out by an independent test organisation at farms that are representative for the animal production system in question. This test protocol outlines detailed requirements for the actors involved: applicant/manufacturer, test organisa-tion and the farmer hosting the test facility. The test must be designed with a case-control approach. Where possible, the case-control setup must be carried out within-farm, such that the emissions from animal compartments equipped with the test system (case) and animal compartments with standard equipment (control) are directly compared by carrying out simultaneous measurements. The case-control setup should be carried out on two different farm locations. However, for naturally ventilated livestock housing systems such as dairy farms, this case-control setup may not be applicable. In such cases, at least four test farms equipped with the test system should be measured during the required test period. Emission factors are then calculated by applying norm emission factors or calculated emis-sion factors from a minimum of four reference farms.

The test is carried out over a one-year period to measure the annual variation in emissions levels and record the operational stability of the system when challenged by seasonal and production variations.

The measurement parameters are divided into primary and conditional parameters. The primary parameters (ammonia, odour and dust) must be sampled and measured on 6 days distributed over one year, as a minimum. Criteria for measuring the conditional parameters (related to gaseous emissions and climate; animal production unit size, manure and feed composition; and operational functioning and stability of the system/technology) vary depending on the individual parameter.

On completion of a VERA test, the test organisation must produce a test report. This report must con-tain a description of the technology tested and the test design and methods used. The test report must also include a presentation of the results obtained and an evaluation of the environmental efficiency and operational stability of the system.


1. Introduction

The environmental footprint of livestock production can be reduced by stimulating the use of en-vironmental technologies designed for improving the eco-efficient performance. The eco-efficiency of livestock production is enhanced by reducing material inputs, emissions of pollutants and energy consumption, recovering valuable by-products and minimising waste disposal problems. Environmen-tal technologies can be introduced in different stages of the livestock production chain, for example techniques applied in animal houses or techniques for manure storage, processing or land application.

In order to facilitate the distribution of environmental technologies for agricultural production it is crucial that the environmental performance and operational stability of the technologies are thor-oughly tested. These tests should be based on test protocols comprised of descriptions of common standard methods for measuring the environmental efficiency and operational stability of an environ-mental technology.

In a joint initiative between Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany, protocols have therefore been developed to test and verify different types of environmental technologies for agricultural produc-tion. This initiative is organised within VERA – Verification of Environmental Technologies for Agricultural Production. VERA was established in 2009 to promote an international market for environmental technologies for agricultural production. The overall purpose of VERA is to fill the information gap of central stakeholders by offering independent verification of the environmental performance and operational stability of environmental technologies determined by applying specific VERA test protocols.

This paper outlines the test protocol for environmental technologies for livestock housing and man-agement systems. The objective of this protocol is to specify the test procedures for the environmental efficiency of livestock housing and management systems. This includes definitions, requirements and conditions for parties involved in the test, measurement and sampling methods, processing and inter-pretation of measurement results, and reporting.

Livestock housing and management system is defined in this protocol as a unit with the primary func-tion of providing housing for a specified animal category, and with a specific design, equipment and management that determines its environmental performance. In principle, all elements in an animal house that affect the external environment may be included in a definition of such a system. In prac-tice, the major effect of animal housing systems on the environment is represented by emissions of ammonia, odour, dust and greenhouse gases. Animal housing systems can therefore be characterised by their ability to reduce one or more of these emissions. This present protocol outlines the methods and demands for testing a system for its effect on reducing ammonia, odour and dust as its primary parameters. A test can be designed to test the primary target parameter of the technology e.g. an am-monia reducing technology, thereby omitting testing of the other primary parameters. However, this is only possible if it can be ensured that the technology in all probability does not have any negative ef-fect on the non-tested parameters. Systems to reduce emissions can be defined in such a way that they include a specified description of one of the following factors:


• Housingdesignincludingdesignofpen,andmanurestorageandremovalsystem• Beddingmaterialandotherloosematerials• Additionalindoortechnicalinstallationsandmanagement• Treatmentofindoorairandindoorclimate• Manuretreatment,includingadditivesandmanagement• Feedcomposition,includingadditivesandmanagement• Generalmanagement.

Since the 1990s, a number of systems have been developed with the aim of lowering emissions of am-monia from livestock houses. These systems are generally based on standard housing systems with pen and manure storage modifications to reduce emitting surfaces, or manure management systems for quick removal or quick drying. The BREF guide for intensive livestock operations gives an overview of available systems for pigs and poultry. Besides ammonia, odour and dust emissions have become important issues in areas with high animal densities. This had led to the development and introduc-tion of air cleaning technologies in Northern Europe. However, in many cases implementation of new livestock housing and management systems may also be an attractive option for farmers to reduce am-monia, odour and dust emissions and thereby meet the environmental goals.

It is important that the scope and performance statements of the international verification system are defined such that its information can be optimally used by different stakeholders in the member states. This means that the test protocol should provide a broad array of reliable information that can be ana-lysed and summarised during the verification in such a way that it can be directly or indirectly used as widely as possible by the different national users.

However, for reasons of costs and time, test protocols have restrictions on the number of parameters to be evaluated and the applicable methods are limited. The starting point in the design of the present test protocol was therefore to create an optimal balance between reliable information that meets the demands of the different users, and costs in terms of time and expenses for carrying out tests.

This current protocol describes the requirements for testing livestock housing and management sys-tems during a defined test period. The test period and the number of sampling days are determined by the requirements for a statistically adequate evaluation of the reduction performance. During the test period the operational stability and deviations from normal operational functioning must be observed and recorded, and reported in the test and evaluation report. However, specific test parameters for the assessment of long-term operational reliability and durability are not included in this protocol.


2. Scope

This protocol specifies the information needed for carrying out tests of livestock housing systems, manure and feed additives, and associated management, defined as ‘livestock housing and manage-ment systems’, and for subsequent verification of the test results. Livestock housing and management systems are termed ‘system’ in the following unless specification is required.

The information specified includes:

• Acomprehensivesystemdescriptionincludingusermanual• Technicalperformanceofthesystembasedondatacollectedduringthetestperiod(requirements

for test parameters, measurement methods, sampling strategy, data collection and handling, calcu-lation methods, reporting are specified in the protocol)

• Evaluationparameterstoassesstheenvironmentalperformanceofthesystemtested.

This protocol describes the requirements for verifying the effects on the fate of gaseous emissions from animal housing of the physical design and management of a livestock housing system, and application of feed and manure additives during a defined testing period. The length of the testing period is based on the time period required for obtaining a statistically adequate evaluation of the environmental per-formance of the system. Animal productivity, animal health and welfare, working environment and external environment observed during the testing period are addressed in the evaluation report.

After a test has been completed, verification of the environmental efficiency based on the test results can be carried out in accordance with this protocol. The test does not lead to a verification of the technology itself, but only its environmental efficiency and operational performance. VERA does not endorse, certify or approve technologies.


3. Terms and definitions

Additive

A substance that is administered by a specific application method, as outlined below, with the inten-tion of reducing the emission potential of various defined parameters such as ammonia, odour, hydro-gen sulphide, methane, nitrous oxide and aerosols (PM10/PM2.5).

Types of additives include:

Acidifying agents Oxidising agents Disinfectants Urease inhibitors Adsorbents Electrical charging of gaseous compounds and aerosols Oil substances.

Application methods include:

Application to animal feed Application to animal manure storage Application to bedding materials Administration to the inside air by direct sprinkling and fogging of additives, occasionally

combined with internal air recirculation Administration of electrical charges to gaseous compounds and aerosols by corona.

Ammonia (NH3)

A gas derived from urea excreted by livestock (for poultry NH3 is excreted by uric acid) and implicated in acidification and nitrogen enrichment of sensitive ecosystems.

Animal category

Different types of animals according to their species (pigs, cattle, chicken, ducks and turkeys etc.), sex, age and scope of production (breeding, rearing, growing and finishing for meat, milk or egg production).

Animal housing system

See ‘Livestock housing system’

Background concentration

Concentration of aerial pollutants in the incoming air.


Bedding material

Bedding material is used in housing systems with solid or partly slatted floors. It should be added in such an amount that urine and moisture are absorbed. In addition, it gives some comfort to the animals.

Building construction

An animal housing can be constructed as a open or closed building, which can be thermally insulated or not.

Compartment, section

Separate part of an animal house that can be individually ventilated.

Cooling system

Cooling of a housing system can be achieved by water fogging of the inlet air, water fogging of the roof, and cooling the inlet air by heat exchanger.

Downtime

The period of time when the system tested is not operating as a result of malfunctions.

Dust

See ‘Particulate matter’.

Emission factor

The rate of release of gases or particulates from an animal house to the atmosphere. It can be expressed as the integrated mass emitted per time interval and animal (A) produced (e.g. kg year -1 A-1) or livestock unit (e.g. OU s-1 LU-1).

Feed additive

See ‘Additive’

Feed composition

Descriptions of the individual ingredients and their nutritional value that constitute a feed formula.

Feeding technique

The feeding technique describes the technical installations for mixing, transportation and dispensing of the feed to the animals. The feed can be applied in dry or wet form.

Floor design

The floor of a pen or a housing system can be designed as a solid (concrete) floor with the use of bed-ding material, or a slatted floor. The slats can be made of metal, concrete or plastic.


Greenhouse gases (GHG)

Gases that contribute to the ‘greenhouse effect’ and global warming. Includes in this context carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O).

Heating system

Installation for production, transportation and distribution of heat in the housing system. Heat can be produced by burning coal, gas or oil or by electrical energy. The heat can be distributed by zone heat-ing (heating elements in floor or in ceiling, radiating heat onto animal) or room heating (pre-heating incoming air, convective room heating).

Livestock housing system

A unit with the primary function of providing housing for a specified animal category, and with a spe-cific design, equipment and management that determines its environmental performance. In principle, all elements in an animal house that affect the external environment may be included in a definition of such a system. This definition includes the way a certain animal category is stocked (floor and pen de-sign), the system for the management and storage of manure, the ventilation system to control indoor climate and the type and regime to feed and water the animals.

Livestock unit (LU)

1 LU equals 500 kg live weight of an animal.

Manure system

The manure system includes the collection and removal of slurry or farmyard manure out of the hous-ing system. Gutters and channels are used for slurry removal, for straw-based systems the manure is removed by scrapers or small tractors with a scraper attachment.

Manure treatment

Chemical and/or physical manipulation of the livestock manure, such as addition of acids or other chemicals, aeration, electrochemical treatment (oligolysis), radiation (e.g. using UV light), ultrasound, etc. in order to change the characteristics of the manure and to reduce gaseous emissions.

Norm emission factor

Description of an emission factor for a standard housing system, which is used as a reference standard factor in the individual countries.

Odour

Pleasant or unpleasant smell caused by different odorants with very different chemical, physical and biological properties. The odour concentration is given in European Odour Units per cubic metre air (OUE m -3) and the concentration is measured by olfactometric analyses in accordance with the Euro-pean CEN standard (EN 13725).


Particulate matter (PM) – Also referred to as dust. Airborne, finely divided solid or liquid particles

Total dust = all particles emitted from a source with an aerodynamic diameter of 500 micrometers and less. PM10 = particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers corresponding to 50 % sam-pling efficiency. PM2.5 = particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers corresponding to 50 % sampling efficiency.

Pen design

Structuring of a pen with separate areas for lying, feeding and defecation. Single area pens are un-structured.

Pull and plug systems

The manure is drained from the gutter by gravity to a tank outside the housing unit. A plug is pulled to drain the gutter. The period between draining depends on the design of the pits and type of housing unit.

Standard housing system

The standard housing system describes the national state of the art for animal housing systems.

Uptime of the system

The period of time when the system tested is functioning.

Ventilation system

Housing must be ventilated in order to provide the livestock with fresh air and to remove gaseous products of metabolism, heat and moisture. Ventilation can be designed either as a forced or a natural ventilation system.

Ventilation rate

The ventilation rate gives the volume flow of air in m3 hour -1 through an animal house. It can be given for the entire housing unit or per animal (place).

In the case of forced ventilated houses, the ventilation rate is controlled either by the difference between outside and inside temperature and/or the concentration of carbon dioxide or ammonia in the air.

The ventilation rate of naturally ventilated houses depends on wind flow, wind speed (pressure differ-ence) and thermal lift inside the house.

The design of the ventilation systems and the ventilation rates are based on national regulations and practical guidelines.


4. System description

The manufacturer/applicant is responsible for providing a precise and full description of the system or technology before initiation of a VERA test. This information should be provided as data required for test organisation, users of the system, verification authorities, etc. and to some extent also forms part of the final test report. The system description must include all relevant and essential information that is needed to:

• Organiseanddesignthetest• Enablethefarmertooperate,maintainandmonitorthesystemproperly• On-linemonitorthesystemincludingthekeyparametersneededforthedeterminationofuptime/

downtime of the system (only where relevant, e.g. not for floors)• Allowtheverificationauthoritiestocheckthesystemafteratesthasbeencarriedout• Provideinsightsintoworkingmechanismsofthesystem.

The description must include detailed information on the housing system in which the technique or system is applied, where the following must be taken into consideration:

• Animalcategory(species,breed,weightrange,herdsize,totalnumber,spaceprovidedperanimal)• Managementofthelivestockandpendesign(descriptionofpendesign,adrawingwouldbehelpful)• Constructionofthebuilding(capacity,length,wide)• Ventilationsystemanditsdesign(capacity,setpointvalues,airinlet/outlet)• Heating/coolingsystem• Typeoffloor(solid/slats,materialofthefloor)• Typeofbeddingmaterialandamount,management,application• Manuresystem,managementandtreatment• Feedingtechniqueandmanagement• Feedcomposition(nutrientsandingredients)andfeedadditives• Typeofdrinkingsystem.

The detailed description of the system or technology to be tested must include:

• Alistofthe(technical)componentsneededforapplication,includingtype(e.g.materialandcharac-teristics), technical and functional description and design

• Descriptionofthetechniqueappliedand,ifrelevant,typeandcompositionofadditivesused,theirprovision including the accuracy of application

• Thesystem’sfunctionindetailandtheexpectedperformanceofthesystemwithrespecttotheeffecton the pollutants (odour, ammonia, dust)

• Illustrationsand/ordiagramsofthesystem(topandsectionalviews,detailsifnecessary)• Alistoftheessentialdesignandoperationalparameters(ranges)thatarespecificforthesystemto

be tested and that are decisive for proper function, and that should therefore be monitored during the test (e.g. slurry acidification: pH; minimum amount of additives applied per m2)

• Alistofkeyparametersconsideredrelevantforelectronicormanualloggingduringoperationofthesystem as part of system surveillance; this list must include a description on how they are monitored

• Compilationoftheinputmaterialsneededandliquidsandwastesproduced(includingamountandrelevant chemical composition).


In addition, the description must include detailed instructions on operation, service and maintenance and monitoring.

The manufacturer/applicant must provide general information about:

• Environmental,occupational,animalandfoodsafetyoftheproductsapplied• Essentialparametersforthecalculationoftheuptime/downtimeofthesystem(althoughthetest

organisation is responsible for a professional evaluation of whether this information is reliable and sufficient)

• Predicteddurabilityofthesystemanditscomponents• Warrantyprovisions• Alistofdemonstrationunitsalreadyworking(animalcategory,typeofhousingsystem,animal

weights, ventilation rates in particular), if available.

The system must meet the minimum requirements on animal health and welfare prior to testing.

User manual

A user manual for the technology must be available in the local language. It must be written in con-sideration of EN 62079:2003 Preparation of instructions – Structuring, content and presentation, which provides general principles and detailed requirements for the design and formulation of all types of instructions, and Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC, which provides the regulatory basis for the har-monisation of essential health and safety requirements for machinery.

The user manual must include the information provided with the system description according to the descriptions above in this chapter and should in particular include instructions for:

• Theoperationofthesystemandthetechnicalinstallations• Thepreventionandhandlingofincidents(environmentalsafety)• Operationalhealthandsafetymeasures• Serviceandmaintenance• Monitoringoftheinstallations.


5. Requirements

This chapter describes the requirements related to the testing of livestock housing and management systems. The requirements described apply to the planning of test activities, test facilities and test organisation, as well as requirements for the framework and contents of the test plan.

In addition, the chapter describes the measurement parameters to be included in the test and a specifi-cation of the methods to be used and of the persons/organisation responsible for providing the speci-fied information. Finally, the chapter describes the requirements to ensure representative feeding and management conditions on the test facility, and requirements related to the impact of the system on occupational health and safety, as well as animal health and welfare and food safety.

5.1 Pre-testing or full testing of a technology

The test protocol can be used during the phases of developing a new technology (pre-testing), as well as for testing a final technology (ready for commercial launch) with the aim of VERA verification.

It is strongly recommended that pre-testing of a new technology be carried out before a final test is ini-tiated. It is also recommended that a final test only be initiated when the system/technology has been proven to be stable and functional.

During pre-testing of a technology, parts of the test protocol can be used in order to clarify and opti-mise the performance and stability of a new technology. The manufacturer may visit the test facility at any time during pre-testing.

However, during a full test of a technology with the aim of VERA verification, all the requirements mentioned in the following sections have to be fulfilled.

This means that the results from pre-testing can only be used as part of the results from a full test if all the specific requirements listed below (5.2‐5.5) are fulfilled, which includes requirements on quality-related issues and restrictions on farm visits and modifications of the technology.

5.2 Requirements on organisation of the test activities

The test of a new technology, housing or management system involves various actors:

1. The applicant/manufacturer wishing to have a technology or system tested.2. The test organisation that carries out the required tests.3. The farmer(s) who owns the facilities where the tests are carried out.

Certain requirements are related to each of these three categories of actors as described in the follow-ing sub-sections.


Test plan

It is required that the applicant or the test organisation writes a test plan based on the template in Annex A and that all questions in the template are answered. To reduce the risk of test results being rejected by the verification authority due to inconsistencies between the test results and the protocol requirements, it is advisable to consult the relevant verification authorities in the case of uncertainties about the preparation of the test plan.

The applicant or the test organisation can decide whether the test plan should be treated as confidential.

Full system description of the technology tested

The applicant/manufacturer is responsible for providing a full description of the system or the tech-nology to be tested prior to the start of a full VERA test, cf. Chapter 4. The description must include detailed instructions for operation, service, maintenance and surveillance.

Requirements and restrictions during the test period

During operation, the applicant/manufacturer of the system is responsible for electronic logging of a number of key parameters to check the operation of the system. This logging must include those pa-rameters essential for the calculation of the uptime/downtime of the system, cf. Chapter 4.

The applicant/manufacturer of the system or technology is not allowed to visit the farm during the test period unless contacted by the farm owner due to operational problems. In this case, the operational problems must be dated and described in the test logbook. In addition, a dated record must be made of when and how the problem was solved, to be signed by the farmer and the applicant/manufacturer when repairs have been completed.

If the applicant/manufacturer has had tests carried out on earlier models of the system, all the test reports must be enclosed, including a description of the differences between the models.

The test organisation is responsible for coordinating and implementing the test plan and for drawing up all the necessary data record tables. Furthermore, the test organisation is responsible for calculating the uptime/downtime of the system tested.

The logbook must be made available to the farmer and the test organisation at any time during the test period.

The farmer is responsible for recording the production conditions in accordance with the test plan. The farmer must also record the time spent on operational problems and maintenance of the system or technology.


5.3 Requirements on the test facility

The livestock housing and management system must be tested under farm conditions that are rep-resentative for the standard practices of the animal categories for which the system or technology is intended for use. This implies that requirements need to be defined to ensure that both the design of the test facility and the management conditions during the test period are representative for the categories concerned.

Test facilities must possess farm characteristics that can be considered representative for standard practices in the country in question. The following items have to be considered:

• Sizeofthelivestockunitsinvolvedinthetest,minimum/maximumsize• Stockdensity,fulfilmentofwelfarerequirements• Pendesign• Manureremovalsystem• Ventilationsystem,managementdesignanddimensioninginrelationtonumberofanimals,air

quality thresholds (ammonia, carbon dioxide)• Feedingsystemandration,representativeproteinandenergyranges• Productionlevel,representativeperformanceranges• Healthmanagement,medicineuse• Applicabilitytootherhousingsystemsandanimalcategories(cf.AnnexI).

Furthermore, the following general management conditions must be considered:

• Animalproductionmustbeincompliancewithanimalwelfareregulations• Ventilationregimemustbeinlinewithestablishedregionalpractice,andmustensurethattheCO2

concentration does not exceed 3000 ppm at any time.• Useoffeed/manureadditivesormedicaladditivesthatmayaffectemissionsmustbedeclared.

Standard practices may differ between countries and it is strongly recommended that the minimum requirements for animal production within the categories described in Table 1 are followed.

During the test, a number of farm parameters related to these requirements have to be recorded to verify standard practice. They are listed in Tables 5a, b and c as conditional measurement parameters.


Table 1: Review of requirements per animal category

Criterion Dairy cattle

Sows Farrow-ing sows

/ piglets

Weaners Fattening pigs

Laying hens

Broilers

Herd composition Min. 70 % cows, rest

heifers > 1 yr. old

– – – – – –

Permitted weight range, (kg)

– – – 6-35 25‐115 – 0.05-3

Animal occupation rate of test compartment (%)

90 90 90 90 90 – –

Minimum number of animals in the test compartment

30 cows 20 10 sows 50 50 750 1000

Minimal period of use of housing system before testing

2 months

One batch

One batch

One batch

One fattening

round

2 months

One batch

Feed composition Minimum50 %

roughage

– – – – – –

Feed requirements: CP/energy

Minimum160 g

CP kg-1 dry matter

SeeAnnex

G

SeeAnnex

G

SeeAnnex

G

SeeAnnex

G

SeeAnnex

G

SeeAnnex

G

Minimum production requirements

20 kg per cow and

day

22 piglets per sow and year

10 piglets per litter

350 g per day

760 g per day

300 eggs per hen and year

Min 1900 g at max. 45 days

Technical management factors that may affect emissions should be recorded

+ + + + + + +


5.4 Requirements for the test organisation

General requirements on the test organisation to ensure adequate quality of all activities related to the test measurements and reporting are specified in this chapter.

The test organisation and laboratories involved must fulfil the following requirements:

1. Sampling and measuring of all test parameters listed in Table 3 must be carried out by labora-tories accredited according to ISO/IEC 17025 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. In addition, it is recommended that the test organisation fulfils the general requirements of ISO 9001 Quality management.

2. For specific measurement parameters, as defined in section 5.4, laboratories have to fulfil the specific requirements of the quality standard indicated. If international standardised methods are not available, national standardised methods have to be applied.

3. The test organisation and laboratories involved must demonstrate relevant experience and ex-pertise to the International Verification Committee (IVC). Relevant experience should include measurement experience in livestock production in general and more specific experience in measuring emissions from animal categories that are involved in the test. The technicians and researchers involved should have a thorough understanding of livestock production systems and their management. The test organisation must demonstrate its ability to combine measurement experience and livestock production expertise into data collection, handling, analysis, interpre-tation and reporting that meet the standards of sound research.

4. The test organisation has to show its independence from the actors involved.

5.5 Test design and sampling strategy

The emissions of ammonia, odour and dust are the primary parameters used to determine the envi-ronmental performance of the livestock housing and management systems tested. The design of test and sampling strategy is based on providing the following information:

1. The effect of the system on the mean annual ammonia emissions, expressed both in terms of the relative effect against a reference system and in absolute emission units.

2. The effect of the system on the mean annual odour emissions, expressed in relative and abso-lute terms as for ammonia. In addition, the effect of the system on odour emissions during the summer period, expressed in relative and absolute terms.

3. The effect of the system on the mean annual dust emissions, expressed in relative and absolute terms as for ammonia.

The test design is based on the case-control approach. If the case-control approach is not feasible for compelling reasons as specified below, the test design must be based on a multiple location test with-out control. These approaches are described separately in the following sections.


Case-control test design (within a farm)

In this approach the emissions of animal compartments equipped with the test system (case) and ani-mal compartments with standard equipment (control) are directly compared by carrying out simulta-neous measurements. Animal compartments are located on the same farm.

The lay-out and equipment of the control compartment are based on what is considered common practice in the test country (e.g. standard housing system). All relevant non-system factors that affect emissions (temperature, ventilation rate, animal age, feed, etc.) are kept as similar as possible between case and control compartments. This approach is adopted for two reasons:

• Acase-controlsetupiseffectiveintermsofcreatinganoptimalratiobetweenstatisticalaccuracyand costs. In this setup, the disturbing effects of non-system factors that are similar in both case and control compartments at the same time are eliminated by observing the differences between case and control compartments.

• Transferofresultsacrossnationscanbefacilitatedbyrelatingtheobservedrelativeeffectstothena-tional standard housing systems. A table of emission factors (measured and possible legal/allowable limits) for different animal categories can be found in Annex C for ammonia, Annex D for odour and Annex E for dust.

The case-control study design can be applied to housing units that are sectioned into compartments, as can be found in pig production (farrowing sows, weaners and growing/finishing pigs). In cases where housing units are not sectioned, comparison may take place between equally designed housing units at the same farm location. For example in poultry production, broiler farms may have two or more identical barns that can be used for this purpose.

The sampling strategy includes the number of measurements and the distribution of these measure-ments in time, within and between farm locations. The main requirements of the sampling strategy are outlined in Table 2.


Table 2: Sampling strategy for testing livestock housing and management systems in cases where case-control within a farm is possible

Parameter Minimum requirement

Number of compartments/housing units for sampling

Two different farm locations, each farm location having at least one case and one control compart-ment/housing unit.

Minimum size of units for sampling The unit size must be representative for farms in the participating countries (cf. 5.3).

Measurement periods At each farm location:

Ammonia, odour and dust (average for year):• Sixmeasurementdaysinoneyear.

Odour (specific for DK):• Sixmeasurementdayswithoutdoortempera-

tures above 16 ºC during sampling1.

Sampling sites Simultaneously sampling in the case and the control compartments/housing units. Management in the case and the control compartments/housing units should be the same.

1 All odour samples sampled at temperatures above 16 ºC may be included as part of the required minimum of 6 additional odour samples during tests in DK.

For all animal categories, six two-monthly periods are considered in a year. Per farm location, one measurement per period should be performed to distribute the sampling days within the year. How-ever, the distribution of the six sampling days within the year depends on the emissions pattern of the animal category to be considered:

• Stableemissionspattern,e.g.dairycattleproduction• Linearincreaseinemissionsduringtheproductioncyclerelatedtothegrowthoftheanimal,e.g.

pig production• Exponentialincreaseinemissionsduringtheproductioncyclerelatedtothegrowthoftheanimal,

e.g. broiler production

For animal categories with a stable emissions pattern (e.g. dairy cattle), the sampling days should be randomly selected in every two-month period. For measurements in dairy cattle farms with grazing management, measurements should be performed only in the period where the animals are inside the house.

For animal categories with a linear increase in emissions during the production cycle (e.g. pigs) an additional requirement is included: half the measurements should be performed in the first half of the production cycle, and the remainder in the second half of the production cycle. Furthermore, the sampling days in the second half of the production cycle should be equally distributed within the year (same number of measurements per season).


For animal categories with an exponential emissions pattern (e.g. broilers), the following procedure should be applied per farm location to distribute the sampling days:

• Theproductioncycleshouldbedividedintothreeperiodsofequallength(samenumberofdays).• Onemeasurementdayshouldfallinthefirstperiod,twomeasurementsinthesecondperiod,and

three measurements in the third period. In addition, sampling days in the third period of the produc-tion cycle should be equally distributed within the year (same number of measurements per season).

An example of the distribution of sampling days within the year and the production cycle (for broilers, with an exponential increase in emissions during the production cycle) is presented in Annex F.

The case-control setup provides data that express the difference in emissions between the test system and the reference. The effect of the environmental technology can then be estimated as the overall mean difference between the emissions levels in the case and control compartments. The statistical significance of the system effect (i.e. differing from 0) can be verified by applying a paired t-test, and confidence intervals for the system effect can be calculated from the pooled variance of differences. More details regarding statistical analysis of the test results are presented in Chapter 7.

Variance levels may differ between emission components and animal categories. It is advisable to check before the test starts whether the minimum number of measurement days (Table 2) should be increased to improve the distinguishing power of the test.

For the general applicability of results, it is important to investigate the existence of possible interac-tive effects of farm location on the system effect. Interactive effects of farm location can be investigated by testing (t-test) whether the mean system effects of the two test farms are different from each other. Where farm location interactions are found to occur, as a worst case approach the results from the lowest effect should be considered to represent the system effect.

Other test designs

When a case-control within a farm study design is not possible, an alternative approach should be applied. For example, naturally ventilated livestock housing systems such as dairy cow houses may not be suitable for case-control studies within a farm, as in most cases only one dairy house is situated on each site, and sectioning of dairy houses may not be applicable.

In such cases at least four test farms equipped with the system should be monitored during the re-quired test period and the emission factors calculated accordingly.

Two options are available as references:

• Comparisonwithnormemissionfactors• Comparisonwitharepresentativenumberofaminimumoffourreferencefarms

The latter will improve the transferability of the test results to other countries.

The main requirements of the sampling strategy for this test design are outlined in Table 3.


Table 3: Sampling strategy for testing livestock housing systems in cases where case-control within a farm is not possible (e.g. naturally ventilated dairy farms)

Parameter Minimum requirement

Number of test farms Four different farm locations

Minimum size of units for sampling The unit size must be representative for farms in the participating countries (cf. 5.3).

Measurement periods At each farm location:

Ammonia, odour and dust (average for year):• Sixmeasurementdaysinoneyear.

Odour (specific for DK):• Sixmeasurementdayswithoutdoortempera-

tures above 16 ºC during sampling1.

Sampling sites Simultaneously sampling in the case and the control compartments/housing units. Management in the case and the control compartments/housing units should be the same.

1 All odour samples sampled at temperatures above 16 ºC may be included as part of the required minimum of 6 additional odour samples during tests in DK.

Similar to the case-control test design, in this test design the distribution of the six sampling days with-in the year depends on the emissions pattern of the animal category to be considered. The procedure for the selection of sampling days is similar to the procedure described for the case-control test design. An example of the distribution of sampling days within the year and the production cycle (for broilers, with an exponential increase in emissions during the production cycle) is presented in Annex F.

Determination of ventilation rate is a requirement for the measurement of emissions. In naturally ventilated buildings, ventilation rates cannot be measured by fans and must therefore be estimated using tracer gas methods or other validated methods with comparable results. However, this approach cannot be applied when naturally ventilated buildings are too open to allow proper mixing of tracer gas and the investigated components. Currently, no adequate methods exist to investigate systems in the case of very open buildings. Initiatives to describe the state of the art and to develop new methods are being coordinated by the technical section ‘Farm Buildings, Equipment, Structures and Environ-ment’ of the International Commission of Agriculture and Biosystems Engineering (CIGR), (http://www.cigr.org/Section2Farmbuildngsequimentstructuresandenvironment.htm).


5.6 Measurement parameters

The measurement parameters are divided between primary and conditional parameters. Primary parameters include the primary environmental pollutants emitted from the livestock housing unit and are the primary targets of the environmental technologies for livestock production. In this protocol these primary parameters are ammonia, odour and dust, which are presented together with units, sampling conditions and measuring method in Table 4.

Table 4: Primary measurement parameters

Parameter [Units] Sampling conditions(where, how and how often)

Measuring method (reference to the method)

Ammonia[mg m-3]

• Minimumnumberanddistributionofsampling days (refer to section 5.5).

• Cumulativesamplingover24hours.• Continuousmeasuringmethods:based

on hourly values (24 samples).• Samplinglocation:Airinletandairoutlet.• Correctionofbackgroundconcentration.

• Photo-acousticmonitor(NDIR)• FTIRspectrometer• NOx-chemoluminescence

monitor • Impingersystem• OpenpathTuneableDiode

Laser(TDL).

Odour[OU m-3]

• Minimumnumberanddistributionofsampling days (refer to section 5.5).

• Min.threesamplespersamplingday.• Samplingbetween9amand4pm.• Samplingtime:Between30and120

minutes.• Samplingequipment:Nalophanbags• Samplinglocation:Cross-sectionofair

outlets, preferably mixed sample.

EN 13725/AC:2006 Air quality – Determinationofodourconcen-tration by dynamic olfactometry

Dust - Total - PM10 - PM2.5[mg m-3]

• Minimumnumberanddistributionofsampling days (cf. section 5.5).

• Cumulativesamplingover24hours• Continuousmeasuringmethods:based

on hourly values (24 samples).• Samplingtime:24hoursforPM10/2.5.• Samplinglocation:Airinletandairoutlet.

Measurement of PM10 and PM2.5 is optional for methodological reasons

Standards for dust measure-ments exist:EN 13284-1:2001EN 13284-2:2004EN 15259:2007

Other instruments can also be used,e.g.Impactor,optical (light scattering) instruments, microbalancing

Conditional mandatory measurement parameters include parameters that may influence the emis-sions level of the primary environmental pollutants or which are relevant reference values (Table 5a). Conditional mandatory or optional parameters related to the animal/manure/feed composition in the system are presented in Table 5b. Conditional measurement parameters related to the operational functioning system are presented in Table 5c.


Table 5a: Conditional measurement parameters related to gaseous emissions and climate

Parameter [Units](M): Mandatory(O): Optional

Sampling conditions(where, how and how often)


Ventilation rate (M)[m³ h-1]

• Ventilationratethroughallairoutlets

Mechanical ventilation:• Preferablyfanwheelanemometercover-

ing the outlet• Natural(e.g.CO2) tracer gas method,

ventilation rate calculated following the calculationrulesoftheCIGR(Pedersenand Sällvik, 2002; Pedersen et al., 2008)

• Artificialtracergasmethod.

Naturally ventilated housing (when sufficient amount of air mixing):• Natural(e.g.CO2) tracer gas method or

artificialtracergasmethodasdescribedabove.

CO2 (M) [mg m-3]

• Minimumnumberanddistribu-tion of sampling days (refer to section 5.3)

• Cumulativesamplingover 24 hours.

• Continuousmeasuringmethods:based on hourly values (24 samples)

• Samplinglocation:Airinletandair outlet

• Correctionofbackground concentration.

Photo-acousticmonitor(NDIR), FTIRspectrometer,GC-HWD,Openpath TunableDiodeLaser(TDL)

Temperature (M)[°C]

• Continuousmeasurement. Minimum time: 24 hours on sampling days

• Continuousmeasuring methods: based on hourly values (24 samples)

• Samplinglocation:Airinletandair outlet.

Thermocouples or other calibrated temperature sensors• Adequatemeasuringrange,sensitivity,

detection limit• Considerundesiredeffectsonmeasuring

device through e.g. contamination, wind or direct sunshine.

Humidity, relative humidity (M)[%]

• Asfortemperature Capacity sensor or other calibrated humidity sensors• Adequatemeasuringrange,sensitivity,

detection limit• Considerundesiredeffectsonmeasuring

device through e.g. contamination, wind, water, direct sunshine or frost.

Wind(M:natural ventilation, O for forced ventilation)Direction[°]Speed [m s-1]

• Samplingasfortemperature• Samplinglocation:Luvside• Measuringheight:Approx

2 m depending on the air inlet height.

Ultrasonic anemometer, wind vane, cup anemometer, propeller anemometer• Adequatemeasuringrange,sensitivity,

detection limit, free approaching flow• Considerundesiredeffectsonmeasuring

device through e.g. contamination or wind shadows, frost.

CH4 (O) [mg m-3]

• AsforCO2 Photo-acousticmonitor(NDIR), FTIRspectrometer,GC-FID,Openpath TuneableDiodeLaser(TDL)

N2O (O)[mg m-3]

• AsforCO2 Photo-acousticmonitor(NDIR),FTIR spectrometer,GC-ECD


Table 5b: Conditional measurement parameters related to the animal production unit size,

manure and feed composition




Number and weight of animals in housing unit [kg] (M)

Date,numberandweight estimation at sampling days

Weighingorestimation

Floor space per animal [m²] (M)

Air volume per animal [m³] (M)

Type of floors (material, perfora-tion, condition)

Documentationthroughrecording

Manure parameters • Amount[kg][m³](M)• pH• DM[%]• OrganicDM[%]• N,PandK[%]

[g/kg]• TAN[%][gkg-1]• C:N• Additives/residues(O)

Sampling at scheduled sampling days for emission measurements as a minimum.Amount of manure must be meas-ured manually at sampling days.

Manure samples must be ‘inactivated’ immediately after sampling by:• Storingsamplesinacoolbox• Storingsamplesinthefreezer

within 5 hours of sampling.

Laboratory methods

Comment: Manure parameter meas-urements should be carried out for validation and explanation of emis-sion factors or effects of additives if relevant for the technology tested. Manure amount is mandatory while the others are optional.

Datesofemptyingthepitsormanure channels (M)


Cleaning of animal house and dunging behaviour (M)

• Descriptionofcleaning procedure.

• Registrationofdefecation behaviour in each pen on odour sampling days

Fouling/pollution of surfaces (pen and animals) (M)

Investigationduringsamplingdays

MeasurementAssessment/rating

Feed composition parameters• Amount[kg]• DM[%]• ME[MJ/kg]• C,PandK• CPandCF• Lysine• Additives• Feedingstrategyand

frequency (O)

Samples of charge

Sampling at scheduled sampling days for emissions measurements as a minimum if possible.

Duringthetestingperiodthedietary protein content should be withinspecificrangesfordifferentpig categories and poultry. See Annex G.

Inthecaseoffeedadditivesthecorrect amount/dose must be verified.

Laboratory methods and documenta-tion through recording

Comment: Feed composition parameters should be measured when relevant for the explanation of the performance of the applied technology/system, e.g. for additives.

Animal production parameters (O)• Milkyield[kg

animal-1 day-1]• Eggproduction

[kg animal-1 day-1]• Daysofpregnancy



Table 5c: Conditional measurement parameters related to the operational functioning and stability of the system/technology, if applicable to the specific technology




Consumption of electricity[Kwh](M)

Relatedtotime

Continuous measurement of electricity consumption by venti-lation in general and potentially by the environmental technology


Consumption of water [l],[m³] (M)

Relatedtotime

Continuous measurement Documentationthroughrecording

Consumption of chemicals/additives (e.g. acid)

Mass [mg or kg] orVolume [l or m³] (M)

Relatedtospaceandanimals[m²], [AP], [LU]


Operational function and stability (M)

Activities, special events (M)


Cleaning of animal house and dunging behaviour (M)


Noise (O) Outdoor 1-2 m from ventilation outlet

Noise level meterISO3746

During measurement of all parameters described in Tables 4, 5a, 5b and 5c, it is generally recom-mended to:

• Avoidabsorption,adsorption,diffusion,condensation,leakagesandblockagesduringsampling• Considerscavengingtimeanddeadtimeofsamplingtubes;risingtimeanddryingouttimeof

measuring instrument, respectively• Considerpotentialcross-sensitivitiesofmeasuringinstruments• Fittheeffectiverangeofexpectedvaluestothemeasuringrangeofinstrumentsorfitmethodtothe

effective range of expected values and avoid measuring close to the lower or upper detection limit• Carryoutmandatorycalibrationandmaintenanceofinstrumentsandmethods.


The measurement parameters specified in this protocol are based on existing national guidelines etc., but there is a need to develop international common measurement standards and an international reference guide.

For each measurement parameter the necessary units expressing the results are specified to ensure the highest possible comparability of the results and a sufficient information basis for recalculating, repro-ducing, converting and relating of values.

The emission has to be expressed per animal and per time unit or per livestock unit and time unit.

The tests must be carried out taking the following conditions into consideration:

The ammonia emission factor must be calculated in kg NH3 animal-1 year-1. Ammonia emissions may also be expressed relatively as a fraction of total excreted ammonia N from the animal and take into account that the emission of ammonia from a livestock housing system is affected not only by the housing design and management, but also by the manure composition. The latter is a dynamic factor and will change over time due to changes in feed composition and strategy, animal genetics, animal productivity, etc.

The TAN content can be estimated using the procedure of the Danish normative system (Poulsen et al., 2001). Based on data collection on the following factors, the excretion of N, P, and K can be esti-mated with good approximation based on:

1. Amount of feed uptake in the test period (kg, feed units). 2. Feed composition (N, P, K, DM). 3. Amount of product in the test period (kg meat, milk, eggs). 4. Product composition (N, P, K). 5. Digestibility coefficients of the feed ingredients (N, P, K, DM).

Permitted deviation from the protocol

If it is known that the type of environmental technology tested does not reduce a specific parameter or has only a marginal effect on it, the manufacturer/applicant can decide to specify the pollution reduction for this specific parameter as zero without carrying out the prescribed measurements. However, the test report must show that in all probability based on previous research, theories or test results, the environmental technology does not have any negative effect on the specific parameter.

Regulations and guidelines

When performing a test according to this test protocol, all activities should be carried out in compli-ance with relevant national and EU legislation in force, as well as relevant standards.

Special attention should be paid to the fields mentioned below:

• Occupationalhealthandsafety• Animalhealthandwelfare• Foodsafety• Chemicalregulation


Lists of relevant EU directives as well as international standards within these fields are available on the VERA website at http://www.veracert.eu/da-dk/newenglish/testprotocols/Sider/default.aspx under ‘Links to EU directives and international standards’. Note that the list may not be exhaustive and that national legislation and standards are not included.

5.7 Data treatment, calculation and evaluation of emissions

Completeness of the dataset for calculation of emission factors

For the calculation of emission factors, all measurement results on the complete sampling schedule have to be included in the calculations with the exception of:

• Measurementresultsthataremissingorunreliablebecauseofmalfunctionoftheequipment,andwhere these measurements could not be replaced in time

• Allmeasurementresultsofasamplingdayforwhichlessthan80%ofthemeasurementdatafortheday are available as a result of malfunction of the equipment

• Measurementresultsduringwhichthetestlocationdidnotcomplywiththerequiredmanagementconditions (5.3)

• Measurementresultsthatcanbeconsideredoutliersafterstatisticalanalysisofthedailymeansofthe complete dataset.

Where too many results are missing or unreliable, the database is not valid for the calculation of emis-sion factors. It is required that for each case-control location or single house test location, at least 4 out of 6 sampling days should be available. It is also required that for the total dataset, i.e. for 2 case-control locations or 4 single animal house locations, at least 80 % of the total number of sampling days is available.

Calculation of the basic emissions data: Daily means

As a first step the ammonia and dust emissions are calculated at the smallest common time basis of measured concentration and ventilation rates. The common time basis may differ between tests as a result of using different analysers. Emission (E) in test compartment (i) at sampling day (j) during time interval (k) is calculated from the ventilation rate (V) and the difference between concentrations in outlet and inlet (C_out, C_in):

Eijk = Vijk × (C_outijk – C_inijk) (1)

In eq. 1, the following units are used for ammonia and dust:

• Concentrationsintheinletandtheoutlet:gm-3

• Ventilationrate:m3 h-1 per animal or m3 h-1 per LU• Emissions:gh-1 per animal or g h-1 per LU.


Similarly, odour emissions are calculated from the ventilation rate and the mean odour concentration (C_out) in the outlet taken at day (j) during sampling interval (k) as:

Eijk = Vijk × (C_outijk ) (2)

In eq. 2, the following units are used for odour:• Concentrationintheoutlet:OUE m-3

• Ventilationrate:m3 s-1 per animal or m3 s-1 per LU• Emissions:OUE s-1 per animal or OUE s-1 per LU.

As a next step the mean daily emissions Eij for compartment i during sampling day j are calculated from Eijk.

Eij = —Eijk (3)

The daily means have to be tabulated in the report for each test location. The daily means are used as input data for statistical evaluation, where relevant, and for calculation of annual emission factors. Because of the partly different structure of datasets, this is described separately below for the case-control approach and for the alternative multi-site approach with at least four farm locations.

Case-control approach: Statistical evaluation and emission factors

The purpose of the case-control approach is to estimate the proportional effect of the test housing system (case) on the emissions in relation to the reference housing system (control). Thus the annual emissions of both the test and reference housing systems have to be calculated.

Within each test location i the proportional effect of the treatment is calculated for each sampling day j from the daily means of the case and control emissions (Ecase and Econtrol ) at day j:

Econtrolij – Ecaseij × 100 % (4)

Econtrolij

Within each test location, the mean proportional effect, averaged over all sampling days, and the standard deviation of this mean are calculated and reported. The overall proportional effect is calcu-lated as the average of both location means.

For the generalisation of results it is important to investigate the existence of possible interactive ef-fects of test locations on the system effect. Interactive effects of the test locations should be investigated by testing (t-test) whether the mean system effects of the two farms are different from each other. For this test the treatment effects should be expressed as the difference on a logarithmic scale between the emissions from control and case compartments, to be calculated for each test location at each sam-pling day. In cases where farm location interactions occur, as a worst case approach the results from the lowest effect should be considered to represent the system effect.


Emission factors should be calculated for both the test and reference housing system. The following applies for animal categories with a stable emissions pattern or with a linear increase in emissions. For each test location i the daily emission means Eij are averaged over the whole sampling period, and this mean value is converted into the following units:

Ammonia: kg NH3 year -1 per animal, and kg NH3 year -1 per LUDust: g dust year -1 per animal, and g dust year -1 per LUOdour: OUE s-1 per animal, and OUE s-1 per LU.

Means and standard deviations of the case and control compartment should be reported for each test location. In addition to the means, the median values of the odour emissions during the sampling period should also be reported. This is done by calculating the means of the logarithmic values of the odour emissions for each test compartment and converting this value back to the arithmetic scale.

For animal categories with an exponential emissions pattern, the following procedure must be applied within each location to calculate emission factors:

• Theproductioncyclemustbedividedintothreeperiodsofequallength(samenumberofdays),asshown in section 5.5. Within each period the mean emissions are calculated from the available daily mean values (periodic means).

• Theemissionfactorsforeachtestcompartmentarecalculatedastheaverageofthethreeperiodicmeans.

• Allfactorsareexpressedinasimilarwayasforanimalcategorieswithstableandlinearemissionspatterns.

• Itisadvisabletoreportthemediansoftheodouremissionstoo,usingthesameprocedureasde-scribed before.

Multi-site approach: Statistical evaluation and emission factors

The purpose of the multi-site approach is to calculate the annual emissions (emission factors) of the housing system tested.

For animal categories with a stable emissions pattern or with a linear increase in emissions, mean emissions within each test location, averaged over all sampling days, and the standard deviation of these means are calculated and reported. The overall emissions for the housing system are calculated as the average of all location means and this mean value is converted into the following units:

Ammonia: kg NH3 year -1 per animal, and kg NH3 year -1 per LUDust: g dust year -1 per animal, and g dust year -1 per LUOdour: OUE s-1 per animal, and OUE s-1 per LU.


In addition to the means, the median values of the odour emissions during the sampling period should also be reported. This is done by calculating the means of the logarithmic values of the odour emissions for each test compartment and converting these values to the arithmetic scale.

For animal categories with an exponential emissions pattern, the same procedure as used in the case-control approach should be applied.

In order to test whether the emissions factor of the test housing system differs from that of the refer-ence housing systems, t-tests should be applied.


6. Test report and evaluation

This paragraph describes the requirements on the test report, including formalities for system and test description, data handling, statistical analysis, etc.

The test report must be written in English and, if necessary, in the local language. The report must in-clude chapters with the subheadings listed below. The following text gives a description of the contents that must be included in the chapters and suggestions on the contents of the individual sections.

Foreword

The foreword should include: • Adescriptionofthethreepartiesinvolvedinthetest–theapplicant,thetestorganisationandthe

farmer(s) – and their respective roles during the test period• Specificationofthetestperiod,includingdates• Dateandsignaturesoftheperson(s)responsibleforthetest• Nameandaddressofthetestorganisation.

Introduction

The introduction may include a general description of, for example, the odour, ammonia and dust problems in the agricultural sector and the need for applying a new technology. The introduction should also include a motivated description of how the system/technology tested can meet these envi-ronmental challenges by decreasing emissions of environmental pollutants and thereby reducing the overall environmental effect of the agricultural production system in question.

In addition, the introduction must include a description of the applicant/manufacturer involved in the test and give a general description of the housing and management system and technology. If the applicant/manufacturer has performed previous tests, these must be described and references pro-vided.

Materials and Methods

The materials and methods section must include a description of:• Thefarmsinvolvedinthetest• Thehousingandmanagementsystemused,accordingtoChapter4• Themeasuringmethodusedanditsmeasuringuncertainty.Ifthisdeviatesfromthosedescribedin

the protocol, the method should be thoroughly described• Samplingprocedure,‘where,whenandhow’• Descriptionofcalculationandstatisticalmethods.


The housing unit in which the test is performed must be described. The description must include details about the:

• Animalcategory• Dimensionsofthesectionsandpens• Numberofpenspersection• Numberofanimalspersection.

In addition, the type of floor, manure system, feed system and ventilation system must be described. Photos taken inside the sections and photos of the housing unit must be included in the test report.

The test design must be described, including dimensioning of the test and the measurement methods, with a specification of the measurement instruments used, the measurement points and the measure-ment frequency and calibration procedures. Furthermore, the test report must include a description of the statistical data processing method used, including models and the statistical software package. Guidelines on statistical data treatment are presented in section 5.7.

Results

The description of the results should start with specification of the measured odour, ammonia and dust concentrations, which are the primary target parameters of the test. The individual raw data must be presented first in graphs and then the processed data must be presented in tables as median and average with 95 percentiles, and the results of tests on the significance of the treatment effects observed. See section 5.7 for guidelines on data treatment.

The average and standard deviation of the conditional measurement parameters (Table 5a, b, c) must be shown in tables and commented on in the text.

The results should contain a presentation of the results with the focus on documenting an environ-mental effect.

Effects on ammonia, greenhouse gas or dust emissions

For each measuring day and housing unit, the following properties must be stated for sampling:

• Dateofthemeasurement• 24houraverageindoortemperature• 24houraverageoutdoortemperature• 24houraverageventilationrate• 24houraverageconcentrationininlets• 24houraverageconcentrationinoutlets• Calculated24houremission.


Effects on odour emissions

For each measuring day and housing unit, the following properties must be stated:

• Dateofthemeasurement• Timeatbeginningofairsampling• Durationofairsampling• Indoortemperatureduringairsampling• Outdoortemperatureduringairsampling• Ventilationrateduringmeasurement• Measuredodourconcentration• Calculated24houremission.

Effects to be found in case-control test design

The following properties must be stated:

• Calculatedemissionsfromeachunitandastheaverageforbothcaseunitsandforbothcontrolunits.• P-valuefort-test for calculation of the significance of differences between case and control for each

pair of units and for the combined data, based on calculated 24 hour emissions.• P-valuefort-test for calculation of the significance of differences in effect between the two farms based

on calculated 24 hour emissions reduction (to determine whether or not interactive effects exist).

Effects to be found in test design that includes comparison with a norm


• Calculatedemissionsfromeachfarmandastheaverageforallfarms.• Confidenceinterval(95%)foremissionsbasedonaverageforeachfarm.

Effects to be found in test design that includes comparison with a minimum of four representative farms (control farms)


• Calculatedemissionsfromeachfarmandasaveragefortreatmentfarmsandforcontrolfarms.• P-valuefort-test for calculation of the significance of differences between treatment farms and

control farms based on average for each farm.

Operational stability

An evaluation of the operating stability of the system must be given. This evaluation must be based on observations made during the entire testing period and must include all recorded data describing the stability of the system or technology.

The uptime of the system during the test period must be calculated, as well as the efficiency of the technology corrected by the uptime factor.a

a If, for example, the measured efficiency of a technology to reduce emission of ammonia is 90 % and the uptime is 80 % the corrected efficiency of the technology is 72 %.


Additional information

Furthermore, the test report must include an evaluation of the potential risks related to the use of the system, including potential impact on:

• Animalwelfare• Occupationalhealthandsafety• Total(external)environment• Foodsafetyofe.g.feedadditives• Chemicalregulations

These evaluations must include situations with normal operation of the system/technology and any unforeseen use or problem.

The test report must include advice to the verification authorities on how to inspect the system.

Finally, the test report must include an evaluation of how the results can be applied to other types of animal housing units or other animal categories.

In cases where the verification body finds it necessary, the raw data should be made available by the applicant or the test organisation for interpretation of the results and conclusions presented.

Discussion and conclusions

The results must be discussed in relation to aspects of the working principle of the system, the plausi-bility of the results and findings in related research reports.

The conclusions must sum up the major results and validate the housing and management system and technology in general. The conclusions section should only include aspects that can be justified in the results section in the test report.

References

Relevant references must be specified.

Annexes

Annexes can be added if relevant.


Bibliography

Applied standards

EN 481:1994 Workplace atmospheres – Size fraction definitions for measurement of airborne particles.

EN 13284-1:2001 Stationary source emissions – Determination of low range mass concentration of dust – Part 1: Manual gravimetric method.

EN 13284-2:2004 Stationary source emissions – Determination of low range mass concentration of dust – Part 2: Automated measuring systems.

EN 13725 Air quality – Determination of odour concentration by dynamic olfactometry.

EN 15259:2007 Air quality – Measurement of stationary source emissions – Requirements for measurement sections and sites and for the measurement objective, plan and report.

EN 62079:2003 Preparation of instructions – Structuring, content and presentation.

ISO 3746 Acoustics – Determination of sound power levels of noise sources - Survey method

ISO/IEC 17025 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories

ISO 12100-2:2003 Safety of machinery – Basic concepts, general principles for design – Part 2: Technical principles

References

Pedersen, S., V. Blanes-Vidal, M.J.W. Heetkamp, A.J.A. Aarnink. (2008). Carbon dioxide produc-tion in animal houses: A literature review. Agricultural Engineering International: CIGR E-journal. Manuscript BC 08 008, Vol. X. December, 2008.

Pedersen, S. and Sällvik, K. (eds.) (2002). 4th Report of Working Group on Climatization of Animal Houses. Heat and moisture production at animal and house levels. International Commission of Agri-cultural Biosystems Engineering (CIGR).

Poulsen, H.D.; C.F. Børsting; H.B. Rom & S.G. Sommer (eds.), (2001). Kvælstof, fosfor og kalium I husdyrgødning – normtal 2000 (Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in livestock manure – norm figures 2000). DJF Rapport nr. 36 Husdyrbrug, Ministeriet for Fødevarer, Landbrug og Fiskeri, Danmarks JordbrugsForskning. pp. 152. http://web.agrsci.dk/djfpublikation/djfpdf/djfhd36.pdf


Annexes

Annex A (informative): Template for a test plan

Name of test organisation

Test plan for [technology/system]

[Name of technology/system] delivered from [name of manufacturer/applicant]

Contact data etc.:

Farmer/Chr. No.:

Address of housing unit (if different from address of the herd owner):

Health status:

Visiting rules:

Start of test of test (dd/mm/yy):

End of test (dd/mm/yy):

Technician responsible:

Technician(s):

Consultant(s) from the test organisation:

Local advisor/veterinarian:

Contact person from the company financing the test: Service technician(s) from the supplier of the technology/system:

File:


Background and aim [maximum of one page]

A short description of the system and a reference to where details can be found should be included. The development process of the system and any previous tests must be specified (all references must be included in the reference list at the end of the test plan).

The section must include a precise description of the aim of the test and a specification of the primary test parameters.

Test procedure

The description of the test procedure must include the following items:

• Descriptionoftheherdandthehousingsystem/technologywherethetestwascarriedout.Previousdescriptions of the individual components in the system/technology must be specified in an appen-dix to the test plan. The verification authorities can then check that the system/technology applied is identical to the tested system/technology.

• Specificationoftheprimarymeasurementparameters,e.g.odour,ammoniaanddust(seeTable4).• Specificationoftheconditionalmeasurementparameters(seeTable5a,b,c).• Descriptionofthelocationofmeasurementpoints,instrumentsandhowtheyarecalibrated.• Descriptionoftheworkproceduresinthehousingunitandhowtheanimalproductionparameters

should be recorded• Timetablefortheentiretestperiod.• Logbook.Locationoflogbookanddescriptionofparameterstoberecorded.

Data Recording

The tables provided for recording data must be presented.

Allocation of responsibility

The allocation of responsibility must cover all working processes in the system/technology, so the technician can use the list when instructing the stockmen.

A list must be drawn up for each section and system/technology.

What needs to be done When By who


Processing of results

Raw data must be presented in tables, which must be included as appendices to the final test report. The raw data must also be presented in graphs, which must be included in the results section in the final test report.

The primary measurement parameters must then be analysed in accordance with the specifications given in the test protocol.

For example, the ammonia concentration and the logarithmically transformed odour concentration can be processed with an analysis of variance in the MIXED Procedure in SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC). Both the median and the 95 percentiles must be calculated for odour concentration and odour emission. For the other primary parameters, the mean must be calculated instead of the median.

The mean and standard deviation must be calculated for the secondary parameters according to the test protocol.

Compensation

Any arrangements made about providing the farmer with financial compensation in connection with the test must be described, e.g. farmer paid DKK/Euro XXX per hour for any extra work.

Appendices

The appendices must include all data recording tables, e.g. tables for

• Odourrecordings• Ammoniarecordings• Defecationbehaviour• Productiondata.

Updates to the test plan

The test plan must be updated every time changes are made. It is not enough to list the changes in the logbook. For each update, the date for the changes must be noted and the test plan must be assigned a new version number.

Example:

1st version: DD/MM/YY initials 1/initials 22nd version: DD/MM/YY initials 1/initials 2

It is recommended to have the test plan verified by the verification authority prior to initiation of a VERA test.


Annex B (informative): Example of a contract

Contract

Between [Name of the company financing the test]

and [Name of the test organisation] and [Name of the farmer(s)] About Test of the technology/system called [name of technology/system] delivered from

[name of manufacturer/applicant]

__________________________________________________________________________________

1. Aim

1.1. The aim is to test the technology/system called [name of technology/system] according to the test protocol called [name of test protocol].

2. Scope and test procedure

2.1. The test includes the system/technology in a unit for e.g. sows / weaners / finishers weighing between xx and yy kg.

2.2. The enclosed test protocol states how the test should be conducted and specifies the data

recordings and analyses that must be performed. 2.3. The animals included in the trial must be housed in accordance with EU and national legisla-

tion. 2.4. The farmer, the company financing the test and the manufacturer/applicant must agree that all

results will remain confidential during the test period and until the final test report is published.

2.5. Data recordings and analyses can be conducted by other organisations, provided that this is

specified in the contract.

2.6. The service contracts must be drawn up before the test starts and must not be changed during the test period.


3. Requirements

3.1. Requirements for checking feed and production specified in the working plan must be met by the farmer.

3.2. All production-related data must be made available, including receipts for purchases and sales

of animals and receipts for feed. 3.3. Animals may only be moved in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the test organisa-

tion. 3.4. Changes to the housing unit (system/technology) and/or production must not be made without

prior agreement with the test organisation. 3.5. The results of the test must not be manipulated to benefit the farmer or anyone else. 3.6. During the contract period, the farmer must not conduct tests together with any parties other

than the test organisation. 3.7. The farmer must agree to inform the herd veterinarian and production consultant that the test

is being conducted.

4. Herd visits/information/analysis

4.1. As required, a technician from the test organisation must conduct an inspection of the herd and the relevant system/technology. The technician should collect data and provide the farmer with data recording tables. Further details of such visits are described in the enclosed test protocol.

4.2. The results of the test must remain confidential until the results have been published. 4.3. Analyses of the feed content must be performed in accordance with the test plan.

5. Termination of the contract

5.1. The contract runs until DD/MM/YY. 5.2. The contract is binding for the farmer, the test organisation and the manufacturer/applicant

until DD/MM/YY.

5.3. In the event of unforeseen problems with the animal production or the system/technology, the contract and test protocol can be reconsidered. If it is not possible to find a solution, the farmer, the test organisation and/or the manufacturer/applicant may terminate the test with one month’s notice.


6. Visiting rules

6.1. On signing the contract, the farmer must declare that the health status of the herd is _____________________. The test organisation must be informed immediately of any disease outbreaks where the health status of the herd is at risk.

6.2. In order to disseminate knowledge of the new technology, the farmer must agree to receive visits when contacted by the test organisation.

6.3. During herd visits, the farmer must agree to observe the general visiting rules, i.e. quarantine period of at least 12 hours after contact with livestock with a lower health status than that of the farmer’s livestock. Quarantine is not required after visits to farms with livestock with a higher health status or the same health status.

If the farmer has established visiting rules for the individual farm, these rules must also be complied with.

7. Compensation

7.1. Compensation may be paid for extra work carried out during the test period. The farmer is paid Euro/DKK XXX per hour for extra work.

This item must include any agreements made by the three parties regarding the amount of

compensation and what the compensation covers.

8. Responsibility

8.1. 8.2.

9. Reconstruction costs

9.1. Costs relating to changes or installations that can be attributed to a specific test are covered by the test organisation or the manufacturer/applicant.

9.2. Equipment and material purchased by the test organisation or the manufacturer/applicant belong to these parties, unless otherwise agreed.

9.3. Ownership after completion of the test must be specified.

9.4. If the farmer terminates the current contract during the test period (see item 5.3), the test organisation and manufacturer/applicant reserve the right to decide what to do with the equip-ment installed on the farm. The farmer can, by agreement with the test organisation, acquire the entire installation at a fixed price.


9.5. If the test organisation or the manufacturer/applicant terminates the current contract during the test period (see 5.3), the ownership of the installation and equipment is as specified in item 9.3. Furthermore, if the manufacturer/applicant terminates the contract during the test period, it must pay for the measurements undertaken to date.

9.6. If the farmer goes bankrupt or the farm is put up for sale, the test organisation is entitled to reclaim the equipment provided by the test organisation. The same applies to the manufacturer/applicant if the company goes bankrupt or closes down.

9.7. The farmer is responsible for maintaining the equipment and covering the costs of fire insur-ance for the equipment installed in connection with the test. The farmer is also responsible for ensuring that the equipment is in compliance with the environmental approval.

9.8 With regard to test facilities established on the farm in connection with the test, the test organ-

isation and the manufacturer/applicant are subject to the legislation of the country in which the test is performed. The test organisation is therefore not liable for any operating losses and cannot be held responsible for any indirect loss arising from the test facilities.

Date and place

__________________________________________________________________________________Farmer

Date and place

__________________________________________________________________________________Applicant/manufacturer

Date and place

__________________________________________________________________________________Test organisation


Annex C (informative): Ammonia emission factors for different animal categories

The table below shows ammonia emission coefficients and emission factors for different livestock categories and housing systems in Germany (DE), the Netherlands (NL) and Denmark (DK).

Livestock

Housing and floor system

Manureb DE(kg NH3-N kg-1 Nc)

DE(kg NH3

AP-1d year -1)

NL(kg NH3

AP-1 year -1)e

DK(kg NH3-N kg-1 TAN)2

DK(kg NH3-N kg-1 N)

Dairycows

Cubicle house (solid or slatted floor (channel, back flushing)), no grazing)

Liquid 0.236 14.6 9.5 0.16

Solid drainedfloor

Liquid No data – – 0.08

Deeplitter Deeplitter 0.236 14.6 – 0.06

Zero grazing, slatted floor

Liquid 11

Grower/finishers

Partially slatted (solid 50-75%)

Liquid 0.268 3.6 3.5 0.13


Liquid 3.6 – 0.17

Fully slatted floor (1/3 of the space requirement max 10% opening area)

0.21

Fully slatted Liquid 0.268 3.6 4 0.24

Deeplitter Deeplitter 0.384 4.9 – 0.25

Weaners Two climate housing, partially slatted

Liquid 0.196f 0.4 0.43 0.10

Fully slatted Liquid 0.268 0.5 0.6 0.24

Deeplitter Deeplitter 0.384 No data – 0.15

Sows, pregnant

Individual, partially slatted

Liquid

0.239g 7.3*

4.2 0.13

Individual,fullyslatted

Liquid – 0.19

Group, partially slatted

0.16

Group, deep litter Deeplitter 2.6 0.15

Sows, lactating

Box,partiallyslatted

Liquid 8.3 0.13

Box,fullyslatted Liquid – 0.26

Broilers Deeplitter Deeplitter 0.138h 0.05 0.08 0.20

Layers Free-range, solid manure

Solid 0.351 0.32 floor housing, manure pit

0.315 0.32

Enriched cage, belt removal

Solid 0.12

Aviary, belt removal

Solid 0.14

Deeplittersystem Solid 0.36


Weaners, fully slatted: It is now illegal to build such systems in DK. Two types predominate in DK, ‘two climate housing, partially slatted’ and ‘50 % drained floor/50 % slatted floor’.

Layers, free-range, solid manure: In DK it is assumed that 10 % of total N ex animal is excreted out-side the house; 30 % of N is excreted in the deep litter inside the house; and the remaining 60 % of N is excreted on the slats. 25 % of N excreted in the deep litter area is lost as ammonia, whereas 40 % of N excreted on the slats is lost as ammonia. Thus overall ammonia-N emissions are (0.30*0.25+0.60*0.40) = 0.32 kg NH3-N per kg N excreted. The 10 % of manure-N which is excreted outside the house is not accounted for.

Layers, aviary, belt removal: In DK it is assumed that 75 % of total N ex animal is excreted on the manure belts and the remaining 25 % is excreted in the deep litter.10 % of N excreted on the manure belts is lost as NH3-N, and 25 % of N excreted in the deep litter area is lost as NH3-N. Thus the average ammonia-N emissions are (0.75*0.10+0.25*0.25) = 0.14 kg NH3-N per kg N excreted.

Layers, deep litter, solid manure: In DK it is assumed that 33 % of N is excreted in the deep litter inside the house; and the remaining 67 % of N is excreted on the slats. 25 % of N excreted in the deep litter area is lost as ammonia, whereas 40 % of N excreted on the slats is lost as ammonia. Thus the average ammonia-N emissions are (0.33*0.25+0.67*0.40) = 0.36 kg NH3-N per kg N excreted.

Relating measured ammonia emissions to nitrogen ex animal (DK approach)

In the Danish normative system, ex animal calculation of norm values is performed as a simple differ-ence between nitrogen input and output. Input is based on recordings and calculations of feed intake for the different livestock categories, combined with statistics on nutrient concentrations in the diet. Thereafter, the nutrient retention in the animal products (meat, milk and eggs) is calculated based on standard values and subtracted. The separate excretion of nutrients into faecal and urinary fractions is also calculated, using digestibility coefficients for the different nutrients (Poulsen et al., 2001 and 2006)

The norm values including ex animal nitrogen are calculated yearly and published at: http://agrsci.au.dk/institutter/institut_for_husdyrbiologi_og_sundhed/husdyrernaering_og_miljoe/normtal/. For each animal category the norm values apply to a certain feed intake, weight range (i.e. meat produc-tion), milk production, and/or egg production. If basic parameters obtained during a test differ from the values outlined in the published norm values in the relevant year, Poulsen et al. (2001) prescribe animal-specific equations to recalculate the nitrogen ex animal values.

* for all stages; sows, pregnant: 4.8, sows, lactating: 8.3b Liquid manure: Based on TAN = total ammoniacal nitrogen (nitrogen in urine) Deep litter and solid manure: Based on total nitrogen excreted in urine and faeces.c Related to TANd AP = the number of permitted animalse For NL only reference housing systems included; minimum levels for BAT-systems are lowerf Naturally ventilated housing with kennelsg No differentiation between the housing systemsh Related to total N.


References

German data: Dämmgen, U. (ed.) (2009): Calculation of emission from German agriculture – National emission inventory report (NIR), vTI Agriculture and Forestry Research, special issue 324.VDI Guideline VDI 3894, Blatt 1 (2011): Emissions and immissions from animal husbandry – Housing systems and emissions – Pigs, cattle, poultry, horses. Beuth Verlag, Berlin

Dutch data: Infomil, (2009). Information centre for the environment: InfoMil. Regulatory list of am-monia emission factors and system description, in Dutch. Available at: http://www.infomil.nl/aspx/get.aspx?xdl=/views/infomil/xdl/page&ItmIdt=29375&SitIdt=111&VarIdt=82 Accessed at March 2009.

Danish data: Poulsen, H.D.; C.F. Børsting; H.B. Rom & S.G. Sommer (Eds.), (2001). Kvælstof, fosfor og kalium I husdyrgødning – normtal 2000 (Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in livestock manure – norm figures 2000). DJF Rapport nr. 36 Husdyrbrug, Ministeriet for Fødevarer, Landbrug og Fiskeri, Danmarks JordbrugsForskning. pp. 152. http://web.agrsci.dk/djfpublikation/djfpdf/djfhd36.pdf

A condensed description is provided by Poulsen et al. (2006). Quantification of nitrogen, phosphorus in manure in the Danish Normative System. In: Petersen, S.O. (Ed.). 2006. Technology for Recycling of Manure and Organic Residues in a Whole-Farm Perspective. 12th Ramiran International confer-ence. Vol. II, DIAS report no. 123. Ministry of Foods, Agriculture, and Fisheries, Danish Agricultural Sciences, p 105-107. http://agrsci.au.dk/fileadmin/DJF/HBS/Danish_normative_system_Ramiran_Proceedings_DJF_2006.pdf


Annex D (informative): Odour emission factors for different animal categories

The table below shows odour emission coefficients for different livestock categories and housing systems in Germany (DE), the Netherlands (NL) and Denmark (DK).

Table 1: Odour emission factors from production units with pigs

Animal type Housing unit DE(annual average, OU LU-1 s-1)

NL(OU AP-1 s-1)i

DK(5 & 95 percentiles)

Drysows Sows kept in individual crates

22 19 16 OUE s-1 animal -1 (7-39)

Sows kept loose 22 19 16 OUE s-1 animal-1

(7-39)

Lactating sows

Sows and piglets kept in crates with partially slatted floor

20 28 72 OUE s-1 sow-1

(40-125)

Sows and piglets kept in crates with fully slatted floor

20 28 100 OUE s-1 sow-1 (56-280)

Weaners Weanerskeptinpens with partially slatted floor

75 8 380 OUE s-1 1000 kg-1 animal(200-750)

Weanerskeptinpens with fully slatted floor

75 8 380 OUE s-1 1000 kg-1 animal(200-750)

Finishers Finishers kept in pens with partially slatted floor

50 23 300 OUE s-1 1000 kg-1 animal(110-810)

Finishers kept in pens with fully slatted floor

50 23 450 OUE s-1 1000 kg-1 animal(190-1200)

Table 2: Odour emission factors from production units with cattle


NL(OU AP-1 s-1)

DK(5 & 95 percentiles)

All type of housing units

12 170 OUE s-1 1000 kg-1 animal

Beefcattle 6-24 month

12 36

Veal calves 30 36

i AP = the number of animals permitted


Table 3: Odour emission factors from poultry


NLOU AP-1 s-1

DKOUE s-1 1000 kg-1 animal(5 & 95 percentiles)

Layers Floor systems 42 0.35 900

Layers

Cages

30 small group housing systems (furnished cages)

0.34 400

Aviary system30 0.34

0.34

Broilers Deeplitter 60 0.24 400

AP: Number of animals permitted

Sources

Dutch data: Infomil, 2009. Information centre for the environment: InfoMil. Regulatory list of am-monia emission factors and system description, in Dutch. Available at: http://www.infomil.nl/onder-werpen/landbouw-tuinbouw/ammoniak-en/regeling-ammoniak/stalbeschrijvingen.Accessed August 2011.

German data: VDI Guideline VDI 3894, Blatt 1 (2011): Emissions and immissions from animal hus-bandry – Housing systems and emissions – Pigs, cattle, poultry, horses. Beuth Verlag, Berlin


Annex E (informative): Dust (PM10) emission factors for different animal categories

The table below shows dust emission factors (PM10) for different livestock categories and housing systems in Germany (DE), the Netherlands (NL) and Denmark (DK)

Livestock Housing and floor system

Manure DE(kg AP-1 year -1)j

NL DK (Not available)

Dairycows

Slatted (channel, back flushing)

Liquid 0.18 0.148

Pre-manufactured floor

Liquid – –

Deeplitter Deeplitter 0.4 –

Grower/Finishers


Liquid

0.24

0.153


Liquid –

Fully slatted Liquid 0.24 0.153

Deeplitter Deeplitter 0.32 –

Piglets

Two climate housing, partially slatted

Liquid 0.08 0.074

Fully slatted Liquid 0.08 0.074

Deeplitter Deeplitter – –

Sows, pregnant

Individual, partially slatted

Liquid 0.16*) 0.175

Individual,fullyslatted

Liquid 0.16*) 0.175

Deeplitter Deeplitter 0.8*) –

Sows, lactating

Box,partially slatted

Liquid 0.16*) 0.160

Box,fully slatted

Liquid 0.16*) –

Broilers Deeplitter Deeplitter 0.015 0.022

Layers Free-range, solid manure

Solid manure 0.12 0.084

*) For all stages

j AP = the number of permitted animals


Sources

Dutch data: Infomil, 2009. Information centre for the environment: InfoMil. Regulatory list of ammo-nia emission factors and system description, in Dutch. Available at: http://www.infomil.nl/onderwer-pen/landbouw-tuinbouw/ammoniak-en/regeling-ammoniak/stalbeschrijvingen.Accessed at Augustus 2011

German data: VDI Guideline VDI 3894, Blatt 1 (2011): Emissions and immissions from animal hus-bandry – Housing systems and emissions – Pigs, cattle, poultry, horses. Beuth Verlag, Berlin


Annex F (informative): Example of distribution of sampling days for broilers during one-year test (exponential increase in emissions during the production cycle)

Case-control test design (within a farm)

Figure F1: Distribution of sampling days within one year.

Figure F2: Example of distribution of sampling days within a production cycle of broilers.


Other test designs without case-control approach

Figure F3: Distribution of sampling days within the year.

Figure F4: Distribution of sampling days within a 42-day production cycle


Annex G (informative): Feeding parameters

Ranges of dietary protein contents in different pig categories in NL, DK and DE

Fatteners: Up to 50 kg live weight 15-18 % crude protein > 50 kg live weight 14-16.5 % crude protein

Piglets: < 20 kg 18-21 % crude protein > 20 kg 17-20 % crude protein

Sows: Pregnant 11-14 % crude protein Lactating 13-17 % crude protein

Dietary protein contents in poultry feeding (approximate values)

DKBroilers, 1.6-3.0 kg live weight, 30-45 days of age: 20-21 % crude proteinOutdoor broilers, 2.4 kg live weight, 56 days of age: 15 % crude proteinTurkeys, females, 10 kg live weight: 20 % crude proteinTurkeys, males, 20 kg live weight: 18 % crude proteinDucks, 4 kg live weight: 17 % crude proteinGeese, 7 kg live weight: 16 % crude proteinLaying hens: 16-18 % crude protein

DELaying hens: 15-20 % crude protein

Broilers: 1-> 5 weeks 18-23.5 % crude protein

Turkeys: Week 1-5 (starter) 26-29.5 % crude protein Week 6-16 (females) 18-24.5 % crude protein Week 6-21 (males) 14-24.5 % crude protein

Ducks: Week 1-2 20-24 % crude protein Week 3-7 16-18 % crude protein

The farmer must be able to document the actual crude protein level in the feed during the test period. If the farmer is not able to deliver this documentation, three feed samples must be taken spread over the measurement period and analysed.

VERASecretariat

Kollegievej6

2920 Charlottenlund

Denmark

Phone: (+45) 39 96 61 30

E-mail: [email protected]

Web:www.veracert.eu 541 - 643 TRYKSAG

test protocol - vera-verification€¦ · vera test protocol 3 foreword to meet the environmental...

Documents