Removal of odor using biofilter from duck confinement buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The poultry and waterfowl industry in the Fraser Valley of British Columbia needs to deal with odor emission problems. The objective of this study is to evaluate the performance of a pilot-scale biofiltration system for treating odors from the exhaust air streams of a commercial duck farm building before their release to the atmosphere. A pilot-scale biofiltration system with semi-enclosed wooden structure was designed, constructed and installed to treat the exhaust air from one of the 12 operating ventilation exhaust fans, having a ventilation rate of 2.36 m3/s. The empty bed residence time of the biofilter was 5-10 seconds at the design flow rate. The biofilter media comprised of 2 parts softwood chips and barks to 1 part finished compost. Fabric filters were used for pre-treatment to protect the biofilter from clogging by dust particles and feathers. Odor reduction was determined by measuring the concentration of the air entering and leaving the biofilter via olfactometry analysis. The odor concentration of untreated barn air was found to vary from 8553+/-1006 to 12171+/-1575 OU/m3; however, the odor concentration was substantially reduced to 420+/-195 OU/m(3) after the manure storage was cleaned out at the end of summer. The odor removal efficiency of the biofilter system averaged 95+/-3%. The high frequency of cleaning and replacement required of the fabric filters would considerably increase the operating cost. Alternative methods of dust and odor removal that are more cost-effective will need to be investigated in the future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".