Scientifically advanced woody media for improved water quality from livestock woodchip heavy-use areas
Overwintering cattle on pastures in many areas can damage the pasture and lead to impaired water quality. During these times, use of a woodchip heavy-use area (HUA) presents advantages such as a soft, supportive, and dry foot surface for animals and protection of the pasture and pasture soils. However, woodchip HUAs can also be a centralized source of high nutrient loads due to their drainage outflows. A column study was conducted to assess the nutrient load reduction potential of: 1) six types of wood media (including torrefied wood media and biochar) that could be used in a woodchip HUA versus a gravel control, and 2) providing a 48 h retention time within the wood media to enhance nitrogen removal through denitrification. The woody media provided significant liquid waste volume reduction compared to the gravel in simulated events (53%–61% vs. 39% reductions, respectively), and there may be additional liquid storage capacity in the woodchips not utilized during these rapid events. Substantial total nitrogen removal by the wood treatments (mean removal efficiencies >50%) was observed across the simulated events, although nitrate leaching also occurred. Nitrate removal was enhanced during the 48 h retention test which showed removal was governed by availability of labile carbon (i.e., fresh woodchips exhibited >70% nitrate removal). The retention test also indicated biochar mixtures provided some of the best total phosphorus removal, but the greatest benefits across all parameters was provided by the Mixed Hardwood treatment.
KeywordsOverwinter Heavy-use area Nutrient pollution Torrefied Woodchip
The authors would like to express appreciation for the support of the sponsors: 2013 West Virginia University Senate Research and Scholarship Grant and University of Illinois College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences Office of International Programs seed grant.
- 1.Faulkner J W, Miller J L, Basden T J, DeVallance D B. Woodchip heavy-use area effluent quality, quantity, and hydrologic design considerations. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 2015, 31(5): 783–790Google Scholar
- 4.Jackson D R, Chadwick D R, Crookes M, Sagoo E, Smith K A. Impact of hydrology and effluent quality on the management of woodchip pads for overwintering cattle. II. Effluent analysis and nutrient balance. Journal of Agricultural Science, 2013, 151(02): 279–286Google Scholar
- 6.Bourgeouis J P, Doet J. Torrefied wood from temperate and tropical species. Advantages and prospects. In: Egnens A E H, editor. Bioenergy 84. London:% Elsevier Applied Science, 1985, 153–159Google Scholar
- 8.Fonseca F F, Luengo C A, Beaton P, Suarez J A. Efficiency test for bench unit torrefaction and characterization of torrefied biomass. In: Overend R P, Chonet E, eds. BIOMASS: A Growth Opportunity in Green Energy and Value-Added Products, Proceedings of the 4th Biomass Conference of the Americas. Oakland, California, USA: Pergamon, 1999, 3Google Scholar
- 9.Lipinsky E, Arcate J, Reed T. Enhanced wood fuels via torrefaction. Fuel Chemistry Preprints, 2002, 47(1): 3Google Scholar
- 10.Nimlos M N, Brooking E, Looker M J, Evans R J. Biomass torrefaction studies with a molecular beam mass spectrometer. Paper-American Chemical Society, Division of Fuel Chemistry, 2003, 48 (2): 590–591Google Scholar
- 11.Bergman P C, Kiel J H. Torrefaction for Biomass Upgrading. The Netherlands: Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN), 2005, Publication No. ECN-RX-05–180, 6Google Scholar
- 14.Mitchell D, Elder T. Torrefaction? What’s that? In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Council on Forest Engineering: Fueling the Future. Auburn, Alabama: Council on Forest Engineering, 2010, 7Google Scholar
- 17.Bergman P C. Combined Torrefaction and Pelletisation. The Netherlands: Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN), 2005, Publication No. ECN-C-05–073. 29Google Scholar
- 24.US DOC. Technical Paper No. 40: Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the United States for Durations from 30 Minutes to 24 Hours and Return Periods from 1 to 100 Years. 1961. Available online at: http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hdsc/PF_documents/TechnicalPaper_No40.pdf (Accessed June 3, 2016)Google Scholar