Odour sampling. 2. Comparison of physical and aerodynamic characteristics of sampling devices: A review

Sampling devices differing greatly in shape, size and operating condition have been used to collect air samples to determine rates of emission of volatile substances, including odour. However, physical chemistry principles, in particular the partitioning of volatile substances between two phases as explained by Henrys Law and the relationship between wind velocity and emission rate, suggests that different devices cannot be expected to provide equivalent emission rate estimates. Thus several problems are associated with the use of static and dynamic emission chambers, but the more turbulent devices such as wind tunnels do not appear to be subject to these problems. In general, the ability to relate emission rate estimates obtained from wind tunnel measurements to those derived from device-independent techniques supports the use of wind tunnels to determine emission rates that can be used as input data for dispersion models.

Comparison of odour emission rates measured from various sources using two sampling devices

Two commonly used sampling devices (a wind tunnel and the US EPA dynamic emission chamber), were used to collect paired samples of odorous air from a number of agricultural odour sources. The odour samples were assessed using triangular, forced-choice dynamic olfactometry. The odour concentration data was combined with the flushing rate data to calculate odour emission rates for both devices on all sources. Odour concentrations were consistently higher in samples collected with a flux chamber (ratio ranging from 10:7 to 5:1, relative to wind tunnel samples), whereas odour emission rates were consistently larger when derived from wind tunnels (ratio ranging from 60:1 to 240:1, relative to flux chamber values). A complex relationship existed between emission rate estimates derived from each device, apparently influenced by the nature of the emitting surface. These results have great significance for users of odour dispersion models, for which an odour emission rate is a key input parameter.

Rapid continuous chemical analysis of meat chicken shed emissions by SIFT–MS

Assessing and addressing odour impacts from poultry production is extremely difficult and subjective because the odorants involved and their dynamics over time and space are poorly understood. This knowledge gap is due, in part, to the lack of suitable analytical tools for measuring and monitoring odorants in the field. The emergence of Selected Ion Flow Tube – Mass Spectrometry (SIFT–MS) and similar instruments is changing that. These tools can rapidly quantify targeted odorants in ambient air in real time, even at very low concentrations. Such data is essential for developing better odour abatement strategies, assessment methods and odour dispersion models. This project trialled a SIFT–MS to determine its suitability for assessing the odorants in meat chicken shed emissions over time and space. This report details evaluations in New Zealand and Australia to determine the potential of SIFT–MS as a tool for the chicken meat industry, including odour measurement (as a proxy for dynamic olfactometry). The report is specifically targeted at those funding and conducting poultry odour research. It will be of interest to those involved with environmental odour monitoring and assessment in general. The high upfront cost of SIFT–MS will lead to potential users wanting compelling evidence that SIFT–MS will meet their needs before they invest in one.