Academic literature on the topic 'Livestock workers Treatment'

Crandell, Doug. "The Nightmare In Atalissa." In Twenty-Two Cents an Hour. Cornell University Press, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.7591/cornell/9781501762628.003.0008.

MISHRA, HEMANTA KUMAR. "LIVELIHOOD MANAGEMENT FOR INCLUSIVE DEVELOPMENT: CASE OF AJEEVIKA PASU SAKHI PROGRAMME OF JHARKHAND." In UNHEARD STORIES: CASES OF INCLUSIVE DEVELOPMENT FROM INDIA. NOBLE SCIENCE PRESS, 2024. http://dx.doi.org/10.52458/9788196919535.nsp2024.eb.ch-07.

Walker, Christine. "Plantations." In Jamaica Ladies. University of North Carolina Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.5149/northcarolina/9781469658797.003.0004.

"From Catastrophe to Recovery: Stories of Fishery Management Success." In From Catastrophe to Recovery: Stories of Fishery Management Success, edited by Molly R. Stephens, Stanley J. Stephens, and Charles C. Krueger. American Fisheries Society, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.47886/9781934874554.ch2.

"problems. Odour problems are commonly associated with: ♦Septic sewage arriving at works •Industrial discharge arriving at works •Inlet works •Primary treatment •Storm tanks •High rate filters •Conventional filters •Activated sludge process •Transfer of sludge •Treatment of sludge •Storage of sludge Four of these operations are more important than the rest: septic sewage, high-rate filters, sludge transfer and sludge treatment, especially filter pressing, account for the majority of instances of serious nuisance. Of the three processes listed involving sludge two are broadly analogous to land disposal: sludge transfer carries the risks associated with spreading, while the sludge storage corresponds more to sludge on land after spreading. The general conclusion from considering all these factors is that when financial resources for remedial measures are at a premiun, it is particularly important to be able to judge the potential benefit in particular cases, as well as to assess the risk from various operations and to ensure that designs of new works or of operating procedures take properly into account these risks. 2. PROBLEMS IN APPLYING CONVENTIONAL ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUES TO A concept which has proved useful in assessing odours from contained sources is that of emission rate, defined: E = FxD where: E - Emission Rate - Related to complaints and is the input to dispersion modelling and to simpler empirical formulae D - Dilution Number - The number of times the odour must be diluted before 50% of people cannot detect it F - Volume Flow Rate of the odorous air When dealing with non-point sources this formula is difficult to apply, because although values of D can be obtained at specific points around the source, it is extremely difficult to measure or estimate values of F which correspond to them. Measurements around a sludge storage tank in Yorkshire Water Authority, shown in Table I. illustrates the difficulty of prediction. Ideally an ’absolute’ method, capable of measuring F accurately should be used; since this is not possible, an alternative approach is to quantify in a reproducible way the potential of the liquid phase for." In Odour Prevention and Control of Organic Sludge and Livestock Farming. CRC Press, 1986. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781482286311-59.

"different aspects of slurry disposal, for example, spreading, and odour from land after spreading. Correlation work to establish which fractions are best remains to be done, and will probably involve chemical analysis. It is clear then, that the concept of Odour Potential of a sludge or slurry can be a useful tool not only to the odour specialist but also to the operators of sewage treatment works and agricultural slurry handling facilities in minimising the nuisance from the disposal of sludges. (1 j GILLARD, F. ’Measurements of odours by dynamic olfactometry; application to the steel and carbonisation industries." Paper presented at internation symposium: Characterisation and control of odoriferous pollutants in process industries, Belgian Filtration Society, Louvain-La-Neuve, April 1984. (2) TOOGOOD, S. J., and HOBSON, J.A. ’The Discharge of Volatile M rials to Sewers", Water Research Centre, Technical Report TR142, England, 1979. (5) Commission of European Communities, ’The use of Sewage Sludge in Agriculture’, Draft Directive, November 1981. (6) HURLEY, B. J., and RACHWAL, A. J. "Reducing Sludge Volune" Effluent and Water Treatment Journal, 21» 292-296, 1981." In Odour Prevention and Control of Organic Sludge and Livestock Farming. CRC Press, 1986. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781482286311-66.

"COST 68 bis was more extensive in scope than the initial project since it covered both treatment and use of sewage sludge. This meant that the topics included both the engineering and economics aspects of sludge processing at sewage works and the environmental aspects of sludge disposal particularly in regard to its utilisation as a fertilizer in agriculture. The use of sewage sludge in this way is important in most countries and it was recognised that co-ordinated research was desirable into both the possible adverse environmental effects of heavy metals and pathogens in sludges and the beneficial effects of plant nutrients in sludge. The problem of odour nuisance arising from the handling and spreading of sewage sludge was also recognised as an important subject-area for research. Under COST 68 bis, five Working Parties were established to co-ordinate the various areas of research. As a 'Concerted Action1, no direct funding was available from the European Commission to finance research projects on sewage sludge, each country being expected to contribute its own publicly-funded projects to the common ’pool*. COST 68 bis ran from 1977 to 1980(2) and was followed by an extension programme - COST 68 ter - which ran from 1981 to 1983(3). In 1983, it was decided to further extend this Concerted Action but to widen the range of research topics in the scientific programme to include animal manures. The renewed programme was designated COST Project 681 'Treatment and Use of Organic Sludges and Liquid Agricultural Wastes'. It is obvious that sewage sludges and farm manures have many aspects in common particularly with regard to handling and treatment techniques and to the environmental impact (e.g. odour) which can occur from their utilisation on land. On the other hand, from the administrative point of view, sewage sludge and farm manures are in two different 'worlds'. Sewage sludge is the general responsibility of public authorities while responsibility for disposing of animal manures belong mainly to the private farming sector. Funding for research on the two types of waste, even if from Government sources, is usually from different Departments and there is little cross-involvement of research scientists in the two sectors. Nonetheless, the COST 681 activity is attempting to promote some co-ordination of effort between the two research areas and, hopefully, this will result in mutual benefit to both those authorities responsible for sewage sludge treatment and those concerned with farm manures and their disposal. This joint Workshop on 'odours' is a good example of the type of co-operation, and sharing of information on a common problem, which can be of great mutual benefit to both sectors. PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES." In Odour Prevention and Control of Organic Sludge and Livestock Farming. CRC Press, 1986. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781482286311-11.

"From Table III, the offensive nature of untreated sludge can again be seen. It is also clear that the effect of storage is most marked with secondary sludges. The results in these tables are illustrative of the kind of assesanent of sludges that can be made, and the figures are in a form that can be used directly as an indication of the relative nuisance likely to arise during disposal. The effect of stabilisation is shown later. 4.2. Scheduling Sludge Disposal - The Effect of Storage Time When sludge samples were stored over a 32 day period the results showed a characteristic double peak in odour potential. Examples are shown in Fig. 2 for two mixed and one hunus sludge from sewage treatment works in the Yorkshire Water region. An initial increase can be seen to a maximun at 2-4 days, followed by a decrease before a second maximum at 8-10 days. The pattern indicates that the age at which a sludge is removed for disposal can be critical if odour nuisance is to be minimised. The tests indicate for example that Esholt hunus sludge should be stored for at least four days before disposal, and that longer storage of, say, three weeks is appropriate for the Knostrop sludge. Disposal while fresh may conversely be the best strategy for the Owlwood sludge. Field observations do indeed indicate that Owlwood sludge consistently gave the most odorous conditions during spreading. 4.3. The Effect, of Lime stabilisation.,on.Odours." In Odour Prevention and Control of Organic Sludge and Livestock Farming. CRC Press, 1986. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781482286311-63.

"In any case, covering may be impracticable for other reasons. Many processes as they are currently designed depend upon at least visual access by operators for process control, and in other instances the production of odorous chemicals such as hydrogen sulphide can be accompanied by the formation of methane, giving a potential fire or explosion hazard. 1.1.1. Odours .from the Spreading of Sludge and Slurries on Land The chimney, originally devised to increase draught through fires and to provide smoke extraction, has found extensive use in many industries to aid the dispersion of odour. The extra height gained by the point of emission is frequently enough to give the extra dilution required to reduce the risk of odour nuisance at even relatively nearby properties. This is an option that is not open to the farmer or the sewage works operator. The cost and practicability of enclosing the processes used in sewage treatment varies considerably, but in the disposal of sludge or animal slurries to land there is never a realistic option that the dispersion of odours once transferred to the gas phase might be effectively controlled. For the prevention of nuisance therefore there are two possibili­ ties. First, the formation or release of odorous chemical species can be discouraged. In practice this usually means the prevention of reducing conditions (negative redox potential) and possibly the prior removal of certain key compounds. Second, the time of contact between the sludge/ slurry and the air can be reduced, for example by ploughing in or sub-surface injection, and the act of spreading can be timed to coincide with favourable atmospheric conditions. These two approaches can of course be used in combination. Both approaches naturally add to the cost of sludge disposal, and for the sewage works manager add to the risk that farmers might be less willing to accept sludge to land, causing a greater problem still. For the fanner, sewage sludge can be a useful source of cheap nitrogen, though of unspecified strength, and also of much needed soil structure, but the imposition of no-grazing periods after application can add to the cost taken as a whole. A further problem, especially for farmers with arable crops is that the demand for soil nutrients and the practicability of spreading and ploughing in are seasonal, whereas a sludge and slurry are produced at a more or less constant rate. In the case of slurries, seme form of storage is inevitable, and commonly takes place in open pits. Scxne digestion and therefore stabilisation takes place during storage, reducing the capacity of the slurry to cause odour nuisance, and as long as the surface crust is not disturbed, little odour results. It is the emptying of slurry pits that gives rise to the release of odour. 2. P rin ciple, Sources, of Odour at .^ weg e .lreatment Works." In Odour Prevention and Control of Organic Sludge and Livestock Farming. CRC Press, 1986. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781482286311-58.

"efficiency. By measurements of total odour strength in a treatment plant the ED values pointed out the sludge press and dewatering process as the predominant odour sources of the plant. In the venting air from this position extremely high ED values were recorded. This air was led through a carbon filter for odour reduction. Olfactometric measurements at the filter revealed poor odour reducing efficiency. It was observed that odour compounds were not destroyed in the filter. They only restrained until the carbon became saturated, and thereafter evaporated into the outlet air contributing to the odour strength. The filter capacity was obviously too small for the heavy load. Attempts to reduce the odour strength before the filter did not succeed, until the air was led through a container filled with saturated lime slurry (pH = 12-14). The slurry was part of a precipitation process in the plant. Dispersion in the alkaline slurry extensively reduced the odour strength of the air, resulting in sufficient capacity of the carbon filter also when handling heavy loads of sewage sludge. Since then the carbon filter has worked well, within the limitation of such filters in general. Neither is it observed signs indicating reduced precipitation properties of the lime slurry. Measurements of total odour strength in combustion processes imply sampling challenges. Beside the chemical scrubber process, combustion of odorous air is the best odour reducing method. The disadvantage of this process is the high energy costs. Treatment at apropriate conditions, however, will destroy the odorous compounds extensively. Temperatures about 850 C and contact time up to 3 seconds are reported (2,3). Olfactometric measurements in combustion processes involve certain sampling problems caused by the temperature difference between inlet and outlet. The humidity of outlet air must also be taken into consideration. Problems may occur when hot outlet air is sampled at low temperatures. In most such cases sampling is impossible without special arrangements. Such conditions are present during odour measurements in fish meal plants with combustion as the odour reducing method. The largest problem turned out to be the temperature differences between outlet air (85-220 C) and outdoor temperatures (0-15 C), causing condensation. The dew point of the outlet air was calculated, and experiments were carried out with dilution of the outlet air to prevent condensation in the sampling bags. Condensation was prevented by diluting the outlet air 5-150 times with dry, purified N gas. Comparison of N -diluted and undiluted samples revealed large differences in ED value. In samples demanding a high degree of dilution to prevent condensation, the measured odour strength was up to 5 times higher than in the undiluted corresponding samples. Samples demanding less dilution showed less deviating results. 4. CONCLUSIONS In the attempt to minimize odour emission, olfactometric measurements of total odour strength give useful informations about the odour reducing efficiency of different processes as a function of parameters like dosage of chemicals in scrubbers, humidity and temperature in packed filters, flow rates, etc. Olfactometric measurements also point out the main odour sources of the plant. From a set of olfactometric data combined with other essential." In Odour Prevention and Control of Organic Sludge and Livestock Farming. CRC Press, 1986. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781482286311-34.

Larabi, Hellen, and Dennis Kinyua. "Enhancing Preparedness and Response to Disease Outbreaks through implementing a one health approach in Isiolo county, Kenya." In 4th International Nutrition and Dietetics Scientific Conference. KENYA NUTRITIONISTS AND DIETICIANS INSTITUTE, 2024. http://dx.doi.org/10.57039/jnd-conf-abt-2024-gioh-07.