Slaughterhouse Water Use and Wastewater Characteristics
- Jump To:
- Definition of terms
- Conclusion
- References
Water use and wastewater characteristics are important factors to consider when designing a slaughterhouse and included operations. This fact sheet collects some of the data reported on slaughterhouse water use and wastewater characteristics for cattle, sheep and poultry. Engineers, planners and designers may use this information to help guide their important decisions on water supply, distribution, management and treatment involving slaughterhouses.
Contents of slaughterhouse wastewater vary widely from plant to plant, depending on many factors, including manufacturing and cleaning practices. The organic content of wastewater can be significantly reduced by incorporating good manufacturing processes (GMPs). For example, separation of blood, grease, solid particles and paunch contents from the wastewater stream will help significantly (Stover, 1974).
Table 1 gives approximate potable water use in slaughterhouse operations for cattle, swine and poultry. Tables 2, 3 and 4 list wastewater characteristics measured from slaughterhouses processing cattle, swine and poultry, respectively. Information in all tables is arranged alphabetically by source.
Table 1. Potable water use in slaughter operations.
| Source | Cattle | Swine | Poultry |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5m, 2009 | 45 gal/animal | ||
| Gil & Allende, 2018 | 150 to 450 gal/animal | 3.5 to 10 gal/animal | |
| Matsumura & Mierzwa, 2008 | 3.0 to 4.5 gal/animal | ||
| Park et al., 2012 | 15.3 to 320 gal/cwt | ||
| Salminen, 2002 | 317 to 343 gal/animal | 44 to 186 gal/animal | 4.7 to 4.9 gal/animal |
| Ziara, 2015 | 355 gal/1,000 lbs. body weight |
Table 2. Cattle slaughterhouse wastewater characteristics reported by researchers.
| Source | Animals slaughtered | BOD mg/l | COD mg/l | TSS mg/l | Oils mg/l | pH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cassidy & Belia, 2005 | Cattle, Canada | 7,685 ± 646 | 1,742 ± 116 | 7.3 ± .4 | ||
| Husam & Nassar, 2019 | Cattle, Gaza | 2,350 | 4,502 | 7.1 | ||
| Maroneze et al., 2014 | Cattle, Brazil | 7,693 ± 5,193 | 540 ± 212 | 7.0 ± 0.2 | ||
| McCabe et al., 2013 | Cattle, Queensland | 163 to 7,020 | 1,040 to 12,100 | 5-2,110 | ||
| Musa et al., 2019 | Cattle | 17,158 ± 95 | 32,000 ±1 12 | 22,300 ± 212 | 1,024 ±212 | 6.9 ± 0.8 |
| Salminen, 2002 | Cattle, Finland | 3,100 to 4,100 | ||||
| Um et al., 2016 | Cattle, France | 2,570 ±11 | 1,860 ± 72 | 5,800 ± 14 | 7.6 | |
| United States Environmental | Cattle, first processing, | |||||
| Protection Agency, 2004 | rendering, U.S. | 7,237 | 1,153 | |||
| United States Environmental | Cattle, first processing, | |||||
| Protection Agency, 2004 | rendering, hides, U.S. | 3,673 to 6,404 | 1,510 to 3,332 | |||
| Wu & Mittal, 2012 | Cattle, Canada | 14,545 ± 5,802 | 50,665 ± 83,866 | 2,427 ± 3,386 | 7.0 ± 0.4 | |
| Wu & Mittal, 2012 | Swine, Canada | 4,711 ± 2,356 | 10,010 ± 6,188 | 1,521 ± 4,160 | 7.0 ± 0.6 | |
| Ziara et al., 2018 | Cattle, U.S. mid-size | 1,486 ± 831 | 4,185 ± 2,141 | 4,973 ± 2,526 | 269 ±196 | 7.9 ± 0.9 |
| Ziara et al., 2018 | Cattle, U.S. large-size | 1,090 ± 314 | 2,758 ± 856 | 2,767 ± 510 | 106 ±153 | 7.4 ± 1.1 |
Table 3. Swine slaughterhouse wastewater characteristics reported by researchers.
| Source | Animals slaughtered | BOD mg/l | COD mg/l | TSS mg/l | Oils mg/l | pH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bui, 2018 | Swine, Vietnam | 4,150 ± 30 | 176 ± 23 | 6.53 ± .15 | ||
| Ha & Huong, 2017 | Swine, Vietnam | 3,200 to 5,100 | 6.1 to 7.0 | |||
| João et al., 2020 | Swine, Brazil | 3,018 | 4,380 | 1,000 | 100 | |
| Masse & Masse, 2001 | Swine, Canada | 2,333 to 8,627 | 4.9 to 7.2 | |||
| Oliveira et al., 2017 | Swine, Brazil | 2,429 ± 2,180 | 7,176 ± 4,631 | 7.8 ± 0.3 | ||
| Park et al., 2012 | Swine, USA (Iowa) | 5,732 ± 1,522 | 7,864 ± 4,294 | 2,355 ± 1,321 | 5.64 ± 0.26 | |
| Salminen, 2002 | Swine, Finland | 340 to 980 | ||||
| Villarroel Hipp & | ||||||
| Silva Rodriguez, 2018 | Swine, Chile | 9,610 | 18,625 | |||
| Wu & Mittal, 2012 | Swine, Canada | 4,711 ± 2,356 | 10,010 ± 6,188 | 1,521 ± 4,160 | 7.0 ± 0.6 |
Table 4. Poultry slaughterhouse wastewater characteristics reported by researchers.
| Source | Animals slaughtered | BOD mg/l | COD mg/l | TSS mg/l | Oils mg/l | pH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aziz et al., 2018 | Poultry, Malaysia | 573 to 1,177 | 777 to 1,825 | 395 to 783 | 2,362 to 3,616 | 6.3 to 6.9 |
| Bazrafshan et al., 2012 | Poultry, Iran | 2,543 ± 362 | 5,817 ± 473 | 3,247 ± 845 | 34 ± 9 | 7.31 ± 0.12 |
| Delforno et al., 2017 | Poultry, Brazil | 1,790 to 4,760 | 2,133 | 114 to 640 | ||
| Meiramkulova et al. 2020. | Poultry, Kazakhstan | 653 | 2,042 | 116 | 7.4 | |
| Pierson & Pavlostathis, 2000 | Poultry, U.S. | 2,319 | 2,000 | 6.7 | ||
| Rajakumar et al., 2011 | Poultry, India | 750 to 1,890 | 3,000 to 4,800 | 300 to 950 | 800 to 1,385 | 7 to 7.6 |
| Ramdani et al., 2019 | Poultry, Indonesia | 676 to 770 | ||||
| Salminen, 2002 | Poultry, Finland | 730 | ||||
| Septiana et al., 2019 | Poultry, Indonesia | 3,216 | 6,406 | |||
| Wu & Mittal, 2012 | Poultry, Canada | 1,648 ± 859 | 3,321 ± 2,234 | ND | 7.0 ± 0.3 |
Definition of terms
- BOD – Biological Oxygen Demand – the amount of oxygen consumed by microorganisms during the decomposition of organic matter.
- COD – Chemical Oxygen Demand – the amount of oxygen equivalents consumed through the chemical oxidation of organic matter.
- TSS – Total Suspended Solids – particles larger than 2 microns.
Conclusion
Design of a slaughterhouse facility can be a challenging process including many unknowns, estimates and guesses. Making informed choices on design parameters, like water use requirements and wastewater characteristics, will help improve project success. This fact sheet provides a summary of water use and wastewater characteristics collected and reported by reliable references. Contact fapc@okstate.edu for assistance or additional information.
References
- 5m. (2009). Environmental Issues Control Slaughter Production. The Pig Site. Retrieved 12/23 from thepigsite.com/articles/environmental-issues-control-slaughter-production
- Aziz, H. A., Puat, N. N. A., Alazaiza, M. Y. D., & Hung, Y. T. (2018). Poultry Slaughterhouse Wastewater Treatment Using Submerged Fibers in an Attached Growth Sequential Batch Reactor. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15081734
- Bazrafshan, E., Mostafapour, F. K., Farzadkia, M., Ownagh, K. A., & Mahvi, A. H. (2012). Slaughterhouse wastewater treatment by combined chemical coagulation and electrocoagulation process. PloS ONE, 7(6), e40108.
- Bui, H. M. (2018). Applying Response Surface Methodology to Optimize the Treatment of Swine Slaughterhouse Wastewater by Electrocoagulation. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 27(5).
- Cassidy, D. P., & Belia, E. (2005). Nitrogen and phosphorus removal from an abattoir wastewater in a SBR with aerobic granular sludge. Water Research, 39(19), 4817-4823. doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2005.09.025
- Delforno, T. P., Lacerda Junior, G. V., Noronha, M. F., Sakamoto, I. K., Varesche, M. B. A., & Oliveira, V. M. (2017). Microbial diversity of a full-scale UASB reactor applied to poultry slaughterhouse wastewater treatment: integration of 16S rRNA gene amplicon and shotgun metagenomic sequencing. Microbiologyopen, 6(3). doi.org/10.1002/mbo3.443
- Gil, M. I., & Allende, A. (2018). Water and wastewater use in the fresh produce industry: food safety and environmental implications. In Quantitative Methods for Food Safety and Quality in the Vegetable Industry (pp. 59-76). Springer
- Ha, B. M., & Huong, D. T. G. (2017). Coagulation for treatment of swine slaughterhouse wastewater.
- Husam, A.N., & Nassar, A. (2019). Slaughterhouses Waste-water Characteristics in the Gaza Strip. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 11(07), 844.
- João, J. J., Silva, C. S. d., Vieira, J. L., & Silveira, M. F. d. (2020). Treatment of swine wastewater using the Fenton process with ultrasound and recycled iron. Revista Ambiente & Água, 15(3).
- Maroneze, M. M., Barin, J. S., Menezes, C. R. d., Queiroz, M. I., Zepka, L. Q., & Jacob-Lopes, E. (2014). Treatment of cattle-slaughterhouse wastewater and the reuse of sludge for biodiesel production by microalgal heterotrophic bioreactors. Scientia Agricola, 71(6), 521-524.
- Masse, D. I., & Masse, L. (2001). The effect of temperature on slaughterhouse wastewater treatment in anaerobic sequencing batch reactors. Bioresource Technology, 76(2), 91-98.
- Matsumura, E., & Mierzwa, J. (2008). Water conservation and reuse in poultry processing plant—A case study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 52(6), 835-842.
- McCabe, B., Harris, P., Baillie, C., Pittaway, P., & Yusaf, T. (2013). Assessing a new approach to covered anaerobic pond design in the treatment of abattoir wastewater. Australian Journal of Multi-Disciplinary Engineering, 10(1), 81-93.
- Musa, M. A., Idrus, S., Che Man, H., & Nik Daud, N. N. (2019). Performance comparison of conventional and modified upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactors treating high-strength cattle slaughterhouse wastewater. Water, 11(4), 806.
- Oliveira, J. F. d., Rodrigues, F. N., Fia, R., Mafra, D. C., & Lan-dim, D. V. (2017). Percolate quality in soil cultivated with application of wastewater from swine slaughterhouse and dairy products. Engenharia Agrícola, 37(6), 1222-1235.
- Park, J., Oh, J. H., & Ellis, T. G. (2012). Evaluation of an on-site pilot static granular bed reactor (SGBR) for the treatment of slaughterhouse wastewater. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng, 35(3), 459-468. doi.org/10.1007/s00449-011-0585-0
- Pierson, J. A., & Pavlostathis, S. G. (2000). Real-Time Monitoring and Control of Sequencing Batch Reactors for Secondary Treatment of a Poultry Processing Wastewater. Water Environment Research, 72(5), 585-592.
- Rajakumar, R., Meenambal, T., Banu, J. R., & Yeom, I. (2011). Treatment of poultry
slaughterhouse wastewater in upflow anaerobic filter under low upflow velocity. International
Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 8(1), 149-158. - Ramdani, F., Prasetya, A., & Purnomo, C. (2019). Removal of pollutants from chicken slaughterhouse wastewater us-ing constructed wetland system. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science,
- Salminen, E. (2002). Finnish expert report on best available techniques in slaughterhouses and installations for the disposal or recycling of animal carcasses and animal waste.
- Septiana, I., Siami, L., Tazkiaturrizki, T., Hadisoebroto, R., & Ratnaningsih, R. (2019). Analysis of load variation on chicken slaughterhouse waste water treatment using GAS-SBR. Journal of Physics: Conference Series,
- Stover, E. L. (1974). Studies on the Performance of Biological Nitrification Processes for the Removal of Nitrogenous Oxygen Demand from Wastewaters Oklahoma State University].
- Um, M. M., Barraud, O., Kérourédan, M., Gaschet, M., Stalder, T., Oswald, E., Dagot, C., Ploy, M.-C., Brugère, H., & Bib-bal, D. (2016). Comparison of the incidence of pathogenic and antibiotic-resistant Escherichia coli strains in adult cattle and veal calf slaughterhouse effluents highlighted different risks for public health. Water Research, 88, 30-38.
- United States Environmental Protection Agency, E. a. A. D. (2004). Technical Development Document for the Final Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Meat and Poultry Products Point Source Category (40 CFR 432) (EPA-821-R-04-011). epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-1
- Villarroel Hipp, M. P., & Silva Rodriguez, D. (2018). Bioremediation of piggery slaughterhouse
wastewater using the
marine protist, Thraustochytrium kinney VAL-B1. J Adv Res, 12, 21-26. doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2018.01.010 - Wu, P. F., & Mittal, G. S. (2012). Characterization of provincially inspected slaughterhouse
wastewater in Ontario, Canada.
Canadian Biosystems Engineering, 54. - Ziara, R. (2015). Water and Energy Use and Wastewater Production in a Beef Packing Plant.
- Ziara, R. M. M., Li, S., Subbiah, J., & Dvorak, B. I. (2018). Characterization of Wastewater in Two U.S. Cattle Slaughterhouses. Water Environment Research, 90(9), 851-863. https://doi.org/10.2175/106143017X1513101218797
Timothy Bowser
Food Process Engineer
Jacob Nelson
Value-Added Meat Processing Specialist