NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

22-Agric-B11 Principles of Waste Management · May 2015

Question 5 of 5: Nitrogen-Based Land Application Rate

Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)

Notes on this paper

National Exams — 04-Agric-B11, Principles of Waste Management — May 2015. 3-hour duration, open-book exam. Answer Question 1 plus any three of Questions 2 to 5; all five questions are answered below as a complete study resource.

Reference texts: Tchobanoglous, Burton & Stensel, Metcalf & Eddy Wastewater Engineering: Treatment and Resource Recovery; MWPS-18, Livestock Waste Facilities Handbook (MidWest Plan Service); Rynk et al., On-Farm Composting Handbook (NRAES-54); Sommer & Christensen (eds.), Animal Manure Recycling: Treatment and Management.

Question 5: Nitrogen-Based Land Application Rate (25 marks)

Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.

Given.

QuantityValue
Total manure volume10,000 m³
Solids content4 wt% (not needed once fertilizer values are given per m³)
Organic N1.0 kg/m³
NH4+-N0.3 kg/m³
NO3--N0 kg/m³
Ammonia volatilization factor30% (subsurface application still applies since it is stated as a fixed factor)
Organic-N mineralization40% yr 1, 20% yr 2, 5% yr 3+
Starter nitrogen15 kg/ha
Corn nitrogen uptake120 kg/ha

Find. The steady-state annual application rate (m³/ha) and the land area required (ha).

Approach. Under continuous annual application, by year 2 the field carries nitrogen credit from two cohorts of manure: the current year's fresh application (mineralizing at the year-1 rate) plus the residual organic nitrogen from the prior year's application (now mineralizing at the year-2 rate) — build the per-m³ available-nitrogen figure from both cohorts plus the ammonium fraction that survives volatilization, then size the application rate against the crop's net nitrogen demand.

  1. Available nitrogen per m³ of manure at year-2 steady state. Every m³ applied contributes ammonium nitrogen that survives volatilization, $NH_4(1-0.30)$, plus organic nitrogen mineralized in its own first year, $N_{org}(0.40)$; at steady state the identical application made the PRIOR year now contributes a second increment as its organic nitrogen continues mineralizing at the year-2 rate, $N_{org}(0.20)$: $$N_{avail} = NH_4(1-f_{volat}) + N_{org}(f_{yr1}) + N_{org}(f_{yr2})$$ $$N_{avail} = 0.3(1-0.30) + 1.0(0.40) + 1.0(0.20) = 0.21+0.40+0.20 = \boxed{0.81\ \text{kg N/m}^3}$$
  2. Net nitrogen the manure must supply. The starter nitrogen already covers part of the corn's demand, so $$N_{needed} = N_{crop} - N_{starter} = 120-15 = \boxed{105\ \text{kg/ha}}$$
  3. Annual application rate. $$\text{Rate} = \frac{N_{needed}}{N_{avail}} = \frac{105}{0.81} = \boxed{129.6\ \text{m}^3/\text{ha}}$$
  4. Land area requirement. $$A = \frac{V_{total}}{\text{Rate}} = \frac{10{,}000}{129.6} = \boxed{77.1\ \text{ha}}$$
QuantityResult
Available N per m³ (year-2 steady state)0.81 kg N/m³
Net N required from manure105 kg/ha
Annual application rate129.6 m³/ha
Land area required77.1 ha

2) Potential environmental impacts of land application: even at an agronomically nitrogen-balanced rate, subsurface-applied liquid manure carries real risk of nitrate leaching to groundwater if mineralization in a wet year outpaces crop uptake, of surface-water contamination from runoff or tile drainage if application precedes a heavy rainfall, of phosphorus over-application since manure is rarely balanced to match a P-based rather than N-based agronomic rate and P accumulates in soil over repeated seasons, of residual ammonia volatilization and odour even for subsurface injection at the injection slot, and of long-term soil-structure and pathogen concerns from repeated heavy liquid loading on the same field. A nutrient-management plan that tracks cumulative loading (not just the single-year N balance solved above) is the standard control for these risks.

Back to the paper →