Original source · versioned page text
Further information from consultant MCU12/0184
Very large file: it may take a few minutes
The original of this document is very large (35.8 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty LId 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Further Information Request of 19 November 2013 -
Noise,
Dust & Odour Issues -
Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L26013/BH/12-002
GHD Covered Windrow3: Average 0.4 OU/m2/second for
covered windrow
Peak 1.2 OU/m2/second for top
section of covered windrow
ERM Gerogery4: Varying odour emission from Week 1
to Week 5 including flux hood
correction, as follows:
Table 1: Surface Odour Emission Rate Derived from ERM Gerogery
Actual SOER for Full Surface of Stockpiles
With Flux Hood Correction FactorS
Surface Odour Emission Rate - OU/m2/sec
PARAMETER
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 WeekS
SOER Measured by Flux Hood 7.7 1 .1 0.36 0.85 0.07
Correction for Flux Hood Diversion 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 4.6
Modelled SOER 107.0 15.3 5.0 11.8 0.3
Whilst the above comparative data does not definitively quantify odour emissions
from the proposed stockpiling activities, the data does indicate that the MWA
Environmental modelled odour emission rates are comparable to published data for
composting windrows, including measurement by wind tunnel instead of flux hood
sampling.
The updated modelling has considered the overall odour impacts from the proposed
development including the following litter stockpile odour emission rate scenarios:
A. Poultry Sheds Only i.e. no litter stockpiling
B. Previously applied stockpile odour emission rate of 5.8 OU/m2/second;
C. Stockpile odour emission rate of 53.3 OU/m2/second based upon the ’10
times higher’ aged stockpile sample referenced in the SCRC information
request; and
D. Stockpile odour emission rates as per Table 1 above (derived from ERM,
2013) varying from 107 OU/m2/second for Week 1 to 0.3 OU/m2/second for
Week 5.
The results of the modelling are presented in Attachment 2.
3
Pollock, T. (2009)Odour Emission rate Measurements on Green-waste Windrows, 19th Int. Clean Air
& Environment Conference. ~
4
Resource Recovery Facility Gerogery Odour Impact Assessment (Environmental Resources
V ~~
-
-
Management Australia, August 2013) including references to Environmental Impact Statement
(Report Number 31/29006/180436 Organic Compost Facility Environmental Impact Statement, (GHD,
-
October 2012)
,
I 5
" Correction factors were noted by the author to be likely overestimates due to the method applied
6
"
"
~
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Very large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.