Monitoring Poultry Processing Waste Water with Total

Organic Carbon
W. K. WHITEHEAD
Environmental Engineering Laboratory, Southern Region, Agricultural Research Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Richard B. Russell Agricultural Research Center, P.O. Box 5677, Athens,
Georgia 30604
(Received for publication July 2, 1975)

ABSTRACT BOD5, COD and total organic carbon were measured in the waste water from

Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on February 18, 2016
six locations in a poultry processing plant and from a processing plant's waste treatment facility.
Total organic carbon correlated with BOD, and COD and was a good indication of the waste
treatment facility efficiency.
POULTRY SCIENCE 55: 679-684, 1976

T HE 5-day biochemical oxygen demand

and chemical oxygen demand tests are
the primary methods poultry processors have
to characterize the wastes generated in their
plants and measure the wastes discharged to
streams or sewers. Both tests are widely
accepted but have major limitations and
serious disadvantages. Total organic carbon
(TOC) analysis offers many advantages and
eliminates some of the variables involved with
BOD5 and COD tests.
The concept of BOD is usually defined
as "the amount of oxygen that bacteria re-
quire while stabilizing decomposable organic
materials under aerobic conditions" (Salvato,
1972). It is a valid and logical means of
assessing the efficiency of waste treatment
facilities and the effects of waste waters on
receiving streams. However, the BOD 5 test
requires 5 days to complete an analysis and
this time lag makes it useless for correcting
faults or making immediate process changes
to eliminate or reduce waste discharges. To
shorten the analysis time it is important to
develop correlations between BOD 5 , COD
and TOC.
Total organic carbon concentration is a
valid estimate of biological oxygen demand
and may be correlated to BOD 5 and COD
in many applications (Emery et al., 1971;
Ford, 1968; Robbins et al., 1972; Schaffer
et al., 1965). However, correlating TOC with
either of the other two parameters is not
without limitations. For many industrial
waste products, some of the COD is attributed
to the dichromate oxidation of oxygen-con-
suming inorganics while the TOC analysis
does not include oxidation of these com-
pounds. The BOD 5 and COD tests exclude
many organic compounds which are partially
or totally resistant to biochemical or dichro-
mate oxidation. Organic carbon in these com-
pounds is included in the TOC analysis. The
BOD 5 test is highly susceptible to such vari-
ables as seed acclimation, temperature, dilu-
tion effects, pH and toxic substances (Ford,
1968).
The ratios, COD/TOC and BOD 5 /TOC,
have been observed to decrease with biologi-
cal oxidation of municipal and industrial
waste waters (Blackmore and Voshel, 1967;
Ford, 1968) and with swine waste effluents
(Robbins et al., 1972). This decrease, how-
ever, can be attributed to the formation of
intermediate compounds during the biolog-
ical process without conversion of the organ-
ic matter to carbon dioxide and to greater
BOD reaction rate in raw waste than in treated
effluent.
TOC is useful as a control parameter be-
cause of the short analysis time (Blackmore
and Voshel, 1967; Hwang et al, 1974; Jones,
1972a) and is useful for mass balance calcula-
tions (Schaffer et al., 1965). Robbins et al.

679
680 W. K. WHITEHEAD
(1972) reported that the TOC test was better
than the BOD5 test in correlating with other
waste parameters (fecal coliform, total (Kjel-
dahl) nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen and phos-
phorus) for land runoff water. Jones (1972b)
found TOC to be effective for monitoring
tertiary treatment process efficiency.
We now report the findings of studies
conducted to determine the usefulness of total
organic carbon as an indicator of the waste
in poultry processing waste waters.
PROCEDURE
Grab samples of the waste waters of a
commercial poultry processing plant (9600
broilers/hr.) were taken at six locations as
shown in Table 1. Weekly for 6 weeks samples
were collected in the mornings during normal
plant operation at least two hours after the
plant began processing (Whitehead, 1974).
Analyses performed were BOD 5 , COD, TOC,
fat, total and volatile solids, and total and
volatile suspended solids. All analyses were
performed according to current water pollu-
tion control standards (A.P.H.A., 1971). TOC
analyses were made with an Oceanography
International total carbon system equipped
with a direct injection module.
Waste water samples were collected from
a second processing plant with a 4-lagoon
waste treatment system. This plant processed
about 90,000 broilers daily, five days a week
during the sampling period. The amount of
water discharged from the waste treatment
lagoons was measured with a 90° V-notch
TABLE 1.—Summary of data' for raw wastes from one commercial poultry processing plant
BOD 5 COT)
Area mg./liter mg./liter
Eviscerating trough 1522 2389
Whole bird chiller 830 1175
Giblet chiller 1251 1570
Scalder 1044 1678
Offal truck 7050 12052
Final effluent 1116 1691
'Values are averages of 6 weekly determinations.
weir a n d averaged about 13,225 m. 3 (3,494,000
gal.)/week(2645 m . 3 / d a y f o r a f i v e - d a y work
w e e k ) . T h e raw w a s t e water f r o m t h e plant
w a s discharged into a lagoon e q u i p p e d with
three aerators (Fig. 1). D i s c h a r g e from this
pond flowed to a second p o n d e q u i p p e d with
a single aerator. T w o m o r e n o n - a e r a t e d p o n d s
were in series with the first t w o . G r a b and
24-hour composite samples of t h e r a w w a s t e
water from the plant and the treated waste
water discharged from the t r e a t m e n t system
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on February 18, 2016
w e r e collected weekly for 18 w e e k s . Samples
were collected on W e d n e s d a y or T h u r s d a y
of e a c h week and were analyzed for B O D 5 ,
C O D , T O C , fat, total and volatile solids, total
and volatile suspended solids a n d total Kjel-
dahl nitrogen ( A . P . H . A . , 1971). In addition,
for five w e e k s during the 18 w e e k sampling
period, grab samples were collected from
effluents of ponds 1, 2 and 3.
RESULTS
A s u m m a r y of the data from the samples
collected at six locations in a processing plant
(Table 1) showed that C O D was greatest at
all locations, with B O D 5 and T O C following
in order. The C O D / T O C ratio for all loca-
tions was larger than the molecular ratio of
oxygen to c a r b o n , 2.66 ( 3 2 / 1 2 ) , a n d the
BOD5/TOC ratios were greater than the
calculated relationship, BOD5/TOC =
( 3 2 / 1 2 ) (0.90) (0.77) = 1.85, w h e r e the ulti-
mate B O D is a s s u m e d to be approximately
9 0 % of the theoretical oxygen d e m a n d , and
the B O D 5 is 7 7 % of the ultimate B O D .
TOC
mg./liter BOD 5 /TOC COD/TOC
262 9.42 11.92
175 5.62 7.54
269 5.17 6.04
396 2.93 4.83
2231 3.60 5.80
216 5.63 8.20
 TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON IN WASTE WATER 681

;
?AW WASTEWATER
; FROM PROCESSING
/ PL ANT

Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on February 18, 2016
TREATED
EFFLUENT
DISCHARGED
TO STREAM

SAMPLE POINT

FIG. 1. Layout of processing plant stabilization ponds.

18

16

14

12

o
o
2 10
X
MG/LITER
CO

/ C O D - 5 8 4 »4.80 TOC
" / R*-0.92
6
§ / S
r-„=II80

12 16 20 24 28 16 20 24 28
TOC. MG/LITER X 100 T O C . MG/LITER X 100

FIG. 2. Relationship between BOD3 and total FIG. 3. Relationship between COD and total or-
organic carbon for raw poultry processing waste ganic carbon for raw poultry processing waste
water. waters.
 W. K. WHITEHEAD

Correlations were significant between

BOD 5 and TOC and between COD and TOC
o\ososo\ for raw poultry processing waste waters
(Figs. 2 and 3). Additional analyses showed
(N oo -—«r-
that for the raw waste waters, TOC also
correlated significantly with fat, total solids,
total suspended solids, total volatile solids
and total volatile suspended solids.
The first pond in the waste treatment sys-
tem removed 92.7% of the total BOD 5 , but

Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on February 18, 2016
the data show the second pond did not remove
any BOD 5 and, in fact, caused it to increase
(Table 2). The complete waste treatment
system removed 97.1% of the BOD 5 . COD
was reduced in each pond, and in the final
effluent 90.7% had been removed. Reduc-
tions of TOC were not as great as of BOD 5
or COD; only 70% was removed in the first
8^ »n ^f ^ r*i m
pond and 83.7% had been removed in the
final effluent.
go o^ o —i —• o The BOD 5 /TOC ratio (Table 2) from Pond
1 was only one-fourth the ratio for the raw
waste. Pond 2 effluent ratio increased but
IS the ratios for ponds 3 and 4 both decreased.
BOD 5 /TOC ratio decreased from 3.40 for
raw waste to 0.58 for the treated waste in
r-r- ^o \o 10
gig! r t ——
the final effluent. The COD/TOC ratio
showed the same general trend and decreased

m from 5.51 for the raw waste to 3.01 in the

final effluent.
Correlations were significant between

m -*}• O — O <N BOD5 and TOC and between COD and TOC
for the combined raw and treated wastes from
this processing plant (Figs. 4 and 5). Correla-
tions also were significant between TOC and
v£) ^ f <o r*i *—
qo E - fat, total solids, total suspended solids, total
volatile solids and total volatile suspended
solids.
From the plot of the BOD 5 , COD and TOC
in the effluent from the treatment system
over a period of 18 weeks (Fig. 6), COD
appears to be more variable than BOD5 or
IIII^ TOC. However, based on the coefficient of
variability (C. V.), COD was the least variable
J-Nr
parameter (C.V. = 24.6%); TOC was inter-
-, O O
§1 mediate (C.V. = 25.4%); and BOD 5 was the
CL.B.
 TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON IN WASTE WATER
100 150
TOC. MG/LITER
FIG. 4. Relationship between BOD5 and total
organic carbon in wastewater samples from a
poultry processing plant's stabilization ponds.
COD- - 5 * 4 . 5 9
R ! . 0.80
100 150 200
TOC. MG/LITER
FIG. 5. Relationship between COD and total or-
ganic carbon in wastewater samples from a poultry
processing plant's stabilization ponds.
most variable parameter (C.V. = 34.4%).
TOC closely follows the pattern of both COD
and BOD 5 ; increasing or decreasing simulta-
neously with COD 76% of the time and with
683
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on February 18, 2016
FIG. 6. BOD5, COD, and TOC effluent con-
centration from a poultry processing plant's stabi-
lization ponds.
BOD 5 71% of the time.
The efficiency of the waste treatment sys-
tem as indicated by BOD 5 , COD and TOC
is shown in Fig. 7. On all sample days, except
one, BOD 5 removal was more efficient than
either COD or TOC and similarly, COD
removal was more efficient than TOC remov-
al. The TOC curve followed the same pattern
as the COD graph 71% of the days and the
same pattern as BOD5 65% of the sample
TOC
days.
DISCUSSION
Total organic carbon can be used as a
parameter of the wastes in poultry processing
waste waters. It was a good indicator of the
efficiency of a waste water treatment facility
even though the BOD 5 /TOC ratio decreased
with increased biological treatment. Given the
expected values of the BOD 5 /TOC ratios
(from previous analyses) the BOD5 efficiency
of a waste treatment facility can be rapidly
determined by TOC analysis of the raw waste
water and the treated effluent.
684 W. K. WHITEHEAD
10 20 10 20 31 10
-JULY- -AUGUST- -—SEPTEMBER——
FIG. 7. Waste removal efficiency of a poultry processing plant's stabilization ponds.
The BOD 5 /TOC ratios for the raw wastes
were greater than one, indicating, as was
shown by the BOD 5 efficiency of the stabi-
lization ponds, that the poultry processing
wastes were easily biodegradable. The lower
efficiency of the stabilization ponds as indi-
cated by TOC compared to either BOD 5 or
COD is a good indication that a reduction
in BOD 5 , or COD, is not always reflected
by a similar reduction in TOC.
REFERENCES
American Public Health Association, 1971. Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste-
water. American Public Health Association, New
York, N.Y.
Blackmore, R. H., and D. Voshel, 1967. Rapid deter-
mination of total organic carbon (TOC) in sewage.
Water and Sewage Works, 114: 398-401.
Emery, R. M., E. B. Welch and R. F. Christman,
1971. The total organic carbon analyzer and its
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on February 18, 2016
20 30 10 20 31 10 20
OCTOBER-—-NOVEMBER-
application to water research. J. Water Poll. Con.
Fed. 43: 1834-1844.
Ford, D. L., 1968. Application of the total carbon
analyzer for industrial wastewater evaluation. Proc.
23rd Purdue Industrial Waste Conf., pp. 989-999.
Hwang. C. P., G. Goos and E. Davis, 1974. Technique
cuts BOD and TOC calculations to five minutes.
Water and Poll. Con. 112 (3): 28, 29, 62.
Jones, R. H., 1972a. Speeds waste analysis. Food
Eng. 44: 107-108.
Jones. R. H., 1972b. TOC analyses for monitoring
tertiary treatment process efficiency. Water and
Sewage Works, 119: 72-74.
Robbins, J. W. D., G. J. Kriz and D. H. Howells,
1972. Total organic carbon determinations on swine
effluents. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng. 15: 105-109.
Salvato, J. A., Jr., 1972. Environmental Engineering
and Sanitation. Wiley-Interscience, New York.
Schaffer, R. B., C. E. Van Hall, G. N. McDermott,
D. Barth, V. A. Stenger, S. J. Sebesta and S. H.
Griggs, 1965. Application of a carbon analyzer in
waste treatment. J. Water Poll. Con. Fed. 37:
1545-1566.
Whitehead, W. K., 1974. Analysis of some physical
properties of poultry processing chiller effluent.
Poultry Sci. 53: 571-574.