See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/315815275

GETTING ENERGY FROM POULTRY WASTE IN JORDAN: CLEANER

PRODUCTION APPROACH

Article · March 2017

CITATIONS READS

18 2,632

4 authors, including:

Motasem Saidan Hussam Khasawneh

University of Jordan University of Jordan
87 PUBLICATIONS   1,436 CITATIONS    34 PUBLICATIONS   268 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Waste Management in MENA Regions, edited by Abdelazim Negm and Noama Shareef View project

Cam-less internal combustion engine View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Motasem Saidan on 07 April 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal
Motasem of Chemical
Saidan, Hussam J.Technology
Khasawneh,andMohammad
Metallurgy,Tayyem,
52, 3, 2017, 595-601Hawari
Mohammed

GETTING ENERGY FROM POULTRY WASTE IN JORDAN:

CLEANER PRODUCTION APPROACH

Motasem Saidan1,2, Hussam J. Khasawneh2,3, Mohammad Tayyem4, Mohammed Hawari4

1
The University of Jordan, School of Engineering Received 24 January 2017
Chemical Engineering Department Accepted 06 March 2017
Amman 11942, Jordan
E-­mail: m.saidan@gmail.com, m.saidan@ju.edu.jo
2
Water, Energy and Environment Center
The University of Jordan, Amman, 11942, Jordan
3
The University of Jordan, School of Engineering
Mechatronics Engineering Department
Amman 11942, Jordan
4
The University of Jordan, School of Engineering
Program of Environmental Engineering
and Climate Change (MAPEC)
Amman 11942, Jordan

ABSTRACT

Reducing environmental impacts and getting economic benefits, based on the waste utilization, and on the re-
duction of both energy consumption and organic load, was the driver of the implementation of cleaner production
assessment in a poultry industry and its related processes. The main objective of this study is to examine the feasibil-
ity of using poultry litter as a source of energy to cover the heating demand of Poultry Company’s slaughterhouse.
Poultry litter enters the cooking stage to produce the fat-oil for the fuel burning stage. The results showed that the
critical price of poultry litter is 46.7 JOD per ton, below which it becomes feasible to utilize this waste as a source
of energy. However, the daily monetary saving was found to be strongly affected by the prices of both poultry litter
and diesel. Another revenue can be generated from the fertilizer value of the poultry waste-to-energy ash. However,
this depends on several technical and market factors that need further clarification.
Keywords: poultry litter, slaughterhouse, steam boiler, energy, eco-efficiency, cleaner production.

INTRODUCTION Facilities should find CP assessment instrumental

The cleaner production (CP) is an in-depth review of
existing operations to increase efficiency of the operation
through pollution prevention and energy conservation
[1, 2]. The CP is an essential and valuable tool used to:
(1) define the specific characteristics of a whole facility
or operation that consumes energy and generates waste,
(2) identify a range of energy conservation and pollution
prevention options, (3) evaluate the options based on a
set of criteria, and (4) select the most promising options
for implementation.
to systematically identifying opportunities to increase
energy efficiency and decrease waste generation. Conse-
quently, this leads to a positive change in the sustainable
production and consumption [3 - 6]. It is a well-used
and proven approach to identifying cost-saving energy
conservation and pollution prevention technologies that
enhance the facility’s performance.
The agro-food industry provides interesting oppor-
tunities for the application of this concept, in particular,
due to the energy and water consumption levels and
wastes generated [7, 8].

595
 Journal of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy, 52, 3, 2017
Jordanian statistics in 2013 indicates the availability
of around 2125 chicken farms [9]. Excess biomass is
readily available on a poultry operation; this poultry lit-
ter is a viable and renewable energy source with heating
value average around 9550 kJ/kg [10, 11], at the same
time 96 % of energy supply in Jordan is imported [12].
Solid waste management is currently a crucial
subject in Jordan. The solid waste generation is ex-
pected to increase on account of development activities,
population growth, and changing patterns of Jordanian
consumption behavior by approximately 3 % per year
[13 - 16]. In addition, changes in public awareness will
affect it [17].
However, poultry-waste-to-energy has the capacity
to increase air pollution and to negatively impact environ-
mental justice and health if environmentally sound man-
agement and best practices are not considered [18, 19].
Poultry litter is a mixture of heads, feet, intestines,
blood, and feathers. According to literature, the uses
of poultry litter as a land fertilizer are constrained due
to risks of water pollution (from leachate and runoff),
and spread of diseases. On the other hand, pyrolysis of
poultry litter by applying thermo-chemical techniques
produces usable energy and destroys microorganisms.
The aim of this study is to provide an initial cost-
benefit analysis for the efficiency of recovering heat from
poultry litter produced at poultry company’s facilities
as an alternative source to meet the heating demands
of the company’s slaughterhouse. Moreover, it is also
examined the feasibility of using the simple pyrolysis
technique to produce fat-oil from poultry litter (heads,
feet, intestines, blood, and feathers).
MATERIALS AND METODS
The assessment presented in this paper has been
carried out following the Guide to Industrial Assess-
ment for Pollution Prevention and Energy Efficiency in
order to facilitate it [20]. In this paper, a poultry factory
located in Al-Karak Governorate in Jordan, was chosen
as a case study. The company is engaged in the operation
of poultry farms, slaughterhouses, breeder and broiler
farms, hatcheries, and feed mills. The company manu-
factures packs, trades, markets, and distributes poultry
products, namely eggs and chicken feed. Products of this
company are distributed throughout the whole country.
According to its annual report, the factory’s produc-
596
tion of poultry meat has experienced a slight increase in
year 2014 to reach 30,629 ton in comparison to 30,230
ton in year 2013. Nevertheless, the factory’s annual
report for the year 2013 has shown a number of difficul-
ties facing the company, which hamper the company’s
growth. Difficulties include rising competition among
slaughter shops, fluctuating prices of feeds globally,
swamping the local market with imported frozen chicken
leading to a higher competition between suppliers, in-
creasing fuel prices globally, and the emergence of new
companies in this industry. All of these difficulties have
led to an increase in production and drop in prices. Thus,
this factory works hard to reduce the cost of production,
which eventually could increase its profit.
Several detailed visits were carried out to collect
necessary data and establish the material, water and
energy flow analyses. The assessment was focused on
the slaughterhouse to examine the status of current boiler
systems for the future utilization of poultry litter as a
source of energy.
All data regarding the daily poultry production, per-
centage of poultry litter, average daily production of fat-
oil, average price per ton of poultry litter, and daily diesel
demand were collected and used for calculations. The
average diesel price for the year 2014 was 0.685 JOD/L
(1 USD equals 0.71 JOD). This number was obtained
from the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources and
therefore it was used as the reference price for diesel.
POULTRY PROCESS DESCRIPTION
As shown in Fig. 1, chickens are normally transported
from several farms and delivered in loose boxes (crates)
via lorries. During the transportation, the crates, which
are made from plastic and have a rectangular shape, are
normally contaminated with manure wastes. Conse-
quently, the manure contamination increases the amount
of organic effluent produced during the automated crate
washing equipment after delivery of the chickens.
Having arrived at the slaughterhouse (killing area),
the chickens are hung upside down by their feet on a
metallic conveyor which moves them towards the stun-
ning machine (30-40 volt) and the stunned chickens are
moved to the killing line. After being killed, the chicken
is bled for up to two minutes while moving on the con-
veyor. The blood is collected in tank, and then it moves
through a specific channel.
 Motasem Saidan, Hussam J. Khasawneh, Mohammad Tayyem, Mohammed Hawari

Fig. 1. Poultry factory’s process flow diagram.

Fig. 2. Poultry factory’s process flow diagram.

After bleeding is complete, the chickens are trans-
ferred via conveyors to the de-feathering stage, in
which they are immersed in a scald tank (56 - 58oC) to
facilitate the mechanical de-feathering process. So, the
de-feathering stage comprises counter-rotating stainless
steel discs with rubber fingers mounted on them, as well
as, continuous water sprays are usually incorporated
within the machines for flushing-out feathers.
The removed feathers are taken to a collection point
via a fast-running water channel located below the ma-
chine. The collected feathers are then transferred to a
lorry using a conveyor belt. Other feathers, which escape
through water, can be collected in the grit chamber in
the preliminary wastewater treatment stage.

597
 Journal of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy, 52, 3, 2017

After that, the chickens are transferred via the con-
veyors to the evisceration stage (EV stage). In the EV
stage, the chicken’s head and feet are cut and removed,
and then the chicken is eviscerated automatically
whereby the internal organs are mechanically removed
using a device which is inserted into the opening and
the viscera are withdrawn. Another sucking system is
used to take out the lungs and make sure that there are
no blood and/or body liquids in the eviscerated chicken
body. A water spray system is used to wash the eviscer-
ated chicken internally and externally prior to chilling.
The chickens are unloaded, immersed and moved
through a counter-flow current in the pre-chiller followed
by screw chiller at temperature less than 5oC. After that
the chickens are dried. Rehanging of chickens is manu-
ally conducted on moving conveyors which pass through
air chilling room to reduce any contamination risk. The
chickens are then automatically weighed and classified
(fresh and/or frozen chicken, wrapping, partitioning,
cutting, and de-boning). After weighing and grading,
chickens are usually packed on polystyrene trays and
wrapped with transparent film. Then the packed poultry
products are cooled, frozen, and stored for shipping.
Table 1. Calculation for Fat-Oil Boiler.
However, as to the poultry litter, it enters the cooking
stage where it is cooked for 2.5 hours. Then it leaves
the system for cooling. Afterward, the yield is pressed
in a pressurized tank to produce the fat-oil for the fuel
burning stage. Fig. 2 shows the input-output process of
each process stage.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The cooked product contains 33 % (wt basis) of fat,
65 % (wt basis) of protein, and 2 % (wt basis) of residual
matter, which is finally pressed to produce fat-oil syrup
of which 19 % (wt basis) is fat in average. The average
production of poultry from the slaughterhouse reaches
up to 150 tons/day of which 25 % is poultry litter (ap-
proximately 37.5 tons of poultry litter per day). The
daily production of fat-oil syrup from the slaughterhouse
ranges between 1,800 to 2,000 liters, while the daily
quantity needed to meet all heating demands in the
slaughterhouse accounts for 4,500 liters. The specific
gravity of fat-oil is 0.87 with a heat content of 35.30
MJ/kg (97 % of diesel heat content (36.4 MJ/kg lower
heating value)).

Fat-Oil Boiler Value Unit

Average Daily Poultry Production 150 ton

Percentage of Poultry litter (Heads, Feet, Intestine,

25.00 %
Blood, and Feathers)

Daily Production of Poultry litter 37.50 ton

Average Daily Production of Fat-Oil 1,900 L

Fat-Oil Production per ton of Poultry litter 50.67 L/ton

Average Demand of Fat-Oil 4,500 L

Required Quantity of Fat-Oil (Shortage) 2,600 L

Required Quantity of Poultry litter (Demanded) 51.32 ton

Average Price per ton of Poultry litter 25.00 JOD

Average Daily Cost to Run the Fat-Oil Boiler 1,283 JOD

598
 Motasem Saidan, Hussam J. Khasawneh, Mohammad Tayyem, Mohammed Hawari

Table 2. Calculation for Diesel Boiler.

Diesel Boiler Value Unit

Daily Diesel Demand 3,500 L

Average Price of Diesel for the Year 2014 0.685 JOD/L

Average Daily Cost to Run the Boiler on Diesel 2,397 JOD

Table 3. Saving Calculation.

Saving Value (JOD)

Average Daily Cost to Run the Fat-Oil Boiler 1,283

Average Daily Cost to Run the Boiler on Diesel 2,397

Daily Saving 1,114

The average price of poultry litter ranges between
20 - 30 JOD/ton, while the average price of diesel for the
year 2014 is 0.685 JOD per liter. Therefore, by assuming
that no change occurs on diesel prices it is found that the
usage of poultry litter as a source of energy to run the
fat-oil boiler will result in a daily saving of 1,114 JOD.
Tables 1 and 2 show the findings of the data gathering
and analysis for fat-oil boiler and diesel boiler, respec-
tively. Accordingly, the resulting savings of poultry
waste-to-energy are calculated as shown in Table 3.
Figs. 3 and 4 show the variation in daily saving vs
the poultry litter price and the diesel price, respectively.
Using poultry waste as a feedstock to produce
electricity and/or process steam requires specialized
equipment, designs, and practices, but is technically
feasible using currently available technology. One
major drawback associated with any feasible system is
capital costs of the technology infrastructure and equip-
ment. Normally, 3 to 5-year return-on-investment (ROI)
is makes the project economically feasible. However,
currently there is no reported literature of an energy
producing system in poultry business and industries that
could provide enough adequate energy and would entail
a 3 to 5-year ROI.

Fig. 3. Daily saving vs poultry litter price (at diesel Fig. 4. Daily saving vs diesel price (at poultry litter price
price of 0.685 JOD/L). of 25JOD/ton).
599
 Journal of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy, 52, 3, 2017
Another economic advantage of using poultry-
waste-to-energy is the utilization of the nutrient-rich ash
which is expected to have significant value for use in
fertilizers. Phosphorus and potassium are the nutrients
present in highest concentration. Internationally, the
net fertilizer value of poultry waste ash at the energy
plant, after accounting for transportation costs and any
additional processing costs, will approximately range
between $25 and $75 per ton of ash [21].
As to the environmental impact of poultry waste-
to-energy process, the sources of emissions from this
process include the smokestack effluent, truck exhaust
from transport of poultry litter and waste ash, runoff
from washing of the trucks, and disposal of the plant’s
wastewater. Incineration of organic materials produces
emissions, including particulate matter of varying sizes,
carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2), dioxins,
nitrogen and sulfur oxides (SOx), heavy metals, polycy-
clic aromatic hydrocarbons, and others, similar to those
of other incinerators that use more conventional forms of
fuel [22]. These emissions can individually and jointly
impact both the environment and human health [22 - 24].
Hence, the processes and emissions related to alterna-
tive energy sources require detailed scrutiny to prevent
sacrificing the communities’ health and environment.
Moreover, biosecurity measures are required in poultry
waste-to-energy projects, and regulations should be set
for achieving biosecurity.
It is worth mentioning that the poultry waste-to-
energy process is subject to environmental impact as-
sessment (EIA) regulations in Jordan. This is in order
to mitigate all environmental impacts that might be
caused by such a process. However, previous studies
showed comparison of emissions from controlled coal
and biomass combustion and poultry litter processes and
mainly focusing on the emissions from the smokestack
[25]. The results of comparison analysis showed that
plants fueled by poultry litter are permitted to produce
more carbon dioxide than other forms of fuel and more
carbon monoxide than either new or existing coal plants.
They are also permitted to produce more NOx than new
coal plants, and more SO2 than plants which use new
wood or existing biomass to create electricity [25, 26].
Nevertheless, the EIA shall be conducted for such type
of processes in order to resolve all potential negative
environmental health impacts of incinerating poultry
litter for the purpose of energy generation [25].
600
CONCLUSIONS
This paper addresses a poultry waste-to-energy
case that has many properties and attributes that are
advantageous for a small-scale poultry litter to energy
production system. Moreover, incineration of poultry
litter is considered as a solution to the issue of excess
waste generation from industrial poultry operations. It
was found that it becomes feasible to use the poultry
litter as an alternative source of energy if the price of
poultry litter is kept below 46.7 JOD per ton, assuming
that the price of diesel will stay on the (0.685 JOD/L).
Moreover, the daily saving increases with decreasing
prices of poultry litter and/or decreasing diesel prices.
Other economic viability of poultry waste-to-energy
process depends on being able to market poultry waste
ash for use in fertilizers because of nutrient concentra-
tion and value in the ash.
REFERENCES
1. F.A. Vollenbroek, Sustainable development and the
challenge of innovation, Journal of Cleaner Produc-
tion, 10, 3, 2002, 215-223.
2. W. McDonough, M. Braungart, The next industrial
revolution, The Atlantic Monthly, 282, 4, 1998, 82-
90.
3. S. Schmidheiny, Changing course, Cambridge, MA,
MIT Press, 1992.
4. E. Ciccozzi, R. Checkenya, A.V. Rodriguez, Recent
experiences and challenges in promoting cleaner
production investments in developing countries,
Journal of Cleaner Production, 11, 6, 2003, 629-638.
5. G. Kjaerheim, Cleaner production and sustain-
ability, Journal of Cleaner Production, 13 2005,
329-339.
6. S. Sangwon, L. Kun Mo, H. Sangsun, Eco-efficiency
for pollution prevention in small to medium-sized
enterprises: a case from South Korea, Journal of
Industrial Ecology, 9, 4, 2008, 223-240.
7. R. Van Berkel, J. Kortman, Waste prevention in
small and medium sized enterprises, Journal of
Cleaner Production, 1, 1, 1993, 21-28.
8. R. Van Berkel, Introduction to cleaner production
assessments with applications in the food processing
industry, UNEP Industry and Environment; January/
March. p. 8-15. 1995.
 Motasem Saidan, Hussam J. Khasawneh, Mohammad Tayyem, Mohammed Hawari
9. Jordanian Department of Statistics, Annual Report
of 2013 Statistics, Amman, Jordan, 2014.
10. S. Mukhtar, K. Annamalai, Co-Firing of Coal and
Broiler Litter (BL) Fuels for Power Generation: BL
Fuel Quality and Characteristics, ASAE Paper No.
024189, Chicago, Illinois, St. Joseph, Michigan:
ASABE, 2002.
11. Maryland Environmental Service (MES) Report, No-
vember 1999, ECI Cogeneration Facility, Full-Scale
Poultry Litter Test Burn, Ref: Air Nova, Inc., Maryland
Environmental Service Poultry Litter Test Burn Emis-
sion Evaluation Test Program, December 1999.
12. M. Saidan, Sustainable Energy Mix and Policy
Framework for Jordan, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung,
Amman, Jordan, 2012.
13. Z. Al-Hamamre, M. Saidan, M. Hararah, K. Rawa-
jfeh, H. Alkhasawneh, M. Al-Shannag, Wastes and
biomass materials as sustainable-renewable energy
resources for Jordan, Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 67, 2017, 295-314.
14. M.N. Saidan, A. Abu Drais, E. Al-Manaseer, Solid
waste composition analysis and recycling evalua-
tion: Zaatari Syrian Refugees Camp, Jordan, Waste
Management, 2017, 61, 58-66,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.12.026
15. M.N. Saidan, L.M. Ansour, H. Saidan, Management
of Plastic Bags Waste: An assessment of scenarios
in Jordan. Journal of Chemical Technology and
Metallurgy, 52, 1, 2017, 148-154
16. M. Saidan, A. Tarawneh, Estimation of Potential E-
waste Generation in Jordan. Ekoloji 24, 97, 2015, 60-64.
17. A. Tarawneh, M. Saidan, Households Awareness,
Behaviors, and Willingness to Participate in E-waste
Management in Jordan, International Journal of
Ecosystem, 3, 5, 2013, 124-131
18. T. Searchinger, R. Heimlich, R.A. Houghton, F.
Dong, A. Elobeid, J. Fabiosa, S. Tokgoz, D. Hayes,
T.H. Yu, Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels In-
View publication stats
creases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions
from Land-Use Change, Science, 319, 2008, 5867,
1238-1240, doi:10.1126/science.1151861.
19. M.A. Hararah, M.N. Saidan, Z. Alhamamre, A.M.
Abu-Jrai, J. Alsawair, R.A. Damra, The PCDD/
PCDF emission inventory in Jordan: Aqaba city,
Journal of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy,
51, 1, 2016, 112-120.
20. United States Environmental Protection Agen-
cy (EPA), Guide to Industrial Assessment for
Pollution Prevention and Energy Efficiency,
EPA/625/R-99/003, June 2001.
21. B.R. Bock, Fertilizer nutrient value of broiler litter
ash. Appendix B. Economic and technical feasibility
of energy production from poultry litter and nutrient
filter biomass on the lower Delmarva Peninsula, TVA
Public Power Institute, Alabama, 1999.
22. M. Allsopp, P. Costner, P. Johnston, State of Knowl-
edge of the Impacts of Waste Incinerators on Human
Health (Executive Summary), Environmental Sci-
ence & Pollution Research International, 8, 2001,
141-145, doi:10.1007/ BF02987308.
23. M. Franchini M. Rial, E. Buiatti, F. Bianchi, Health
Effects of Exposure to Waste Incinerator Emis-
sions: A Review of Epidemiological Studies, Annali
dell’lstituto superior di sanita, 40, 2004, 101-115.
24. A.B. O’Connor, C. Roy, Electric Power Plants
Emissions and Public Health, American Journal
of Nursing, 108, 2008, 62-70, doi:10.1097/01.
NAJ.0000310342.98495.b6.
25. J.A. Stingone, S. Wing, Poultry Litter Incinieration
as a Source of Energy: Reviewing the Potential for
Impacts on Environmental Health and Justice, New
Solutions, 21, 1, 2011, 27-42.
26. B.M. Nicholson, Comparison of emissions from
controlled coal and biomass combustion, Committee
Meeting, North Carolina Environmental Manage-
ment Commission, Raleigh, NC July 9, 2008.
601