Find out more about Project Clean Air hereJoin our membershipProgramsKid StuffCalendar of events
Project Clean Air
Clean Air Tips
Health
Clean Air Currents
Homepage

Text Links:
| About Us |
| Membership |
| Programs |
| Kid's Stuff
|
| Calendar of Events |
| E-mail
|

Hit Counter
have visited this page as of
3/15/00

What's New

wpe11.jpg (24308 bytes)

Kern County Proposed Site for Industrial-Sized Dairies
Key Meetings, What's Up, What's Project Clean Air Doing? and Volunteers needed! 

Updated 7/27/00

Key Meetings: Check out the Calendar!

August 9:  Kern County Dairy Technical Advisory Committee Meeting, 3pm, 2700 M Street, First Floor Conference Room

August 23:  Kern County Dairy Technical Advisory Committee Meeting, 3pm, 2700 M Street, First Floor Conference Room

Interview with Texas A&M Dairy Expert, Dr. Calvin Parnell

Q.  What are the air quality problems associated with dairies?
A.  Odor is considered a nuisance, while the particulate matter found in dust is considered an air quality problem. However, odor may have negative health impacts, such as triggering undesirable symptoms in sensitive people.

Q.  What dairy air quality studies have you conducted?
A.  Texas A&M is researching emission factors from dust created by cattle kept in open pens. Our results show that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) emission factors are high and inaccurate. For example, the EPA estimates that Particulate Matter of 10 microns in size (PM10) emissions from dairy cattle dust is 70 pounds per head. Our research at Texas A&M shows the average PM10 emissions from dairy cattle dust is 15 pounds per head.

Additionally, if you were to look at a graph of Particulate Matter emissions related to dairies, it would form a bell curve with the node of the curve measuring 15microns. Urban Particulate Matter dust curves usually have a node measuring 5 to 10 microns. A study by Dr. Flocchini at UC Davis also shows the EPA’s emission factors to be higher than the actual emissions. The conclusion would be that dairies are primarily a source of large particulate matter, that is not a health concern compared to urban sources of particulate matter.

Q.  What measures, if any, do you recommend for controlling particulate matter from dairy operations?
A.  It is a choice of dust versus odor. In California, feedlots must have sprinklers. Wet manure produces stronger odors than dry manure. I have a patent on an anaerobic digester that processes biomass gas. When working right, it produces 500 British Thermal Units (BTU) per cubic foot. As a point of comparison, Natural Gas burns at 1000 BTU/cubic foot.

The anaerobic digester has met with low market success because it does not compete with the price of Natural Gas as a source of electricity for the operator. However, it should still be considered as a method for reducing odors from dairy operations that use holding ponds.

Schwang in North Texas was able to reduce odors at dairy operations by pumping the liquid from holding ponds back into the soil. However, in my opinion, there are legitimate concerns about pathogens leaching through the soil into the water table.

What's up?

Borba Dairies of Chino want to develop 5,300 acres west of Bakersfield at Taft Highway and Buena Vista Road, as agricultural fields devoting 682 acres to two dairies that 28,600 cows would call home.  The property was previously zoned for a town (Pacificana) of 19,000 homes.  Late last year, the county rescinded the 1994 town plan.

The Borba proposal is not your average dairy.  Most dairies in California run about 624 cows.  In Kern County, the average is 1,531 cows per dairy (the largest average in California).

It has been estimated that the emissions from this project would be 2,657 tons of methane, 980 tons of ammonia, and 10 tons of other airborne gases each year. Each day, a 1,400 pound dairy cow requires at least 100 gallons of water for drinking and washing.  Each cow would also generate about 100 pounds of waste.

Two cows per acre?  Do the Math!  Many people have asked how 28,600 cows on a 600 acre dairy calculates to 2.71 cows per acre.  We contacted the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region to get the answer.  The Water Quality Control Board bases its cows/acre on total animal units and total acreage over which manure is to be dispersed.  For instance, a full-grown milk cow is equal to 1.0 animal units, a Heifer (1 year and older) is equal to 0.73 animal units, while a calf (3 months to one year) is equal to 0.35 animal units.

The first step is to calculate the amount of waste produced by the existing cows.  The number of cows in each age category is converted to animal units (AU).  The the animal units are adjusted for animal breed.  In the case of Holsteins, the AU values are multiplied by a factor of 1.4 before moving on to the next part.

This involves Nitrogen Loading calculations, which use specific formulas for liquid and solid waste.  These generate the total pounds of nitrogen available to crops where the wastewater and solid manure is applied.

This takes us to the second step.  Depending on which crops are grown, cropland nitrogen requirements are calculated.  For instance, Alfalfa has listed nitrogen requirement of 480 pounds per acre.  Dairies total up the number of acres of each crop and their coinciding nitrogen requirements.  By comparing the results of the first step (nitrogen in waste produced by the existing herd) with the second step (nitrogen requirements of crops grown), the dairy owner can determine if all of the waste generated on site can be spread to their attached acreage or must be shipped off site.

And this is how the Borbas have arrived at 2.71 cows per acre.  We have not checked their math.

The Kern County Planning Department was the lead agency on an Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project.  On November 11th, the Kern County Planning Commission approved the project and accepted the Planning Department's recommendations.  Following a public outcry against the dairy, the Borba's proposal was withdrawn and may go before the Kern County Board of Supervisors in July 2000.   The matter will go before the Kern County Planning Commission again.

What has Project Clean Air done?

The Board of Directors of Project Clean Air sent a letter to the Kern County Planning Commission.  We reminded them that the air quality rating in our area has been down-graded to "severe non-attainment" for Ozone.  We also have severe air quality problems with Particulate Matter.  The letter stated, "Two of the monitors which consistently record the worst air quality in the air basin are located in Arvin and Edison.  Both of these locations are downwind from the proposed Borba Dairy."  The letter also explained the health effects of air pollution and that the current Vision 2020 community forums indicate that air quality is a top concern among Bakersfield residents.  Because of the downgrading of our attainment status, existing businesses will face complying with costly stricter regulations.

We requested that the Kern County Planning Commission, "emphasize protecting our communities (residential health and economic health) by preserving our air quality.  We also ask you to balance the financial investment asked of existing businesses against that asked of new development" to not allow for overriding conditions as proposed by the Planning Department, but to require "other mitigating measures, such as planting trees as windbreaks around the property, that are not mentioned in the EIR...and to recommend that the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District's revised CEQA guidelines be used in future dairy construction [one dairy won't be constructed for two years according to Planning Department Director, Ted James] on the Borba property."

The day after the Planning Commission approved the Borba dairy proposal, the San Joaquin Valley Air district kicked off its "Don't Light Tonight" program which asks residents to not light their fireplaces on certain evenings to reduce particulate matter emissions.  The air district program has had some success and Project Clean Air encourages individuals to participate.  However, we find it disheartening that the Planning Commission allowed a large emission-producing dairy operation largely ignoring concerns from the community.

What is Project Clean Air doing?  To prepare comments for the Kern County Board of Supervisors Meeting, we are doing our homework!  We are concerned with air and water quality.  The neighboring community has expressed concerns about (a) the proximity of the dairies to schools, churches, parks, and homes.  This includes the McAllister Ranch development planned for 2 miles north of the proposed dairy; (b) the increase in diesel-fueled truck traffic along two-lane highways where anyone traveling out to Buena Vista Lake will have to pass by the property, (c) odors and flies, (d) the lack of concrete plans for relocating the Western Beltway highway that was planned to run through the now-proposed dairy site.

Environmental Impact Report Review:  A volunteer reviewed the EIR with the following results:
1)Our research shows that anaerobic digester technology is unreliable as an   electric generator.  However, according to Dr. Parnell @ Texas A&M University, anaerobic digesters should still be considered as a means for reducing odors.

2)The EIR failed to turn-up technology for waste water treatment developed by Rain for Rent right here in Kern County.  The technology was brought to the attention of the Planning Commission by Rain for Rent in a letter dated November 4th.   Update:  An individual we spoke with who is trained in Environmental Compliance and who works with agriculture thought that this technology, involving enzymes, looked promising.

3)Ponds for wastewater are not netted for migratory birds.  We are checking to see if these are necessary.  Update:  The sumps are to be lined with the least amount of clay mixture permitted by law.  The EIR recognizes the waste will leak out.  The EIR proposed annual testing of wells for contamination, and the Borba's think that's unfair.  The issue of stored manure fires isn't addressed in the EIR. 

Health Study Research:  We have contacted the California Air Resources Board for information regarding health studies to find out if any have been conducted near to dairies, especially the dairies in Chino.  Update:    The California Air Resources Board employee that we spoke with agreed with the EIR that the dairy would produce less air pollution than the Pacificana (small town) proposal.  The current research shows that Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) seems to have the greatest negative impact on children's health.  Field studies on children and air pollution demonstrate that NOx increases occur simultaneously with Particulate Matter (PM) increases.  The difficulty with dairy-associated PM is that water plays a significant role in decreasing PM.  This would imply that we should look at protecting water quality as an issue linked with air quality, and not as a separate issue.

Air Pollution Study Research:  Update:   We have contacted the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District to see if any preliminary data from the current Particulate Matter study is available on dairies.   They referred us to Dr. Robert Flocchini at UC Davis.  A staff research associate, Teresa James responded that, "We have made some measurements of PM-10 and PM-2.5 upwind and downwind of two dairies and a feedlot.  We have not yet quantified emission rates or factors for these constituents, as we have been concentrating our efforts on ammonia emissions from these facilities".

Crops for Dairy Feed  What the cows eat plays an important role in what cows discharge, as well as what the crop demand for manure will be and what pesticides, water demand, etc. will be required.  According to James Borba, the following crops will be grown:  Corn, Alfalfa, Wheat, Oats, Sudan, some row crops such as carrots, and perhaps some cotton.  Odors, pesticide use, and leaching of salts into the water table from crops should be a consideration when determining if a large dairy should be permitted on a certain location.

Legal Advice:  Since we don't handle this type of project every day, we contacted an attorney experienced in environmental law to find out what recommendations we can make to the Board of Supervisors, should we decide that recommendations to protect air quality that were not mentioned in the EIR should be adopted.  The attorney stated that the usual course is to challenge the EIR legally and that an attorney should be retained as soon as possible.  Project Clean Air does not intend to follow this course.  We have been told that a local community group is, however, considering this alternative.

Public Education:  We will continue to update this website as information becomes available.  We will post community meetings to this website.  We will answer questions and take note of concerns of community members which may become incorporated in our comments.

Volunteers are needed to help with this.  Please call Linda at 661-833-5740 to volunteer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


.