Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 6(8): 1116-1124, 2010

© 2010, INSInet Publication

The Utilization of Agricultural Waste as One of the Environmental Issues in Egypt

(A Case Study)

Shaban D. Abou Hussein and Omaima M. Sawan

Agricultural Waste Recycling Unit, Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency, Ministry of state for
Environment Affairs.

Abstract: Agricultural wastes in Egypt amount range from 30-35 million tons a year of which only 7
million tons as animal feed and 4 million as organic manure are being utilized. These crop residues results
after harvesting in the farm of leaves, stem and shelves which are characterized as Coarse plant by-
products and big size, chemically low in protein and fat contents. Also it is high in lignin and cellulous
contents. The problem of agriculture wastes becomes very obvious and aggregated after the harvest of
summer crops. That is because at this time of the season, the farmer is in a rush to re cultivate his land
therefore getting ride of the wastes has his highest priorities, usually by burning. This method, burning
not only is considered an economic loss but also has harmful effects on the environment. These harmful
effects are emission of poisons gases to the air and reducing the microbial activities in the soil. In
addition, storing these wastes in the field after compacting may make it suitable environment for
reproduction and growth of pests and pathogens that will attack new crops.Therefore, utilization of
agriculture wastes in any other environmentally friendly way is very important. These can be done by:-
1- Compost production by fermenting the agricultural in the main way for recycling them.
This will help in re fertilizing the soil organically and reduce the production cost.
2- Animal feed production:- by treating some wastes such as rice straw by Urea or ammonia to increase
its nitrogen content hence its nutritional value.
3- Food production.
q This can be done by growing mushroom on agricultural wastes such as rice straw as a substrate. This
means the conversion of wastes to economic, nutritional human food.
q Growing vegetables on rice straw compacted bales in areas where soil disease and salinity are
constrains.
1- Energy production
Bio gas
I t can be concluded that recycling agriculture wastes is a must for environment as well as economical
saving. This recycling will not only increase agricultural production but also will improve its quality.

Kew words: Agricultural waste, Composting, Animal feed, mushroom production and Biogas

INTRODUCTION and quantity of agricultural waste in Egypt changes

from one village to another and from one year to
Egypt is 97% desert and only 5% of the land area another because farmers always cultivate the most
is actually occupied with less than 4% of the land is profitable crops suited to the land and the environment.
suitable for agriculture. The agricultural activates result Several factors have aggravated the problem including
in "the yield" which is economic part of the crop and the absence of environmental awareness and the low
less important part which used to be called level of knowledge and skills affecting the behavior of
"agricultural waste". Therefore, agricultural waste is peasants in handling agricultural waste. In addition,
defined as the outcome of agricultural production burning agricultural waste in the rice cultivated fields
following the different harvesting activities. W ith the generates many poisonous and harmful oxides and
introduction of technology in the agricultural process, hydro- carbonates (the black cloud).
waste has become a burden because of the entailed Egypt has an agricultural tradition which goes back
destruction and pollution of the environment. In thousands of years. Egyptian farmers were good at
addition, Statistics point out that agricultural waste making use of crop residues for building, heating,
reaches 30 million tons on the national level. The type livestock feeding and fertilizing. W ith modernization of

Corresponding Author: Shaban D. Abou Hussein, Vegetable Research Dept., National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt
E-mail: [email protected]
1116
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1116-1124, 2010

agriculture, as well as economic and social grow with a more or less standard planting density,
development leading to deep changes in rural energy which in practice may not be true. The type of
and the structure of feedstuffs, the traditional management (traditional or advanced) as well as the
approaches for utilization of crop residues have crop variety (local variety, improved and/or clonal
subsided and plans to expand this tradition in the variety ) can result in large differences in the amount
future. In order to combine the old traditions with of crop as well as residue obtained from a particular
m o d e rn te c h n o lo gie s to a c h ie v e s u s ta ina b le cropping area. This method is, therefore, limited to
development, waste should be treated as a by-product. particular plantations under specific conditions (eg,
The main problems facing rural areas today are coffee plantations, tea plantations, palm trees ..etc). The
agricultural waste, sewage and municipal solid waste. second method of calculation of crop residues, often
However, few studies have been conducted on the used for annual crops, is to use a residue-to-product
utilization of agricultural waste for composting and/or ratio (RPR). Several RPRs for different crops have
animal fodder, and none of them has been implemented been suggested by different authors (see, for example,
in a sustainable form [1] . In addition, many farmers now [2,3]
). Variations in the reported values have been
view the practice of residue utilization as an extra cost attributed to differences in seed varieties planted,
with small returns, and that the best way in to get rid moisture content of the crop residues, and method of
of the residues by dumping, open burning, etc. But the harvesting. Table (1) gives the RPR values used by
hazards to the environment of such practices can no FAO in estimating crop residues in the Asian region,
longer be ignored. Attitudes must, therefore, change and those given recently by Lai [3 ] for the estimation
from considering crop residues as undesired wastes, for of crop residues in the world,
which some use must be found, to those of considering There are three crop cultivation seasons in Egypt.
such residues as an integral part of agricultural W inter crops are cultivated at the beginning of the
production. There are many new approaches and winter season in October/November, their growth
methods for utilizing crop residues that have become period lasts until early summer of the next year. They
attractive and profitable such as composting, animal are harvested in May/June. These crops include grains
fodder and energy production. Several research and such as wheat and barely, legumes (beans, lentil), sugar
development programs are underway in several crops (sugar beat, sugar cane), fibers (flax), fodders
European countries, the U.S.A, China, India and other (clover, green, fodder), aromatic and medicinal plants,
countries to use biomass. However, The five crops with and vegetables. The second group of crops (summer
the highest amount of waste are which must be focused crops ) is cultivated at the beginning of the summer
on rice, corn, wheat/barley, cotton and sugar cane. season In M ay (cotton is planted earlier in
On the national level, there are many efforts March/April) and its growth period extends to the end
particularly those of the ministry of the environment of autumn in the same year (October). These crops
and the ministry of agriculture to find solutions for the include grains such as rice, maize and sorghum; oily
problem and avoid environmental degradation. Those crops (soy bean, peanut, sesame and sunflower); sugar
efforts must be encouraged, increased and implemented crops (sugar cane); fodders
on large scale. (alfalfa, green fodder)t fiber (cotton, kenaf),
aromatic and medicinal plants, and vegetables. Fruits
2-Agricultural W aste in Egypt: are cultivated both in winter and summer. The third
2.1 Estimation of Crop Residues: The proportion of group of crops is known as Nili crops and these are
straw, or stover, to grain varies from crop to another cultivated in the middle of summer (July/August) and
and according to yield level. The yield is a function of their growth period continues until the beginning of
total biomass and the harvest index (the grain to straw winter. These crops include rice, maize, sorghum, and
ratio). A harvest index of 0.5 indicates that the biomass oily crops and fodder similar to these grown in the
produced comprises 50 per cent grain and 50 per cent summer season. Both winter and summer crops account
straw. Lower harvest indices means higher proportions for the bulk of agricultural products in Egypt.
of straw. The height of cutting will also affect how
much stubble is left in the field: many combine- 3. Utilization of Crop Residues: Crop residues are
harvested crops are cut high; crops on small- scale organic and biodegradable. Utilization technology must
farms may be cut at ground level by sickle or uprooted either use the residues rapidly, or the residues must be
by hand. stored under conditions that do not cause spoilage or
Two different methods can be used to calculate the render the residues unsuitable for processing to the
amount of crop residues generated. The first one, used desired end product. There are many methods for
for woody residues from perennial crops, is based on utilizing agricultural waste in Egypt which can be
the cropped areas. This method assumes that crops summarized as follows:

1117
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1116-1124, 2010

particles, so if aeration is adequate, small particles will

3 .1 C o m p o s t in g : C o m p o stin g is th e ae ro b ic degrade more quickly. W hereas , Gray and Sherman,
[6]
decomposition of organic materials by microorganisms and Gray et al. [7 ] recommend a particle size of 1.3
under controlled conditions. Agricultural waste is rich to 7.6 cm (0.5 to 2 inches), with the lower end of this
in organic matter. This matter is derived from the soil scale suitable for forced aeration or continuously mixed
and the soil needs it back in order to continue systems, and the upper end for windrow and other
producing healthy crops. In addition, Geisel, [4 ] and El- passively aerated systems.
Haggar, [1 ] reported that composting is one of the best A theoretical calculation by Haug [8 ] suggests that
known recycling processes for organic waste to close for particles larger than 1 mm in thickness, oxygen
the natural loop. The major factors affecting the may not diffuse all the way into the center of the
decomposition of organic matter by micro-organisms particle. Thus the interior regions of large particles are
are oxygen and moisture. Temperature, which is a probably anaerobic, and decomposition rates in this
result of microbial activity, is also an important factor. region are correspondingly slow. However, anaerobic
The other variables affecting the process of conditions are more of a problem with small particles,
composting are nutrients (carbon and nitrogen), pH, as the resulting narrow pores readily fill with water due
time and the physical characteristics of the raw to capillary action. These issues are addressed more
material (porosity, structure, texture and particle size). fully in the section on factors leading to anaerobic
Aeration is required to recharge the oxygen supply for conditions.
the micro-organisms. The passive composting method Regarding carbon to nitrogen ratio Geisel, [4]
is the recommended technique for the Egyptian showed that the mixture of materials in the compost
environment for technical and economic reasons. The pile should have a carbon to nitrogen ratio of 30 to 1.
main advantages of composting is the improvement of Because of the bulk of dry materials and the fact that
soil structure by adding organic matter as well as green material shrinks even more upon drying, we can
utilizing agricultural waste that can cause high levels of use a 1 to 1 volume to approximate the 30 to 1 ratio
pollution if burned. of carbon to nitrogen. This may need to be adjusted
Because composted materials usually contain some depending on the nitrogen content of the green material
biological resistant compounds, a complete stabilization or if manures are added to the pile. M atted materials
(maturation) during composting may not be achieved. exclude the oxygen necessary for rapid decomposition.
The time required for maturation depends on Some green items, such as grass clippings, also
environmental factors within and around the tend to mat if not mixed thoroughly with ray materials.
composting pile. Some traditional indicators can be W hereas, composting works best if the moisture
used to measure the degree of stabilization such as content of the pile is about 50 percent moist, not
decline in temperature, absence of odour, and lake of soggy. Too much moisture slows decomposition and
attraction of insects in the final products [1 ] . produces a disagreeable odor due to the activity of
In addition, A grower’s guide, [5 ] . mentioned that methane-producing microorganisms. If the organic
Aerobic composting systems can be classified as turned material is too dry, decomposition will be very slow or
windrows, aerated static piles, passive static piles or may not occur at all. Heat is supplied by the
windrows, and aerobic in vessel systems. In any respiration of the microorganisms as they break down
aerobic system, composting is most rapid when the organic materials [4] . In addition, excess moisture,
microbial activity is mazimized. This accomplished by inadequate porosity, and excessive pile size, all of
using starting material that have proper balnce of these factors make it more difficult for oxygen to
carbon and nitrogen and keeping compost pile moist penetrate throughout a pile before it is depleted, or
yet well aerated (see Table 3). allow airflow to short-circuit around large zones which
Concerning size of materials Geisel, [4 ] concluded become anaerobic. One of the mechanisms of oxygen
that material decomposes best if it is 0.5 to 1.5 inches transport is diffusion, which is function of the
in size. Soft, succulent tissues do not need to be concentration difference between the outside air (21%
chopped into very small pieces, but hard or woody oxygen) and the oxygen concentration in the interior of
tissues should be reduced to smaller pieces in order to the pile (if anaerobic, zero). In a passively aerated or
decompose rapidly. Decomposition occurs primarily on windrow system, diffusion is assisted by natural
or near the surfaces of particles, where oxygen convection, but that assistance is probably limited to
diffusion into the aqueous films covering the particle is the upper and outer parts of the pile [9 ] . A compost
adequate for aerobic metabolism, and the substrate pile needs to be turned to prevent it from overheating
itself is readily accessible to microorganisms and their and to aerate and thoroughly mix the materials. If the
extra cellular enzymes. Small particles have more internal temperature of the pile exceeds (71°C), the
surface area per unit mass or volume than large necessary microorganisms are killed, the pile cools, and

1118
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1116-1124, 2010

the whole process of composting must start again from problems several methods were used to transform the
the beginning. Turning is done to move to the center agricultural waste into a more edible form with a
the material that is at the outer edge of the pile. This higher nutritional value and better digestibility [1 ] .
way, all the material reaches the optimum temperature W hereas, mechanical and chemical treatment
at various times. Due to heat loss around the margins, methods were used to transform the shape of the
only the central portion of the pile is at the optimum roughage (waste) into an edible form, the chemical
temperature [4 ] .Oxygen uptake rates measured in treatment method with urea or ammonia is more
compost vary widely, from less than 1 to over 10 g feasible than the mechanical treatment method. The
O 2 /kg volatile solids per hour [8 ] . best results were obtained by adding 3% of ammonia
Regarding maturity of compost, CCQC, [1 0 ] reported (or urea) to the total mass of the waste. It is
that immature and poorly stabilized composts may pose recommended to cover the treated waste with a
a number of problems during storage marketing and wrapping material usually made out of polyethylene (2
use. However, maturity is the degree or level of mm thickness). After 2 (summer) - 3 (winter) weeks,
completeness. For any grower considering the use of the treated waste is uncovered and left for 2-3 days to
compost, the issue of quality is critically important. release all the remains of ammonia before use as an
Many factors can be considered in determining animal food [1 ] . On the other hand, rice straw is high
compost quality (see Table 4) [5 ] Maturity is not in lignin and silica. Both those components play an
described by a single property and therefore maturity important role in reducing the digestibility of straw.
is best assessed by measuring two or more parameters The crude protein content of rice straw is generally
such as C: N ratio, Carbon Dioxide evolution or between 3 - 5 percent of the dry matter. Any crop
respiration, oxygen demand, Dewar heating test, residue with less than 8 per cent crude protein is
Ammonium : Nitrate ratio, Ammonia concentration , considered inadequate as a livestock feed because it is
Volatile organic acids concentration and plant test as un-likely that such residues, without supplementation,
shown in Table (5). could sustain nitrogen balance in animal.
Rice straw is the most abundant feed resource for
3.2 Animal feed: ruminant animals in Vietnam especially during the dry
3.2.1 Treatment with Urea and Injection with season [13 ] . They added that methods for increasing its
Ammonia: Most developing countries, the problem is nutritive value by ammoniation using urea or anhydrous
in the limited availability of protein sources although ammonia are well established and are being applied in
great efforts have been and are being made to find many countries in Asia. W hen urea is used in the wet
alternative supplements [1 1 ,1 2 ] . On the other hand, Crop ensiling system, the usually recommended level is 4 kg
residues have a high fiber content and are low in urea per 100 kg air-dry straw, little over half of which
protein, starch and fat. Cell walls of straw primarily remains in the straw when this is finally fed to the
are lignin, cellulose, and hemicelluloses as shown in animal. In addition, response to ammoniation has two
Table (6). components: an increase in digestibility due to partial
Therefore, the traditional method of increasing live specification of the lignin-cellulose-/hemi-cellulose
stock production by supplementing forage and pasture linkages and a greater feed intake arising from the
with grains and protein concentrate may not meet g r e a te r s u p p ly o f a m m o nia to th e r u m e n
future meat protein needs. Use of the grain and protein microorganisms. Many authors have similar results with
for human food will compete with such use for animal treated rice straw with urea or ammonia [1 4 -1 7 ].
feed. In addition, the conversion of many available The feeding of molasses-urea blocks is another
residues directly to human food presents problems related technology widely used for improving animal
when the source of the residues is not food grade. performance on fibrous crop residues bringing about
These problems may be circumvented by utilizing increases in feed intake and also in digestibility [1 8 -2 0 ].
residues to feed domesticated animals. Many crop Pre-treatment with a source of ammonia such as
residues have been used directly as animal feed. This urea or ammonium bicarbonate can greatly enhance
help in covering the deficiency of animal foodstuffs in both the intake and digestibility of straw, and will
Egypt which reaches more than 3 million tones of improve the productive performance of the animals [2 1 ] .
energy a year. However, transforming wastes into
animal foodstuffs would help in a greater deal in 3.2.2 Silage Production: Corn silage is a major feed
overcoming this deficiency. This is because these ingredient for cattle diets in Egypt and other countries.
wastes have a high content of fiber that, low protein, Because of the large role that corn silage plays in
starch and fat makes them not easily digestible and the cattle rations, methods to improve its nutrient value
size of the waste in its natural form might be too big have been tested and implemented for many decades.
or tough for the animals to eat. To overcome these two Silage additives are added to fresh forage at the time

1119
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1116-1124, 2010

of ensiling and it has been estimate that 30-35% of all little value and are therefore attractive for the purpose
silage produced has an additive added to it. The of growing mushrooms. W hereas, Straw mushrooms are
positive effects of additives include lower pH, greater highly perishable and must be marketed within 1-2
content of lactic acid (and acetic acid in some cases), days. They tend to liquefy when refrigerated but have
greater dry matter recovery, improved digestibility and a shelf life of about 3 days when stored at room
improved aerobic stability of silages when exposed to temperature.
air. There are four general types of additives used in
silage production; bacterial inoculants, enzymes, acids 4.2 Cultivated on Compacted Rice Straw Bales:
and non-protein nitrogen. Abdel-Satar, [2 7 ] . Concluded that cultivated vegetable
Ammonia addition to silage increases lactic acid crops on compacted rice straw bales such as straw
compared with untreated silages (Huber, et. al. [2 2 ], berry, pepper, tomato, Cucumber and okra in open field
Kung, et. al. [2 3] ) and compared with urea [2 4 ] . Lopez or under green house were promised method to utilize
[2 4 ]
concluded that lactic acid production is directly rice straw residues. Also, the cultivation on compacted
related to the buffering capacity of the silage additive. rice straw bales was used in the soil which, suffered
Free ammonia is much related to the buffering capacity from soil born diseases and high salinity. In addition,
of the silage additive. Although feed intake after harvesting the vegetable crops, the agricultural
reductions can often be positively correlated with acetic wastes will be thoroughly mixed with rice straw and
acid in silage, , the relationship is not one of cause and used as compost for a soil to increase soil fertility. The
effect. Production of acetic acid by inoculants or by compacted rice straw bales were used for two years.
direct addition is not a result of poor fermentation and
should not cause a reduction in intake [2 5 ] 5. Energy Production:
5.1 Bio Gas: Biogas is the anaerobic fermentation of
4-food Production:
organic materials by micro-organisms under controlled
4.1 M ushroom Production: Application of rice straw
conditions. Biogas is a mixture of gasses mainly
for plantation of mushrooms is well known in Egypt.
methane and carbon dioxide that results from anaerobic
There are some large farms and many small farms
fermentation of organic matter by bacteria. Biogas is
producing mushroom mostly in the Delta. There are
ranked low in priority in Egyptian energy policy and
some institutes and universities carrying research and
there is no estimate of the share of biogas of the total
training courses in Egypt. In this respect the
biomass potential [1 ].
consumption of mushroom in Egypt is quite low,
Studies on the use of energy in rural Egypt (Alaa
therefore the amount of straw used by this way
El Din et al,) [2 8 ] have shown that 76.4% of the gross
remains very limited but still sesible and promising.
energy consumed originated from burning crop residues
Oyster mushrooms (Pleurotus spp.) have become
and dung cakes, while 23.6% of the needs were met by
increasingly popular in recent years and are now
conventional sources, e.g. kerosene, butagas and
cultivated in many subtropical and temperate countries.
electricity. The efficiency of releasing energy from
Commercial cultivation is usually carried out on straw
biomass by direct burning in primitive stoves is very
but the non-composted cotton waste supplemented with
low (5-10%). The contribution of crop residues and
rice bran and calcium carbonate used in Singapore also
animal dung to net energy used in rural areas
proved an effective substrate. Rice straw is an essential
represented only one-third of total energy consumption,
substrate for the growing of Agaricus bisporus in Asia.
while conventional sources met about two-thirds. In
In Japan, Taiwan and Korea, rice-straw composts
addition, The organic matter content in Egyptian soils
have been used for many years with consistent results.
is 2%, a level which is considered very poor and needs
Rice straw has enough nutrients and regarded as the
annual addition. Besides,. The available crop residues
best material for mushroom growing in all countries
after harvest are estimated at about 22.6 million tons,
which produce rice, e.g. China, the Philippines and
out of which about 13.7 million tons or 61% are used
Indonesia [2 6 ].
for direct burning. Animal droppings, principally of
In addition, cotton waste can be used for
cows and buffaloes, are used as organic manure
mushroom production . W aste, generated from the
("Balady manure") or as fuel for rural cooking.
mechanical processing of raw cotton prior to spinning,
Removal of these nutrient-rich resources from the
provides an ideal substrate for the growth of some
fields deprives the farmer of much needed fertilizer and
edible mushrooms notably Volvariella volvacea the
their replacement often means the use of chemical
Chinese or Straw M ushroom and the Oyster
fertilizers at a severe financial and energy cost.
Mushrooms (Pleurotus spp). About 7% of lint (i.e.
Biogas technology has become therefore interesting
fibre) waste is produced in spinning. However, this
as a way to improve the energy release from
primary waste is quite valuable and can be re-used in
agricultural residues, save plant nutrients, and improve
various ways but the residual or secondary wastes have

1120
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1116-1124, 2010

health conditions and quality of life in the villages technology. More than 900 biogas digesters were
[2 9 ]
. constructed, operating in various governorates so far,
Also, Biogas technology attracted the interest of with different capacity, gas utiliz a tio n, a nd
Egyptian scientists and rural developers because of the environmental impacts [3 0 ].
numerous benefits realized from it. In 1980, Three types of biogas digesters are applicable in
Agricultural Research Center (ARC), Ministry of rural Egypt; the first is the Indian type which is fed
Agriculture (MOA), National Research Center (NRC), with animal droppings. This digester is provided with
Egyptian Academy of Scientific Research and gravel basin to produce air dried biogas manure. The
Technology (EASRT) and Faculty of Agriculture at second type is the Chinese biogas digester which is fed
Fayoum; Cairo University started research programs to with crop residues and vegetable wastes. The major
introduce the biogas technologies in rural Egypt. constraints in rural areas are scarcity of animal
Soils and W ater Research Institute (SW RI) ARC droppings and large amount of crop residues. So, the
started since 1980 a research and demonstration ARC modified the design of the traditional biogas
program to promote the biogas technology in rural digesters to suit the Egyptian farms. The new system
communities and new reclaimed lands. Biogas Training is a two-stage fermentation system fed with both
Center at Mushtohour in the Delta Region was animal droppings and crop residues to cover the energy
constructed by SW RI ARC to help the biogas users in consumption for household [3 0 ].
construction, maintenance, and utilization of biogas

Table 1: Residue -to- Product Ratios (RPR) of D ifferent crops

Residue FAO (1998) Lai (2005)
---------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------
RPR M oisture content RPR M oisture content
Rice straw 1.76 13% 1.5 Air dry weight
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W heat straw 1.75 15% 1.5 Air dry weight
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barely straw 1,75 15% 1.5 Air dry weight
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M aize stalk 2.00 15% 1.0 Air dry weight
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M aize cob 0.27 8% ------ ------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cotton stalk 2.76 12% 1.5 Air dry weight
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sugar cane (tops) 0.30 10% 0.25 Air dry weight
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sugarcane(bagasse) 1.29 50% 0.25 Air dry weight
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rice husk 0.27 12% ---- ---------------

Table 2: The estim ated am ount of agriculture waste in Egypt

Crop residues Am ount ( m illion tons)
Cotton stalks 1.6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rice straw 3.6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M aize residues 4.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sugar cane residues 6.8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W heat straw 6.9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barely straw 0.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sugar beet residues 0.32
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trees trim m ing residues 1.7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vegetable residues 0.71
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Banana residues 1.7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1121
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1116-1124, 2010

Table 2: Continue
Beans straw 0.35
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lentil straw 0.012
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pea straw 0.042
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public garden residues 1.14
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorghum residues 1.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sesam e straw 0.56
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D ate palm residues 0.66
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potato 0.317
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom ato 1.11
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 33.4

Table 3: M ain criteria for aerobic com posting.

Factor Acceptable Range O ptim um Range
Starting M aterials
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C:N ratio 20:1-40:1 25:1-30:1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particle size 1/8-2 Varies with m aterial
Therm ophilic Stage
W ater content 40-70 % 50-60%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O xygen concentration >5% >10%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
pH 5.5- 9.0 6.5-8.0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tem perature 110-150°F 125-140 °F

Table 4: Com post quality criteria

Chem ical Biological Physical
C:N ratio Activity Particle size
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
N utrients W eed seeds Contam inants
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salts Anim al / hum an pathogens
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
pH Plant pathogens
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M etal com pounds Pathogen suppression
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O rganic com pounds(pesticides, etc. ) Plant response (bioassay)

Table 5: M aturity index for com post a (stability) m ethods [1 0 ]

M ethod UN ITS Very m ature Ratingm ature Im m ature
SO U R TEST O 2 /unit TS/hr <0.5 0.5-1.5 >1.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO 2 test C/unit Vs/day <2 2-8 >
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCL CO 2 C/unitVs/day <2 2-8 >8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W ERL CO 2 C/unit Vs/day <5 5-14 >14
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D ewar Tem p.rise (°C) <10 10-20 >20
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solvita © Index value 7-8 5-6 <5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
N H 4 :N O 3 -N Ratio No units <0.5 0.5-3 >3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1122
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1116-1124, 2010

Table 5: Continue
Total N H 4 -N ppm , dry basis <100 100-500 >500
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VO A or VFAs ppm , dry basis <200 200-1000 >1000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seed Germ ination % of control <90 80-90 <80
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plant Trials % of control <90 80-90 <80
SO U R TEST = Specific Oxygen U ptake Rate
SCL = Soil Control Laboratory
W ERL=W oods End Research Laboratory
D ewer = Dewer Self H eating Test
VO A or VFAs = Volatile O rganic or fatty acids concentration

Table 6: The chem ical com position of som e crop residues in Egypt
Crop residues Cellulose(% ) Hem i-cellulose(% ) Lignin(% ) CrudeProtein(% ) Ash(% ) D igester
factor (% )
Rice straw 34.20 27.9 10.20 2.00 16.20 23.60
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W heat straw 39.00 36.00 9.60 2.60 7.80 38.20
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barely straw 40.40 28.10 9.10 2.70 8.10 37.80
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bean hay 42.10 21.30 13.20 4.85 7.40 42.90
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barseem hay 39.20 17.90 14.80 4.30 8.20 48.60
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M aize stalks 38.10 32.80 7.90 3.70 6.40 40.90
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corn cobs 37.40 37.90 5.80 2.10 7.40 61.60
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cotton stalks 49.40 12.90 22.00 3.60 6.50 24.80
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rice hulls 39.10 13.70 11.00 3.70 21.90 23.70

REFERENCES pp:411.
9. Miller, F.C., E.R. Harper, and B.J. Macauley.
1. El-Haggar S. M., G. Mounir and L. Gennaro 1989. Field examination of temperature and oxygen
,2004. Agricultural waste as an energy source in relationships in mushroom composting stacks -
developing countries, a case study in Egypt on the consideration of stack oxygenation based on
utilization of agricultural waste through complexes. utilization and supply. Australian Journal of
International Centre for Science and High Experimental Agriculture 29(5):741-750.
T echnology (ICS).U nited N ations Industrial 10. California Compost Quality council (CCQC),
Development organization (UNODO). pp:1-10 2001.Compost maturity index. pp:1-26
2. Barnard, G. and L. Kristoferson, 1985.Agricultural 11. Preston, T. R., 1986. Better Utilization of Crop
residues as fuel in the third world. Earthscan, Residues and by-products in Animal Feeding:
Technical Report No. 4,IIED,London. Research guidelines. 2. A practical manual for
3. Lai, R., 2005. W orld crop residues production and research workers. FAO Animal Production and
implications of its use as a biofuel. Environment
Health Paper, No.52/2. FAO, Rome.
Intern.31.575-584.
12. Leng R A, B.S. Choo and C. Arreaze ,1992.
4. Geisel, P. M., 2001. Compost in a Hurry. Compost
Practical technologies to optimize feed utilization
in a Hurry University of California, Agriculture
by ruminants. In: A Speedy and P L Pugliese
and neutral recourses. Publication No 8037. pp:1-4.
(Editors). Legume Trees and Other Fodder trees as
5. A grower’s guide., 1999.Compost production and
Protein Sources for Livestock. FAO, Rome, Italy,
unitization. California Department of food and
Agriculture, University of California. USA.pp:1-17 pp:145-120.
6. Gray, K.R., and K. Sherman, 1970. Public 13. Sundstol F and E.C. Owen, 1984. Straw and Other
Cleansing. 60(7):343-354. Fibrous By-products as Feed (Editors: F Sundstol
7. G ray, K .R ., K. Sherman, and A .J. and E C Owen) Elsevier: Amersterdam
Biddlestone,1971. Process Biochemistry . 6(10):22- 14. Garrett, W .N., 1978. The value of rice straw
28. compared to alfalfa hay for feedlot diets. Proc.
8. Haug, R.T., 1993. Practical Handbook of Compost. W estern Section Amer. Soc. Anim . Sci.
Eng'g. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL. 29:375–378.

1123
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1116-1124, 2010

15. Garrett, W . N., and J. R. Dunbar,1992. Rice straw 23. Kung, Jr., L., J.R. Robinson, N.K. Ranjit, J.H.
as a feedstuff for ruminant live-stock. Unpublished Chen, C.M. Golt and J.D. Pesek, 2000. Microbial
report. Department of Animal Science. University populations, fermentation end-products and aerobic
ofstock. Unpublished report. Department of Animal stability of cron silage treated with ammonia or a
Science. University of California, Davis, CA. propionic acid-based preservative. J. Dairy Sci.
16. Nader, G., J. W illiams, and R. Ingram, 1998. New 83:1479-1486.
concepts of rice residue for use as cattle feed. 24. Lopez, J.M ., T.R. Preston and T.M. Sutherland.
Report to the Rice Research Board. 1976. The effect of various additives on lactic acid
17. Nader, G., 2000. Rice straw utilization by cattle. production in ensiled sorghum. Tropical Animal
Report to the Rice Research Board . Production. 3:25-29.
18. Leng, R. A. and T. R. Preston, 1984. Nutritional 25. Kung Jr.L. and R. Shaver. 2001. How good is
strategies for the utilization of agro-industrial by- your silage making? Hoards Dairyman. September
products by ruminants and extension of the 25. pp:597.
principles and technologies to the small farmer in 26. Takahashi, Z., Takahashi, S. and N. Oka, 1978.
Asia. IN: Proceedings 5th W orld Conference on Rice-straw compost: a new formula. The
A n im a l P ro d uc tio n . J a p a n e se S o c ie ty o f Mushroom Journal 71: 348-351, 1978.
Zootechnical Science: Tokyo pp:310-318 27. Abdel-Satar, M.A., 2004. Using compacted rice
19. Sansoucy, R .,1986. The Sahel: Manufacture of straw bales in cultivated some fruits and vegetable
molasses-urea blocks. W orld Animal Review crops. Ministry of Agriculture, Egyptian German
integrated pest management project. (in Arabic)
57:40-48
28. Alaa El-Din, M.N., I.Rizk, H.El-Lakkni, M.Abdel-
20. Bui An Xuan, Hieu Trong Luu, Duong Khang
Nabey, M.El Sabbah, and S.A. El- Shimi, 1984.
Nguyen and Preston Thomas R. 1992 Effect of
"Rural energy in Egypt, A survey of resources
position in the tree and pretreatment of Acacia
and domestic needs",. Inter. Cong. state of the art
mangium leaves on rumen dry matter and nitrogen
on biogas technology, transfer and diffusion,
degradabilities. Livestock Research for Rural
NRC, Cairo, Egypt.
Development 1992 Volume 4, Number 2:1-6
29. El-Shimi, S.A., and S.M.Arafa, 1995. "Biogas
21. Liu, J.X., 1995. Supplementing rice straw-based
Technology for Rural Egypt",. Conf. on Settling
diets for ruminants. In: M Ivan (Editor). Animal
T e c h n o lo g y fo r I n d u str ia l a nd S o c ia l
Research and Development: Moving toward a New
Development. Alex. Scientific Committee of the
Century. Proceeding of the 75th Anniversary Alexandria Syndicate of Engineers, Egypt, Jan. 24-
Meeting of the Canadian Society of Animal 26.
Science, Ministry of Supply & Services Canada, 30. El-Shimi, S.A.,1994. "Biogas Production and
Ottawa, Canada, pp:281-293. U tilization in Rural Egypt. Activities and
22. Huber, J.T., J. Foldager and N.E. Smith. 1979. Achievement of Agricultural Research Center",.
Nitrogen distribution in corn silage treated with Egyptian-French Seminar on Biological N-Fix
varying levels of ammonia. J. Anim. Sci. 48:1509- Associated with Cereal Crops, Giza, Egypt, Sept.
1516. 26-28.

1124