Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2008) 835–842

Review

Water conservation and reuse in poultry processing

plant—A case study
E.M. Matsumura ∗ , J.C. Mierzwa
Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Escola Politécnica, Departamento de Engenharia Hidráulica e Sanitária,
Av. Prof. Almeida Prado, 83 travessa 02, CEP 05508-900, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
Received 10 July 2007; received in revised form 22 October 2007; accepted 23 October 2007
Available online 5 March 2008

Abstract
Water conservation and water reuse concepts in food industry are presented in this paper. The developed study was in poultry processing
plant, which focused water reuse evaluation for only non-potable applications. Although potable water reuse is allowed in some coun-
tries and there are international regulations about this practice [Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Guidelines for Water Reuse; 2004.
http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/625r04108/625r04108.htm], this issue is recent in Brazil, where there is only a general regulation that deals with
non-potable water reuse. In this study, rational water use strategies to identify operational flaws were evaluated by improvements at operational
issues and physical losses identification. Some sectors with high water consumption and wastewater generation were identified, and the feasibility
of water reuse practices was evaluated. A reduction by almost 31% in water consumption was achieved as a result of this study. It can be concluded
that water conservation and water reuse programs are important tools for industry economy and its sustainability, and for the environment by
preserving freshwater resources.
© 2008 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Keywords: Water conservation and minimization; Water reuse; Poultry processing

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835
2. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836
3. Results and discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837
3.1. Rational water use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838
3.2. Water reuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839
3.2.1. Chilling room: water reuse from pre-chiller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839
3.2.2. Water reuse from gizzard machine to viscera flume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840
3.2.3. Thawing process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840
3.2.4. Water recovery from filter wash and sludge discharge from settling tank at the water treatment plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840
4. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842

1. Introduction tion sources and by increasing demands for many activities such
as public, industrial and agricultural water supply (Mierzwa and
Water shortage in metropolitan and industrialized regions of Hespanhol, 2005). An example is the location of an industry
Brazil has occurred because of the degradation by several pollu- case study, in which the specific water availability (SWA1 ) is
about 279 m3 /hab. year. This value is too low comparing to the

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +55 11 3091 5329/6256 6220;

fax: +55 11 3091 5423. 1 Specific water availability (SWA): gives the ratio of annual water availability

E-mail address: erika@sistemasurbanos.com.br (E.M. Matsumura). per inhabitant (m3 /hab. year).

0921-3449/$ – see front matter © 2008 Published by Elsevier B.V.

doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2007.10.002
836 E.M. Matsumura, J.C. Mierzwa / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2008) 835–842
average value for Brazil (50,162 m3 /hab. year). The occurrence
of this low value is because this is the most populated and indus-
trialized region of Brazil and water resource is limited, being the
value of water resource compromising rate (WRCR2 ) above 5,
which indicates a critical situation for water conflicts (Mierzwa,
2002). For this reason, it is necessary to improve water man-
agement strategies in order to reduce the possibility of water
scarcity.
About 81% of the Brazilian people live in urban areas, most
of them concentrated in 26 metropolitan regions. In these places,
water sources are not enough to supply consumption demands.
Because of this, government policies have been developed in
order to reduce impacts in water sources by lower capture and
less wastewater generation accordingly to quality standards. The
adoption of water charge policies to collect and to discharge
water will probably force industries to minimize water con-
sumption and make better use of this resource. Consequently,
industries will need to adopt water conservation and minimiza-
tion policies in their processes over water reuse practices.
In a food industry, water reuse practice is more difficult. In
Brazil, the quality of water in contact with food needs to be
potable and recycled water is allowed in the food industry as
long as it does not bring risks to health.
According to the Codex Alimentarius Commission
(FAO/WHO) (2001), water reuse can be conducted in direct
contact with food and this water can be incorporated to the
final product, but this use is limited in function of water quality.
In Brazil, this use is not allowed because there is no specific
regulation. The water reuse concept has just begun to be applied
by the existence of a general regulation about this practice with
rules for non-potable water reuse.
Water reuse requires special care about its implementation in
the food industry, mainly because of potential biological con-
tamination to products. It is necessary to watch the quality of the
water in contact with edible products, for which potable quality
water is required.
One of the main difficulties to obtain water reuse with ade-
quate quality is the characterization of the effluent to be treated,
identification and quantification of substances, which can pose
risks to public health.
An example of food industry is a poultry processing plant,
which consumes a large amount of water in its processes. Its
effluent can be treated and the water reused in a lot of pro-
cesses or activities within the plant. In many sites, water from
chilling and scalding processes is reused for viscera and feather
transportation in the flumes (DPPEA, 2004).
According to the Environmental Technology Best Practice
Programme (2000), specific water consumption can be between
8 and 15 L/poultry and effluent produced in processing areas has
a high concentration of BOD, COD and TSS.
2 Water resource compromising Rate (WRCR): indicates tendency of poten-
tial conflicts and other environmental problems to occur in a given region. Its
value presents a dimensionless range of 1–5, in which 1 indicates that there is
no environmental conflict and 5 indicates a critical condition in environmental
stress.
Blood, soluble fat and feces are responsible for high concen-
trations of BOD. Because of feces, it is important to be ware
of pathogens such as Salmonella sp. and Campylobacter jejuni
that are parasite and virus, respectively (EPA, 2002).
Thus, in this study, the reduction in water consumption by
conservation and reuse concepts in poultry processing plants
was evaluated. To help this, it was necessary to understand all
existing processes in this kind of production (FACTA, 1994 and
Mead, 1996) and standards for poultry products industry (EPA,
2002).
2. Methodology
With conservation and water reuse concepts, this study was
developed by assessing the consumption in water processes and
its minimization, intending to make use of water from one pro-
cess to another, with or without any kind of treatment, targeting
system sustainability and alimentary security.
The first step was industry characterization by collecting
information about processes and activities developed in order
to understand these functioning and routines.
Data collection was conducted by analyzing lay-out
processes, water distribution system, sewage and drainage col-
lecting system projects, equipment specifications and chemical
and energy consumption.
To achieve water consumption and effluent generation flows
at processes, there were used data available from a previous
study conducted at the site.
Industries were sectioned by water consumption and waste
generation. Production buildings were categorized according to
activities developed, and domestic uses were grouped in only
one sector.
The data were organized in a flowchart in order to obtain an
industry water flow balance. Micro-flow, in each sector consid-
ered and macro-flow, for the industry as a whole, were evaluated
considering water demand according to its temperature and
required quality.
With results of demand at each point of use and in each sec-
tor, it consumption was prioritized by classification of water
volume using the ABC curve concept (Solano, 2003), where it
is graphically possible to identify the highest water consumers.
The ABC curve concept aims to order items accordingly to
their relative importance. Usually, this curve is divided into three
parts: “A”, “B” and “C”. “A” represents the most important items
which require special attention, “B” is the intermediate group
and “C” indicates the group with less importance. To demarcate
these groups, the inflection points from resultant curve were
considered.
After these steps, some options for rational water use were
evaluated. Attention was given to operational processes proce-
dures to identify possible flaws such as physical water losses
and inadequate operational conditions so as to reduce water
consumption and waste generation. After that, the feasibility
of water reuse practices was evaluated.
Water reuse options were considered for sectors the processes
of which require a great volume of water and generate a large
volume of wastewater. Water reuse from wastewater treatment
 E.M. Matsumura, J.C. Mierzwa / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2008) 835–842 837

Table 1 Table 3
Water demand by its quality required for use Water demand by the temperature required for reuse
Water quality Water demand Percentage (%) Water temperature Water demand Percentage (%)
(m3 /day) (m3 /day)

Potable water 2837.06 77 Room water temperature 537.34 75

Reuse water 720.34 20 Cold water temperature 183.00 25
Raw water 117.43 3 Hot water temperature 0.00 0

Table 2 Finally, the water saved by the poultry plant was evaluated.
Water demand by its temperature required for use
Water temperature Water demand Percentage (%) 3. Results and discussions
(m3 /day)

Room water temperature 1737.50 48 Table 1 presents the water demand identified by the quality
Cold water temperature 419.30 11 required for use in the industry case study. These values result
Hot water temperature 1518.02 41 from the water flow balance conducted with data collection from
a previous study conducted at the site.
The values in this table indicate the maximum potential of
plant was not considered because of the high microbiological water consumption, but they do not occur simultaneously. There
contamination risk. Thus, it was important to consider the col- is water recycling or water reuse in some sectors; because of that,
lection and treatment of effluent from processes before mixing the total water consumption volume is higher when compared
it to other ones, making its reuse possible. to the water source total (2622 m3 ).

Fig. 1. ABC curve—water consumption per sector.

Fig. 2. ABC curve—water consumption by unit.

838 E.M. Matsumura, J.C. Mierzwa / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2008) 835–842

From Table 1, it can be verified that almost 20% of the indus-
try water demand can be supplied with reuse water.
In Table 2, the distribution of water requirement is presented,
according to its temperature. Room temperature water corre-
sponds to the major need and, at this temperature, water can be
achieved by heat exchanger from cold or hot used water.
The next evaluation was conducted concerning water reuse
demand, identifying water demand by its temperature, as shown
in Table 3, where no hot water is required for reuse.
With the data collection, the major sectors and activities that
correspond to the highest water consumption in the industry
were identified. To show them graphically, concepts the ABC
curves were used, as presented in Figs. 1 and 2.
Range “A” from Fig. 1 shows the six sectors corresponding
to 80% of water consumption. They are:
• Scalding/production area;
• Machinery room/cooling system;
• Evisceration;
• Receiving area/production area;
• Chillers (entire poultry);
• Logistic sector.
Fig. 2 there presents the nine activities or units corresponding
to almost 49% of water demand in industry in range “A”:
• Cage cleaning;
• Production of ice;
• Feather removal;
• Water heating;
• Gizzard removal;
• Cooling with pre-chiller (room temperature water);
• Cooling with main chiller (cold water and ice);
• Tail feather removal;
• Feet scalding.
For water conservation and minimization, the rational water
use and water reuse technologies were studied, as follow.
3.1. Rational water use
At this stage, the target was to reduce water consumption
with the least effort and costs of investments. For this purpose,
the following were considered:
• physical losses: water leaks were identified at the central
reservoir header and at the condensed water reservoir. Both
leaks were repaired as soon as reported.
• inadequate operations: there was no purge control at the cool-
ing tower, where the concentration cycle was lower than ideal;
there was no control of water consumption in truck and live
poultry storage cage washing.
• operational improvements: cold water shower in live poultry
storage sector with no control valve; some hydrometers were
not in use; nonaccounted water consumption in evisceration
and chilling room during maintenance procedures; reduction

Table 4
Improvements to rational use
Site Improvements

Truck washing Adoption of high-pressure washer to operate at the same operation existing time,
with 0.02 m3 /min consumption
Live poultry storage washing Adoption of high-pressure washer to operate at the same operation existing time,
with 0.02 m3 /min consumption
Cold water shower (live poultry) Reduction of shower time from 5.8 to 5 min/trucka .
Evisceration and chilling room Consideration of water consumption in maintenance process
Replacement of main chiller Replacement of main chiller by air chilling with no water consumption.
ClO2 production Reduction of ClO2 production because of main chiller replacement
Equipment and floor washing Adoption of high-pressure washer to operate at the same operation existing time,
with 0.02 m3 /min consumption
Cooling system (reposition flow) Increase in concentration cycle from 2 to 5 cycles
a 5 min considered enough for shower time.

Table 5
Reduction of water consumption with rational use
Site Present consumption Rational consumption Reduction or increase in
(m3 /day) (m3 /day) consumption (%)

Truck washing 64.6 20.4 Reduction 68.4

Live poultry storage washing 30.6 20.4 Reduction 33.3
Cold water shower (live poultry) 117.43 101.67 Reduction 13.4
Evisceration and chilling room 404.6 410.55 Increase 1.5
Replacement of main chiller 144.0 0 Reduction 100.0
ClO2 production 4.2 2.35 Reduction 44.1
Equipment and floor washing 78.5 2.0 Reduction 97.5
Cooling system (reposition flow) 289.44 180.90 Reduction 37.5
Total 1133.37 738.27 Reduction 34.9
 E.M. Matsumura, J.C. Mierzwa / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2008) 835–842 839

in water consumption with replacement of main chiller by less Table 6

water consumption process or by cold air chilling and, conse- Discharged water in conditions to be reused by temperature
quently, less water consumption at ClO2 production; equip- Water temperature Discharged water Percentage (%)
ment and floor washing processes of production area with (m3 /day)
effective previous dry cleaning procedure, and adequate con- Room water temperature 245.34 13
centration cycle of cooling system with low reposition flow. Cold water temperature 306.43 17
Hot water temperature 1278.23 70
Table 4 presents improvements to adequate operation pro-
cesses.
After the improvements mentioned above, it was possible
to obtain a general water consumption reduction of about were identified as well as their temperatures, as shown in
34.9% or 395.1 m3 /day at the places evaluated, corresponding Table 6.
to 15.1% of the whole demand for the industry. As shown As shown in Table 3, no hot water is required for reuse. Thus,
in Table 5, only evisceration and chilling room had increase lot of hot water volume proceeding from wastewater treatment
in water consumption because these consumptions were not needs a complex treatment technology.
considered by the industry as demand. So, with these values Water demand at room temperature and cold temperature
added to demand in industry, reduction could not be higher. can be supplied by room temperature and cold temperature
For the present production of 155,000 poultry/day and water discharged water.
demand as a result of rational use, the specific water consump- Processing units and sectors with major potential water reuse
tion could reach 14.4 L/poultry, instead of the 16.9 L/poultry were researched as shown next:
(existing value). As a result, a volume of 390 m3 /day in water
saving can be achieved, as compared to the 2622 m3 /day existing 3.2.1. Chilling room: water reuse from pre-chiller
water supply. Two configurations of reuse were evaluated: continuous
discharged effluent reuse (during chilling process), and batch
3.2. Water reuse discharged effluent reuse (after chilling process when water is
discharged from chillers).
In the next stage, water reuse technologies were studied. Both configurations considered a process for oil–water sep-
First, sources of discharged water in conditions to be reused aration (skimming tank) and membrane filtration by ultra

Fig. 3. Pre-chiller water balance (continuous effluent discharge).

Fig. 4. Pre-chiller water balance (bath effluent discharge).

840 E.M. Matsumura, J.C. Mierzwa / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2008) 835–842

Fig. 5. Gizzard machine to viscera flume water balance.

filtration (UF) for further permeate reuse. Figs. 3 and 4 show
a schematic diagram of these systems.
3.2.2. Water reuse from gizzard machine to viscera flume
At gizzard processing, water is continuously used and dis-
charged into an effluent flume where it mixes with others
effluents. This water can be intercepted before its discharge
into the effluent flume and be used in inedible viscera flume
as cascade water reuse (Fig. 5). This option does not need any
pre-treatment for water reuse.
3.2.3. Thawing process
The thawing process of freezing tunnel and frigorific
chamber produce water in reuse condition. The contamination
level of this water is low, with mainly particulate materials
that get into it from varied sources. There is a small number of
measurable contaminants in water. Filtration process is enough
to retain particles as shown in Fig. 6.
3.2.4. Water recovery from filter wash and sludge discharge
from settling tank at the water treatment plant
This effluent is discharged into the drainage system, instead
of being reused. Fig. 7 shows an option for water recovery: from
filter wash, water could be returned to the entrance of the water
treatment plant because of its low concentration of TSS; water
of discharged sludge from the settling tank could be extracted
by its thickening and dewatering and finally be returned to the
water treatment plant entrance. With these improvements, there
would be less discharged water and total volume of treatment
could increase with no additional extraction from water sources.
After water reuse evaluation, Table 7 presents the daily vol-
ume of effluent to be reused and, consequently, the water saving
volume.
With previous rational water use evaluation a volume
of 390 m3 /day as water saving was acquired, resulting in
2232 m3 /day of water demand.
With water reuse evaluation an additional volume of
487.94 m3 /day of water saving can be acquired, resulting in
1744.06 m3 /day of water demand.

Fig. 6. Thawing process water balance.

 E.M. Matsumura, J.C. Mierzwa / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2008) 835–842 841

Fig. 7. Hydric balance of solid stage of water treatment plant.

Reduction of water demand in industry can be by 33.48% as 4. Conclusions

compared to the initial volume of 2622 m3 /day.
With rational water use and later water reuse, specific water As result of this study, it can be concluded that water con-
consumption in the facility could be reduced to 11.25 L/poultry, servation and water reuse are very important tools to minimize
a reduction by 33.43% as compared to the initial 16.9 L/ water scarcity problems in urban and industrial areas.
poultry. The full understanding of all existing processes in an industry
is an important step to devise water consumption reduction, such
as operational proceedings changes and an effective control of
water use activities.
Table 7 Rational water use evaluation indicates a potential reduction
Possible effluents as sources for water reuse by 14.9% in total water demand in industry, as the total demand
Effluent sources Effluent volume was reduced from 2622 to 2232 m3 /day. In evaluated sectors
(m3 /day) and processing units, water demand can be reduced by almost
Pre-chiller (water reuse—continuous 80.00 34.9%, decreasing from 1133.37 to 738.27 m3 /day simply by
feed of effluent) rational water use.
Pre-chiller (water reuse—batch feed 51.00 Adopting water reuse programs in addition to rational water
of effluent) use, water consumption can be reduced by 21.9%, considering
Gizzard machine (cascade water 239.78
reuse in viscera flume)
the improvements implemented.
Thawing water (water reuse—treated 20.00a Jointly considering rational water use and water reuse imple-
effluent) mentations, comparing to an initial demand of 2622 m3 /day, the
Water treatment plant (water 97.16 reduction of water consumption in the industry is about 33.48%,
reuse—treated effluent) reduced to 1744.06 m3 /day.
Total 487.94
About specific water consumption, from the initial
a Considering daily volume available. 16.9 L/poultry, the value of 11.25 L/poultry can be achieved with
842 E.M. Matsumura, J.C. Mierzwa / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2008) 835–842
rational water use and water reuse programs, attaining a value
between 8 and 15 L/poultry as expected.
References
Codex Alimentarius Commission (FAO/WHO). Codex Committee on Food
Hygiene—Proposed Draft Guidelines for the Hygienic Reuse of Processing
Water in Food Plants. Bangkok, Thailand: Thirty-fourth session; 2001.
DPPEA (Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance). North Carolina
Department and Natural Resources. Water Efficiency. Industry Specific Pro-
cesses; 2004, http://www.p2pays.org.
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Development Document for
the Proposed Effluent Limitations – Guidelines and Standards for
the Meat and Poultry Products Industry – Point Source Category
(40 Cfr 432); 2002. http://www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/
cfr/title40/part432.html.
Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme. Reducing Water and
Effluent Costs in Poultry Meat Processing. Guide GG233; 2000.
http://www.envirowise.gov.uk.
FACTA (Fundação APINCO de Ciência e Tecnologia Avı́colas). Abate de Pro-
cessamento de Frangos. Campinas; 1994.
Mead GC. Processing of Poultry. Bristol, UK: Chapman & Hall;
1996.
Mierzwa JC. O uso racional e o reúso como ferramentas para o gerenciamento
de águas e efluentes na indústria – estudo de caso da Kodak Brasileira. São
Paulo. Tese (Doutorado) – Escola Politécnica da Universidade de São Paulo.
Departamento de Engenharia Hidráulica e Sanitária; 2002.
Mierzwa, J.C., Hespanhol, I. Água na Indústria—Uso Racional e Reúso. São
Paulo. Ed. Oficina de Textos; 2005, p. 143.
Solano, R.S. Curva ABC de fornecedores: uma contribuição ao plane-
jamento, programação, controle e gerenciamento de empreendimentos
e obras. Florianópolis. Dissertação (Mestrado)—Programa de Pós-
Graduação em Engenharia de Produção, Universidade Federal de
Santa Catarina; 2003. p. 167. http://teses.eps.ufsc.br/defesa/pdf/12863.
pdf.
Further reading
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Guidelines for Water Reuse; 2000.
http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/625r04108/625r04108.htm.