Method for treating waste chickens

Abstract

To provide a method for treating waste chickens, capable of preventing or suppressing infiltration of water into soil by a simple method and keeping the wasted chickens in a safe state even after the wasted chickens is buried in the soil by killing or the like.SOLUTION: A method for treating waste chickens comprises: an excavation process for excavating a hole in the ground of a land where the waste chickens are buried; a charging process for charging the waste chickens into the hole; a burying process for backfilling the hole with soil and sand; and a spraying process for spraying a treating agent containing thermoplastic resin on a surfaces of the backfilled soil and sand, where the soil and sand are not rolled in the burying process.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a method for disposing of discarded chickens that have been buried in the ground after being slaughtered or the like. [Background technology]

[0002] For example, in Japan, when highly pathogenic avian influenza (hereafter simply referred to as "avian influenza") breaks out, prefectural governors issue orders to cull chickens, and chickens are culled at poultry farms. The culled chickens are sterilized with lime, then packed into flexible container bags (hereafter referred to as "flexible container bags") and buried in the ground.

[0003] When chickens are slaughtered, rigor mortis occurs. If such rigor mortis chickens are stuffed into flexible container bags, the rigor mortis carcasses may break through the bag, potentially resulting in the leakage of chicken body fluids from the broken parts. To address this issue, the inventors developed a method for disposing of discarded chickens (Patent Application No. 2024-34144) using a superabsorbent polymer (SAP), which successfully solved the problem before burial (e.g., during transport of the flexible container bags). However, after the flexible container bags are buried in the ground, the weight of the soil exerts significant pressure on the bags, again increasing the likelihood of leakage of body fluids from broken parts. Because chicken body fluids are infectious organic waste, there is a risk of secondary contamination spreading to the surrounding area if soil erosion due to rainfall or flooding causes water to seep into the ground, resulting in the leakage of chicken body fluids.

[0004] Techniques for preventing soil erosion caused by rainfall or flooding are found in civil engineering works, slope revegetation works, etc. For example, the soil surface stabilization method described in Patent Document 1 involves spraying onto the soil surface a chemical agent made by adding a polymer emulsion to a mixture containing an acetylene alcohol derivative and a cationic water-soluble polymer. Patent Document 1 claims that this method can effectively prevent turbid water from occurring during rainfall.

[0005] The soil stabilization method described in Patent Document 2 involves spreading a solution of chitosan obtained from crab shells diluted with water onto the soil as an erosion inhibitor. According to Patent Document 2, adjusting the chitosan concentration to a specific range is expected to have an anti-erosion effect on soil. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0006] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 11-80727 [Patent Document 2] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2010-275697 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0007] However, the soil surface stabilization method of Patent Document 1 uses a chemical containing a cationic water-soluble polymer, which raises concerns about fish toxicity. In addition, since multiple components must be mixed to prepare the chemical, preparation before use is time-consuming.

[0008] The soil stabilization method of Patent Document 2 uses chitosan, a natural biodegradable material, so there is no problem of fish toxicity, but the water inundation prevention effect is not sustainable. In fact, Patent Document 2 states that "the purpose of the construction method of the present invention is not to stabilize the slope permanently, but to stabilize the slope for a certain period after the slope is formed until plants grow" (paragraph 2 of Patent Document 2).

[0009] (See reference), and is not intended to maintain the flood prevention effect for a long period of time.

[0009] Furthermore, both Patent Documents 1 and 2 are technologies related to the field of civil engineering work, and are not intended to be used in the treatment of infectious organic waste.

[0010] The present invention has been made in consideration of the above-mentioned problems, and aims to provide a method for disposing of discarded chickens that can prevent or suppress water from seeping into the soil using a simple method, and that can maintain chickens discarded by culling or other means in a safe state even after burying them in the soil. [Means for solving the problem]

[0011] The characteristic configuration of the method for processing discarded chickens according to the present invention to solve the above problems is as follows: an excavation process for digging holes in the ground where discarded chickens will be buried; A throwing step of throwing discarded chickens into the hole; a burying step of backfilling the hole with soil and sand; a spraying step of spraying a treatment agent containing a thermoplastic resin on the surface of the backfilled soil and sand; It encompasses In the embedding step, the soil and sand are not compacted.

[0012] According to the present disposal method for discarded chickens, a hole is dug in the ground where the discarded chickens will be buried (excavation step), the discarded chickens are placed in the hole (placement step), the hole is then backfilled with soil (burial step), and finally, a treatment agent containing a thermoplastic resin is sprayed onto the surface of the backfilled soil (spraying step). This simple process forms a thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) on the surface of the soil, preventing or suppressing water infiltration into the soil. This reduces the risk of infectious organic waste derived from chicken body fluids being washed away by rainfall or flooding, and allows discarded chickens, such as those slaughtered, to be maintained in a safe state even after burying them in the soil. Furthermore, because the soil is not compacted during the burial step, the discarded chickens in the soil are not crushed by pressure, which also contributes to the safety of the present disposal method for discarded chickens. Furthermore, the present disposal method for discarded chickens is efficient because the shape of the soil can be sufficiently maintained by the thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) without the need for compaction, eliminating the need for compaction.

[0013] In the method for treating discarded chickens according to the present invention, In the burying step, it is preferable that the soil and sand be used to form an embankment.

[0014] According to the disposal method for discarded chickens of this configuration, by forming a mound of soil with soil in the burying step, even if the discarded chickens buried in the ground naturally decompose and create a cavity in the soil, the mound will sink into the cavity, preventing the ground from sinking (forming a hole).

[0015] In the method for treating discarded chickens according to the present invention, In the burying step, it is preferable that the soil generated in the excavation step is used as the soil to backfill the hole.

[0016] According to the method for disposing of discarded chickens of this configuration, the soil generated in the excavation step is used as the soil to backfill the hole in the burying step, thereby enabling the generated soil to be effectively reused. Furthermore, since the same soil is used in the excavation step and the burying step, the properties of the land where the discarded chickens are disposed do not change, allowing for safe and appropriate disposal.

[0017] In the method for treating discarded chickens according to the present invention, In the spraying step, the content of the thermoplastic resin contained in the treatment agent is preferably 3 to 10.5% by weight.

[0018] According to the method for treating discarded chickens of this configuration, by setting the content of thermoplastic resin contained in the treatment agent to 3 to 10.5% by weight in the spraying process, a good thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) is formed on the surface of the soil and sand, which reliably prevents infectious organic waste derived from chicken body fluids, etc. from being washed away by rainfall, flooding, etc.

[0019] In the method for treating discarded chickens according to the present invention, In the spraying step, the amount of the treatment agent sprayed was 0.5 kg / m 2 It is preferable that this is equal to or greater than this.

[0020] According to the method for treating discarded chickens of this configuration, the amount of treatment agent sprayed in the spraying step is 0.5 kg / m 2By doing so, the treatment agent penetrates from the soil surface to an appropriate depth, forming a good thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) on the soil surface, which reliably prevents infectious organic waste derived from chicken body fluids and the like from being washed away by rainfall, flooding, etc.

[0021] In the method for treating discarded chickens according to the present invention, In the spraying step, the thermoplastic resin contained in the treatment agent is preferably ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA).

[0022] According to this disposal method for discarded chickens, a durable thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) can be formed on the surface of the soil by using ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) as the thermoplastic resin contained in the treatment agent. Furthermore, since the treatment agent containing ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) can be sprayed on the surface of the soil in the form of a solution (emulsion), it can be said that the workability of the spraying process is excellent.

[0023] In the method for treating discarded chickens according to the present invention, The discarded chickens are preferably chickens that have been culled due to an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza.

[0024] According to the method for processing discarded chickens of this configuration, even if chickens culled due to an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza damage the processing container due to rigor mortis and infectious organic waste derived from the chicken's body fluids, etc., leaks from the processing container, the thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) formed on the surface of the soil can prevent or suppress water from entering the soil, thereby reducing the risk of infectious organic waste leaking out due to rainfall, flooding, etc., and the discarded chickens can be kept safe in the soil. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0025] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating the method for treating discarded chickens of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0026] The following describes embodiments of the method for treating discarded chickens of the present invention, but the present invention is not limited to these embodiments.

[0027] While investigating various methods for preventing water infiltration into the ground, the inventors noticed that compacting soil with a thermoplastic resin could impart water resistance to the soil. They hypothesized that using such a thermoplastic resin would be effective in preventing or inhibiting water infiltration into the ground, thereby reducing the risk of infectious organic waste derived from chicken body fluids, etc., being washed away by rainfall or flooding, even after cull chickens have been buried in the soil. As will be described in detail in the Examples below, a treatment agent containing ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA), an example of a thermoplastic resin, was sprayed onto simulated soil to compact the surface soil, and a water infiltration test was conducted on this simulated soil, confirming that it had a high water infiltration suppression effect. Thus, the inventors discovered that treating soil with a thermoplastic resin allows for safe and appropriate disposal of cull chickens even after burial, leading to the completion of the present invention. That is, the method for disposing of discarded chickens of the present invention involves spraying a treatment agent containing a thermoplastic resin onto the surface of the soil in which chickens to be disposed of have been buried, and is particularly intended for disposing of chickens that have been culled due to an outbreak of avian influenza.

[0028] <Treatment chemicals> In the method for treating discarded chickens of the present invention, a thermoplastic resin or a composition containing a thermoplastic resin is used as a treatment agent to solidify the soil. Examples of thermoplastic resins include ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA), polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polystyrene (PS), and acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene copolymer (ABS). Among these thermoplastic resins, ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) is preferred. While the ratio of ethylene to vinyl acetate in ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) is not particularly limited, increasing the ratio of ethylene to vinyl acetate results in the formation of a flexible film, while increasing the ratio of vinyl acetate to vinyl acetate results in the formation of a hard film. Therefore, the ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) used as a treatment agent can be selected from those with an appropriate ratio of ethylene to vinyl acetate depending on the properties of the soil to be treated. For example, by adjusting the ratio of ethylene in ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) to approximately 3 to 10% (molar equivalent), a film with a good balance of flexibility and hardness can be formed, making it suitable for use with a wide range of soils.

[0029] In addition to the thermoplastic resin, the treatment agent may also contain a bactericide, an antibacterial agent, an antiviral agent, a deodorizer, a thickener, a dispersant, and the like.

[0030] The treatment agent is preferably in the form of an emulsion in which a thermoplastic resin is dispersed in a solvent, and particularly preferably an aqueous emulsion in which a thermoplastic resin is dispersed in water. The content of the thermoplastic resin (solid content) in this emulsion (treatment agent) is preferably 3 to 10.5% by weight. Within this range, the soil can be appropriately solidified, forming a thermoplastic resin layer that serves as a good waterproofing layer on the soil surface. If the content of the thermoplastic resin in the treatment agent is less than 3% by weight, the soil may not be sufficiently solidified. On the other hand, if the content of the thermoplastic resin in the treatment agent is more than 10.5% by weight, cracks may occur on the surface of the solidified soil (thermoplastic resin layer).

[0031] When using (spraying) emulsion-type treatment agents, the amount used (sprayed) should be 0.5 kg / m2 on the soil surface (ground). 2 It is preferable that the content is 1 kg / m or more. 2 It is more preferable that the amount of treatment agent used is 0.5 kg / m or more. 2 If the amount of treatment agent used is 0.5 kg / m or more, the treatment agent will reach a moderate depth (for example, 1 to 10 cm) from the soil surface, and a good thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) can be formed on the soil surface as a waterproof layer. 2 If the amount is less than this, the treatment chemical will not penetrate into the soil sufficiently and will remain near the soil surface, which may result in the soil not being sufficiently consolidated. On the other hand, there is no particular upper limit on the amount of treatment chemical to be used, but considering the cost of using the treatment chemical, 5 kg / m is recommended. 2 The extent is realistic.

[0032] <How to dispose of discarded chickens> The method for treating cull chickens of the present invention, which is carried out using the above-mentioned treatment agent, will now be described. Figure 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating the method for treating cull chickens of the present invention. The method for treating cull chickens of the present invention includes four steps: an excavation step, a throwing step, a burying step, and a spraying step. Each step will be described in detail below.

[0033] <Drilling process> In the excavation process, a hole 2 is dug in the ground 1 where discarded chickens (chickens culled due to an outbreak of avian influenza) will be buried (Figures 1(a) and 1(b)). The land where discarded chickens are buried is usually located within the premises of a poultry farm. Because discarded chickens are disposed of in flexible container bags, the size of the hole 2 need only be large enough to hold several to a dozen flexible container bags (1100 mm diameter, 1100 mm height, 1000 L capacity). For the sake of convenience, Figure 2(b) illustrates the excavation means 3 used to excavate the hole 2 as a shovel, but heavy machinery such as a backhoe is typically used. The soil 4 generated by the excavation of the hole 2 is temporarily stored near the hole 2.

[0034] <Input process> In the throwing step, discarded chickens (more precisely, flexible container bags containing discarded chickens) 5 are thrown into the hole 2 (Fig. 1(c)). The discarded chickens 5 preferably fit to a depth of about two-thirds the depth of the hole 2. It is also desirable that the discarded chickens 5 are thrown in so that they are aligned at the bottom of the hole 2.

[0035] <Burial process> In the burying process, the hole 2 is backfilled with soil 4 (Figure 1(d)). In the present invention, it is important not to compact the soil 4. Compaction refers to the process of hardening the ground using tools such as rollers and rammers or heavy machinery. In road construction, the laid soil is typically compacted to increase the strength of the soil surface, but compaction also transmits pressure to the soil. In the present invention, the backfilled soil 4 is not compacted to prevent the buried discarded chickens from being crushed by the pressure. The soil 4 generated in the excavation process is used to backfill the hole 2. This allows for effective reuse of the soil 4. Furthermore, because the same soil 4 is used in both the excavation and burying processes, the properties of the land where discarded chickens 5 are disposed remain unchanged, allowing for safe and appropriate disposal.

[0036] <Spraying process> In the spraying step, a treatment agent 6 containing a thermoplastic resin is sprayed onto the surface of the backfilled soil 4 (FIG. 1(e)). Ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) is a preferable thermoplastic resin. Ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) can form a durable thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) on the surface of the soil 4. Furthermore, since the treatment agent containing ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) can be sprayed onto the surface of the soil 4 in the form of a solution (emulsion), the spraying step can be said to be easy to use. The means for spraying the treatment agent 6 is not particularly limited, and examples include a spraying device 11 consisting of a chemical tank 8, a pump 9, and a shower head 10, as shown in the figure. The content of the thermoplastic resin in the treatment agent 6 is preferably 3 to 10.5% by weight. The spray rate of the treatment agent 6 is 0.5 kg / m. 2The above is preferable. These are as explained in the "Treatment Agent" section above. When the treatment agent 6 dries, a thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) 7 is formed on the surface of the soil 4. Note that, when discarded chickens 5 buried in the soil naturally decompose, cavities may form in the soil. However, if an embankment is formed with the soil 4 as shown in Figure 1(d), the embankment will sink into the cavities as shown in Figure 1(f), preventing the ground from settling (forming holes).

[0037] As described above, the method for disposing of culled chickens of the present invention involves a simple process: digging a hole 2 in the ground 1 where culled chickens 5 are to be buried (excavation step), dumping the culled chickens 5 into the hole 2 (loading step), backfilling the hole 2 with soil 4 (burying step), and finally spraying a treatment agent 6 containing a thermoplastic resin onto the surface of the backfilled soil 4 (spraying step). This simple process forms a thermoplastic resin on the surface of the soil 4, preventing or inhibiting water penetration into the soil. This reduces the risk of infectious organic waste derived from chicken body fluids, etc., being washed away by rainfall or flooding, and allows chickens discarded by slaughter or other means to be kept safe even after burying them in the ground. Furthermore, because the soil 4 is not compacted in the burial step, the culled chickens 5 in the ground are not crushed by pressure. This also contributes to the safety of the method for disposing of culled chickens of the present invention. Furthermore, the method for processing discarded chickens of the present invention can be said to be efficient in that the shape of the soil 4 can be sufficiently maintained by the thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) 7 without the need for compacting the soil 4, thereby eliminating the need for compaction work.

[0038] Furthermore, according to the method for processing discarded chickens of the present invention, even if chickens that have been culled due to an outbreak of avian influenza damage the flexible container bag (processing container) due to rigor mortis and infectious organic waste derived from the chicken's body fluids, etc., leaks out of the flexible container bag, the thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) 7 formed on the surface of the soil 4 can prevent or suppress water from entering the soil, thereby reducing the risk of infectious organic waste leaking out due to rainfall, flooding, etc., and the discarded chickens 5 can be kept safe in the soil. [Example]

[0039] In order to verify the effectiveness of the method for treating discarded chickens of the present invention, a submersion test was carried out on soil treated with a treating agent.

[0040] <Medicines and materials used> The drugs and materials used in the test are as follows: Treatment agent: Ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) aqueous emulsion (solid content of the original solution: 21% by weight) Comparative agent: carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) Clay: Clay from Tochigi Prefecture (Tochi Clay (registered trademark)) Sand: Mixed sand of silica sand No. 3 and silica sand No. 5 in a 1:1 (weight ratio)

[0041] <Rainfall Reproduction> According to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism website, the average annual rainfall in Japan is 1,718 mm. Also, according to the Japan Meteorological Agency website, a situation in which the rainfall per hour is between 50 mm and 80 mm is considered "very heavy rain," and a situation in which the rainfall is 80 mm or more is considered "severe rain." Based on this information, the target area for this flooding test was set to 120 mm x 120 mm (0.0144 m 2 ) and simultaneously reproduced the amount of precipitation (volume) and rain intensity (flow rate) by generating half a year's worth of precipitation in a short period of time.

[0042] [Precipitation (volume)] The calculation formula is omitted, but the average annual rainfall in Japan is 1718 mm, which is 0.0144 m. 2 The amount of precipitation (volume) that fell in this area over six months is calculated to be approximately 13 (L).

[0043] [Rain intensity (flow)] Using a garden shower to spray tap water at a flow rate of 1.3 L / min for 10 minutes continuously, we were able to replicate the aforementioned six-month rainfall (volume) of 13 L. While we will not go into the calculations, this amount of rainfall (volume) converted to 78 mm per hour, which corresponds to the "very heavy rain" defined by the Japan Meteorological Agency.

[0044] <Preparation of reproduced soil> To simulate the soil generated when excavating land where discarded chickens are buried, clay and sand were mixed in weight ratios of (1) 100%:0%, (2) 70%:30%, and (3) 50%:50%. Each mixture was then hydrated and stirred until it resembled typical surplus soil, yielding replica soils A, B, and C. Note that adding water and stirring the mixtures would result in some of the soil becoming aggregated, resulting in greater variation in particle size. Furthermore, the aggregated soil would have larger gaps, potentially making it difficult to accurately evaluate the soil infiltration test. Therefore, the soil was sieved using a 2.0 mm mesh sieve, and the material that passed through the sieve was used as the replica soil for testing. The composition of the replica soils A, B, and C is shown in Table 1.

[0045] [Table 1]

[0046] <Water immersion test> Soil and sand submersion tests were carried out using the treatment agents of the following Examples 1 to 8. For comparison, soil and sand submersion tests were also carried out in the same manner using the treatment agent of Comparative Example 1 or under the conditions of Comparative Examples 2 and 3.

[0047] Example 1 An undiluted solution of an aqueous emulsion of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) with a solid content of 21% by weight was diluted twice with water to prepare the treatment agent of Example 1 (solid content: 10.5% by weight).

[0048] Example 2 An undiluted solution of an aqueous emulsion of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) with a solid content of 21% by weight was diluted five times with water to prepare the treatment agent of Example 2 (solid content: 4.2% by weight).

[0049] Example 3 An undiluted solution of an aqueous emulsion of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) with a solid content of 21% by weight was diluted 6 times with water to prepare the treatment agent of Example 3 (solid content: 3.5% by weight).

[0050] Example 4 An undiluted solution of an aqueous emulsion of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) with a solid content of 21% by weight was diluted 7 times with water to prepare the treatment agent of Example 4 (solid content 3.0% by weight).

[0051] Example 5 An undiluted solution of an aqueous emulsion of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) with a solid content of 21% by weight was diluted 8 times with water to prepare the treatment agent of Example 5 (solid content: 2.6% by weight).

[0052] Example 6 An undiluted solution of an aqueous emulsion of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) with a solid content of 21% by weight was diluted 9 times with water to prepare the treatment agent of Example 6 (solid content: 2.3% by weight).

[0053] Example 7 An undiluted solution of an aqueous emulsion of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) with a solid content of 21% by weight was diluted 10 times with water to prepare the treatment agent of Example 7 (solid content: 2.1% by weight).

[0054] Example 8 An undiluted solution of an aqueous emulsion of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) with a solid content of 21% by weight was diluted 15 times with water to prepare the treatment agent of Example 8 (solid content: 1.4% by weight).

[0055] Comparative Example 1 An aqueous solution of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) dissolved in water was used as the treatment agent of Comparative Example 1 (solid content: 0.5% by weight).

[0056] Comparative Example 2 No treatment chemicals were used.

[0057] Comparative Example 3 No treatment chemicals were used, but the soil was compacted.

[0058] The soil submersion test and evaluation were carried out according to the following steps (1) to (7). (1) A hole with a radius of 3 cm is drilled in the center of a non-permeable plastic plate (120 mm x 120 mm) and a non-woven fabric (repurposed from a ventilation fan filter) is attached to cover the hole. (2) Place a polyvinyl chloride pipe (inner diameter: approximately 3 cm, height: approximately 10 cm) on a plate with the nonwoven fabric side facing up, with the nonwoven fabric between them, aligned with the hole. Place a funnel on top of the polyvinyl chloride pipe and add 100 g of simulated soil and sand, allowing the soil to deposit into the polyvinyl chloride pipe by natural fall. (3) For Examples 1 to 8 and Comparative Examples 1 and 2, the vinyl chloride pipe was removed as is. For Comparative Example 3, the hole in the plate was blocked from the opposite side of the vinyl chloride pipe, and the vinyl chloride pipe was tamped (rolled) 25 times with a 2.5 kg rammer before being removed. (4) The treatment agents of Examples 1 to 8 were sprayed onto the surface of the soil and sand obtained in (3) above at a rate of 1 kg / m 2 A considerable amount is sprayed and allowed to dry naturally for about a day in a temperature- and humidity-controlled room (temperature: 20±5°C, humidity: 50±10%). For Comparative Example 1, since the viscosity of CMC makes spraying using a spray bottle difficult, water is first sprayed onto the surface of the soil and sand, and then the treatment agent is sprayed using a syringe, and then the soil is allowed to dry naturally for about a day. For Comparative Example 2, only natural drying is allowed for about a day. For Comparative Example 3, the soil is compacted (rolled) and then allowed to dry naturally for about a day. (5) After drying, each sample (soil and board) is placed on a beaker with the soil side facing up, and a shower is placed 100 mm above it. (6) Spray tap water from the shower in the off mode (flow rate: 1.3 L / min, time: 10 minutes). At this time, the water that permeates the sediment collects in the beaker, and the water that does not permeate the sediment flows out of the beaker. (7) After the watering is finished, measure the amount of water W (L) collected in the beaker and calculate the water permeability R (%) using the following formula. Water permeability R(%) = L / 13 × 100 (8) The water ingress prevention effect is evaluated comprehensively based on the permeability R and the condition of the soil. Note that for samples where the soil cannot withstand 10 minutes of water spraying and collapses during the process, the permeability R cannot be measured, so the water ingress prevention effect is evaluated based on the time until collapse. The evaluation criteria are as follows: A + : The soil does not collapse for 10 minutes or more and the permeability is 10% or less. A : The soil does not collapse for more than 10 minutes. ·B : It takes 2 to 10 minutes for the soil to collapse. C : The time it takes for the soil to collapse is less than two minutes. D :The earth and sand will collapse instantly (in about 1 second).

[0059] <Test Results> The results of the soil submersion test are shown in Table 2.

[0060] [Table 2]

[0061] <Consideration> As shown in Examples 1 to 4, when a stock solution (solid content 21% by weight) of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) aqueous emulsion was diluted 2 to 7 times with water (solid content 3.0 to 10.5% by weight) and used as the treatment agent, the soil did not collapse when continuously sprayed with water for 10 minutes on any of the simulated soils A to C. Thus, when the treatment agents of Examples 1 to 4 were used, an excellent water ingress suppression effect was demonstrated (evaluation A or higher). In particular, when the treatment agents of Examples 1 to 3, which were diluted 2 to 6 times from the stock solution, were used on the simulated soil A, when the treatment agents of Examples 1 to 4, which were diluted 2 to 7 times from the stock solution, were used on the simulated soil B, and when the treatment agents of Examples 1 to 4, which were diluted 2 to 7 times from the stock solution, were used on the simulated soil C, the permeability was 10% or less, and an excellent water ingress suppression effect was demonstrated (evaluation A or higher). + ).

[0062] As shown in Examples 5 to 8, when an undiluted solution of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) aqueous emulsion (solid content 21% by weight) diluted 8 to 15 times with water (solid content 1.4 to 2.6% by weight) was used as the treatment agent, none of the simulated soils A to C could withstand 10 minutes of continuous water spraying, but since it took more than 2 minutes for them to collapse, a certain degree of water seepage suppression effect was observed (evaluation B).

[0063] The results of Examples 1 to 8 show that when a treatment agent containing ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) is used, the higher the solids concentration of the ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) contained in the treatment agent, the greater the water seepage suppression effect. Furthermore, for simulated soils A to C, Example 1 (solids content 10.5% by weight), in which the original solution was diluted two-fold, had a slightly lower water permeability than Example 2 (solids content 4.2% by weight), in which the original solution was diluted five-fold. The reason for this is thought to be that when the solids concentration of the treatment agent exceeded a certain level, cracks developed in the waterproof layer (EVA layer) formed on the soil surface after drying, allowing some water to seep in through these cracks.

[0064] In contrast, as shown in Comparative Example 1, when a carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) aqueous solution (solid content 0.5% by weight) was used as the treatment agent, the simulated soils A to C collapsed in about 1 minute, and no effect of suppressing waterlogging was observed (Evaluation C).

[0065] As shown in Comparative Example 2, in the case where no treatment agent was used, the simulated soils A to C all collapsed instantly (in about 1 second), and no effect of suppressing flooding was observed at all (rating D).

[0066] As shown in Comparative Example 3, when no treatment chemicals were used but the soil was compacted, the soil collapsed in about 30 seconds for all of the reproduced soils A to C, and no effect of suppressing waterlogging was observed (Evaluation C).

[0067] As described above, according to the disposal method for culled chickens (Examples) of the present invention, the thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) formed on the surface of the soil can prevent or suppress water from seeping into the soil, thereby reducing the risk of infectious organic waste derived from chicken body fluids, etc., being washed away by rainfall, flooding, etc., and chickens discarded by slaughter or other means can be maintained in a safe state even after being buried in the soil. Furthermore, by not compacting the soil, the culled chickens in the soil will not be crushed by pressure, and in this respect too, the disposal method for culled chickens of the present invention can be said to be highly safe. Furthermore, the disposal method for culled chickens of the present invention can be said to be efficient in that the shape of the soil can be sufficiently maintained by the thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) without compacting the soil, thereby eliminating the need for compaction work. [Industrial Applicability]

[0068] The method for disposing of discarded chickens of the present invention is used to dispose of chickens that have been culled due to an outbreak of avian influenza, but it can also be used to dispose of chickens that have been culled for other reasons. [Explanation of symbols]

[0069] 1 ground 2 holes 3. Excavation methods 4. Sediment 5. Discarded chickens 6 Treatment Agents 7 Thermoplastic resin layer (waterproof layer) 8 Chemical tank 9. Pump 10. Shower head 11 Spraying equipment

Claims

1. an excavation process for digging holes in the ground where discarded chickens will be buried; A throwing step of throwing discarded chickens into the hole; a burying step of backfilling the hole with soil and sand; a spraying step of spraying a treatment agent containing a thermoplastic resin on the surface of the backfilled soil and sand; It encompasses A method for disposing of discarded chickens, wherein the soil is not compacted in the burying step.

2. 2. The method for treating discarded chickens according to claim 1, wherein the soil is used to form a mound in the burying step.

3. 2. The method for treating discarded chickens according to claim 1, wherein the soil generated in the excavation step is used as the soil to backfill the hole in the burying step.

4. 2. The method for treating discarded chickens according to claim 1, wherein the content of the thermoplastic resin contained in the treatment agent in the spraying step is 3 to 10.5% by weight.

5. In the spraying step, the amount of the treatment agent sprayed was 0.5 kg / m ２ The method for treating discarded chickens according to claim 4, wherein the method is as described above.

6. The method for treating discarded chickens according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein in the spraying step, the thermoplastic resin contained in the treating agent is ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA).

7. 7. The method for treating discarded chickens according to claim 6, wherein the discarded chickens are chickens that have been culled due to an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza.

Images