Evaluation of alternative methods of tunnel composting (submitted by the European Composting Network) II
Abstract Two alternative methods for producing compost in a tunnel, from certain category (Cat.) 3 animal by‐products (ABP) and other non‐ABP material, were assessed. The first method proposed a minimum temperature of 55°C for 72 h and the second 60°C for 48 h, both with a maximum particle size of 2...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2024-04-01
|
| Series: | EFSA Journal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8745 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849708979189448704 |
|---|---|
| author | EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) Konstantinos Koutsoumanis Ana Allende Declan Bolton Sara Bover‐Cid Marianne Chemaly Lieve Herman Friederike Hilbert Roland Lindqvist Maarten Nauta Romolo Nonno Luisa Peixe Panagiotis Skandamis Giuseppe Ru Marion Simmons Alessandra De Cesare Pablo Fernandez Escamez Elisabetta Suffredini Angel Ortiz‐Pelaez Avelino Alvarez Ordonez |
| author_facet | EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) Konstantinos Koutsoumanis Ana Allende Declan Bolton Sara Bover‐Cid Marianne Chemaly Lieve Herman Friederike Hilbert Roland Lindqvist Maarten Nauta Romolo Nonno Luisa Peixe Panagiotis Skandamis Giuseppe Ru Marion Simmons Alessandra De Cesare Pablo Fernandez Escamez Elisabetta Suffredini Angel Ortiz‐Pelaez Avelino Alvarez Ordonez |
| author_sort | EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Two alternative methods for producing compost in a tunnel, from certain category (Cat.) 3 animal by‐products (ABP) and other non‐ABP material, were assessed. The first method proposed a minimum temperature of 55°C for 72 h and the second 60°C for 48 h, both with a maximum particle size of 200 mm. The assessment of the Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) exclusively focused on Cat. 3 ABP materials (catering waste and processed foodstuffs of animal origin no longer intended for human consumption). The proposed composting processes were evaluated for their efficacy to achieve a reduction of at least 5 log10 of Enterococcus faecalis and Salmonella Senftenberg (775W, H2S negative) and at least 3 log10 of relevant thermoresistant viruses. The applicant provided a list of biological hazards that may enter the composting process and selected parvoviruses as the indicator of the thermoresistant viruses. The evidence provided by the applicant included: (a) literature data on thermal inactivation of biological hazards; (b) results from validation studies on the reduction of E. faecalis, Salmonella Senftenberg 775W H2S negative and canine parvovirus carried out in composting plants across Europe; (c) and experimental data from direct measurements of reduction of infectivity of murine parvovirus in compost material applying the time/temperature conditions of the two alternative methods. The evidence provided showed the capacity of the proposed alternative methods to reduce E. faecalis and Salmonella Senftenberg 775W H2S negative by at least 5 log10, and parvoviruses by at least 3 log10. The BIOHAZ Panel concluded that the two alternative methods under assessment can be considered to be equivalent to the processing method currently approved in the Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-7b892cdb3298413e8200f9b4ef2986b7 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 1831-4732 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-04-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | EFSA Journal |
| spelling | doaj-art-7b892cdb3298413e8200f9b4ef2986b72025-08-20T03:15:27ZengWileyEFSA Journal1831-47322024-04-01224n/an/a10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8745Evaluation of alternative methods of tunnel composting (submitted by the European Composting Network) IIEFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)Konstantinos KoutsoumanisAna AllendeDeclan BoltonSara Bover‐CidMarianne ChemalyLieve HermanFriederike HilbertRoland LindqvistMaarten NautaRomolo NonnoLuisa PeixePanagiotis SkandamisGiuseppe RuMarion SimmonsAlessandra De CesarePablo Fernandez EscamezElisabetta SuffrediniAngel Ortiz‐PelaezAvelino Alvarez OrdonezAbstract Two alternative methods for producing compost in a tunnel, from certain category (Cat.) 3 animal by‐products (ABP) and other non‐ABP material, were assessed. The first method proposed a minimum temperature of 55°C for 72 h and the second 60°C for 48 h, both with a maximum particle size of 200 mm. The assessment of the Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) exclusively focused on Cat. 3 ABP materials (catering waste and processed foodstuffs of animal origin no longer intended for human consumption). The proposed composting processes were evaluated for their efficacy to achieve a reduction of at least 5 log10 of Enterococcus faecalis and Salmonella Senftenberg (775W, H2S negative) and at least 3 log10 of relevant thermoresistant viruses. The applicant provided a list of biological hazards that may enter the composting process and selected parvoviruses as the indicator of the thermoresistant viruses. The evidence provided by the applicant included: (a) literature data on thermal inactivation of biological hazards; (b) results from validation studies on the reduction of E. faecalis, Salmonella Senftenberg 775W H2S negative and canine parvovirus carried out in composting plants across Europe; (c) and experimental data from direct measurements of reduction of infectivity of murine parvovirus in compost material applying the time/temperature conditions of the two alternative methods. The evidence provided showed the capacity of the proposed alternative methods to reduce E. faecalis and Salmonella Senftenberg 775W H2S negative by at least 5 log10, and parvoviruses by at least 3 log10. The BIOHAZ Panel concluded that the two alternative methods under assessment can be considered to be equivalent to the processing method currently approved in the Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011.https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8745ABPalternative methodcategory 3composttunnel |
| spellingShingle | EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) Konstantinos Koutsoumanis Ana Allende Declan Bolton Sara Bover‐Cid Marianne Chemaly Lieve Herman Friederike Hilbert Roland Lindqvist Maarten Nauta Romolo Nonno Luisa Peixe Panagiotis Skandamis Giuseppe Ru Marion Simmons Alessandra De Cesare Pablo Fernandez Escamez Elisabetta Suffredini Angel Ortiz‐Pelaez Avelino Alvarez Ordonez Evaluation of alternative methods of tunnel composting (submitted by the European Composting Network) II EFSA Journal ABP alternative method category 3 compost tunnel |
| title | Evaluation of alternative methods of tunnel composting (submitted by the European Composting Network) II |
| title_full | Evaluation of alternative methods of tunnel composting (submitted by the European Composting Network) II |
| title_fullStr | Evaluation of alternative methods of tunnel composting (submitted by the European Composting Network) II |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of alternative methods of tunnel composting (submitted by the European Composting Network) II |
| title_short | Evaluation of alternative methods of tunnel composting (submitted by the European Composting Network) II |
| title_sort | evaluation of alternative methods of tunnel composting submitted by the european composting network ii |
| topic | ABP alternative method category 3 compost tunnel |
| url | https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8745 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT efsapanelonbiologicalhazardsbiohaz evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT konstantinoskoutsoumanis evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT anaallende evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT declanbolton evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT sarabovercid evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT mariannechemaly evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT lieveherman evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT friederikehilbert evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT rolandlindqvist evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT maartennauta evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT romolononno evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT luisapeixe evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT panagiotisskandamis evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT giusepperu evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT marionsimmons evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT alessandradecesare evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT pablofernandezescamez evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT elisabettasuffredini evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT angelortizpelaez evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii AT avelinoalvarezordonez evaluationofalternativemethodsoftunnelcompostingsubmittedbytheeuropeancompostingnetworkii |