Hollandske erfaringer med højt tørstofindhold i gylle. Maikel Timmerman

Transcription

1 Hollandske erfaringer med højt tørstofindhold i gylle Maikel Timmerman

2 Overview of presentation Background information Source measures Water management Farm building Manure treatment

3 Manure production in the Netherlands Total manure production 72.7 million tonnes (2009) Liquid manure = 69.4 Mtonnes and solid manure 3.3 Mtonnes Cattle manure: 77% of total manure; 63% of total N-production Pig manure: 19% of total manure; 21% of total N-production Nitrogen production Cattle manure Pig manure

4 Average manure quality in the Netherlands Liquid manure DM OM N NH 4 -N N-org P 2 O 5 K 2 O MgO Na 2 O Density (kg/m 3 ) Cattle ,4 2,2 2,2 1,6 6,2 1,3 0, Finisher pigs ,2 4,2 3,0 4,2 7,2 1,8 0, Sows ,2 2,5 1,7 3,0 4,3 1,1 0,6 - Veal calves ,0 2,4 0,6 1,5 2, Chicken ,2 5,8 4,4 7,8 6,4 2,2 0, Solid manure Laying hens ,1 2,4 21,7 18,8 22,7 4,9 1,5 605 Chicken (litter) ,1 8,6 10,5 24,2 13,3 5,3 4,2 600 Broiler ,5 5,5 25,0 17,0 22,5 6,5 3,0 605 Cattle ,4 1,2 5,2 4,1 8,8 2,1 0,9 900 Finisher pigs (straw) ,5 1,5 6,0 9,0 3,5 2,5 1,0 -

5 Farms with a manure surplus Cattle farms Surplus: 42% of cattle farms Farmland for roughage production Possibility of 250 kg N/ha instead of 170 kg N/ha Off-farm disposal: mostly a small amount of the manure production Pig farms Surplus: 100% of pig farms Mostly: very little farmland Limit of 170 kg N/ha Off-farm disposal: most of the manure production

6 Off-farm manure disposal Off-farm disposal cost depends on: Animal category Manure type: liquid vs solid Manure composition: N en P content Time of year Area of production: farm in surplus or shortage area Weather and soil conditions at crop farms Disposal price for liquid manure Mostly per tonne Sometimes: extra for high P-content Disposal cost per animal category: per tonne Disposal cost for finisher pig manure in south per tonne

7 Main drivers for high dry matter content Most interest on pig farms High cost for manure disposal (most important!) Storage space of manure Historical s: premium for disposal of liquid manure with high DM Biogas production at farms Around 130 installations operational in NL Manure law: input at least 50% manure High cost for coproducts Recent: more interest in high DM manure and solid manure fractions

8 Source measures Water management Drinking water system Prevention of spillage Cleaning Milking parlour Farm buildings Feeding system Manure system Choice of manure

9 Drinking-water systems Pigs Bite (ball) nipple: height and angle of nipple Drinking bowls Wet feeder Water use (l/day) Bite nipple (350 ml/min) Drinking bowl (500 ml/min) Wet feeder (500 ml/min) Weaned piglets (Bokma and Duijf, 1988) Finisher pigs (Plagge et al., 1989) Cattle Drinking bowl Drinking trough

10 Prevention of water spillage Leaking nipples Check for right water delivery (l/min) of drinking water system Tap water: water savers Showers: water saving shower head

11 Cleaning of farm buildings Pressure cleaning of pig housing (Roelofs et al., 1993) Soaking procedure Water pressure Flow rate Nozzle type Effect soaking procedure (farrowing crates) Effect water pressure and flow (finishing pig pens) Effect nozzle type (sow farm)

12 Cleaning milking equipment (Verstappen and Wolters, 1996) Big differences in water consumption between farms Influence factors Person who cleans Use of a broom/rubber wiper before pressure cleaning Pressure: high pressure cleaning saves 50% compared to low pressure Flow rate Faster cleaning Method of cleaning milk tank

13 Effect of feeding systems for pigs Manure production and water consumption Animal category (van Cuyck and den Brok, 1994) Dry versus liquid feeding Manure production (m3/a.p.a./place) Feeding system finisher pigs (Timmerman and Smolders, 2004) Certain byproducts lead to more pen dirtiness Water consumption (l/animal/day) Finisher pigs Wet feeder Finisher pigs Drinking bowl Finisher pigs Liquid feeding Manure production (m3/place/year) Dry feed 1.13 Liquid dry feed 1.35 Liquid feed with 3 byproducts 1.50 Liquid feed with 4 byproducts 1.54

14 Influence of cattle feed on manure Roughage type High/low amounts of concentrated feed Composition of feed ration Grazing system (Un)limited grazing All-year-round in dairy barn

15 Effect of housing systems Housing systems sows Animal category (van Cuyck and den Brok, 1994) Manure production (m3/a.p.a./place) Water consumption (l/animal/day) Pregnant sows individual housed Pregnant sows group housed Biofix Pen design Bad layout more pen dirtiness Building material (concrete, PVC) Dung gap Type of slats

16 Manure system Frequent removal of manure Fresh manure higher biogas production Manure trays for farrowing crates Sewage system for pigs Manure scraper below slats Kempfarm system for pigs In house separation of faeces and urine V-shaped manure belt below slats

17 Which manure to use for biogas production? Influence of manure type on biogas production Batch test with pig manure (Timmerman et al., 2009) DM (g/kg) Methane production (m 3 CH 4 /tonne) Hydrolysis rate k h (d -1 ) Pig manure Liquid fraction of screw press Solid fraction of screw press Piglet manure Farrowing sow manure Pregnant sow manure Finisher pig manure dry feed Finisher pig manure liquid feed Higher hydrolysis rate faster biogas

18 Manure treatment Natural sedimentation in manure storage Use of thicker manure for biogas production Separation Use of solid fraction for biogas production Pro: higher biogas production per tonne Con: not using organic matter in liquid fraction for biogas Target: as much as possible organic matter into solid fraction Thickening of manure Getting rid of excess water: evaporation of water Dry matter from 6% to 12% 50% volume reduction

19 Benchmark Dutch agro co-digestion plants Average results (Rabobank, 2010) (25% lowest cost price) CHP (MWe) Investment (per MWe) 3.2 mln 3.1 mln 2.3 mln Full load hours (%) 6900 (79%) 7300 (83%) 7800 (89%) Electricity use (%) 9% 9% 7.5% Financial ( per kwh e ) Substrates costs (input+output) Maintenance Labour/Consulting/Other Depreciation+interest Total costs

20 Returns Dutch agro co-digestion plants Return = subsidy + sale price of electricity (negotiation) Subsidy scheme 1) MEP: steady scheme but cancelled by government 2) SDE: yearly different subsidy and different rules 3) SDE+: cheapest green energy installations get subsidy Consequences for agro co-digestions plants Electricity: max price 13.2 ct/kwh not an option Upgrading to natural gas: max price 76.7 ct/nm3 is an option

21 Returns of manure digestion Biogas yield Cattle manure 12 m 3 CH 4 /ton Pig manure 16 m 3 CH 4 /ton Electricity production with CHP-engine 40% electrical efficiency Cattle manure 48 kwh e /ton Pig manure 64 kwh e /ton Profit of manure digestion Electricity 13 ct/kwh 6-8 per tonne Cost of (extra) transport manure to biogas plant 3-5 per tonne

22 Farm scale manure digestion More interest in manure digestion instead of codigestion Farm energy neutral by using own manure Lower investment cost and less labour No need for coproducts (limited availability) No need for transport to regional biogas plant Examples of newly development systems Microferm (HoSt, NL) Piccolo (Röring, Dld) AgriModem (GET, NL) Induced Blanket Reactor (Andigen, VS)

23 Conclusions Source management 1) Prevention of water spillage 2) Effective cleaning of pens and milking equipment Farm building 1) Good layout of pens 2) Choice of feeding system 3) Choice of manure system Manure treatment Farm scale manure digestion

24 Questions? Points of discussion?

25 Thank you for your attention Maikel Timmerman