1 ECONOMIC MODELLING OF ANAEROBIC DIGESTION/ BIOGAS INSTALLATIONS IN A RANGE OF RURAL SCENARIOS IN CORNWALL Eight Scenarios were studied; 7 farm based scenario s and 1 community installation. 5 of the 7 scenario s were studied using the base case alone (current herd sizes and acreage). In each case there were a number of variables that could have been explored, but this would have warranted a much larger study. Scenario 6 and 7 included options in addition to the base case. Scenario 6 studied the base case and then the base case +7,135 t/a energy crops. Scenario 7 has three options; a base case, base t/a of food waste and base case t/a of food waste. As scenario 7 originally proved to be the smallest of the installations, we asked IBBK to recalculate the model to explore the amount of food waste required to make the plant viable. This also gave the opportunity to explain the legislative requirements of taking in food waste.
2 Case study 1: 75kW AD plant using slurry and energy crops Case study 1 is a dairy farm. Unchopped straw and sand are used as bedding material for the cows. A shortage of straw in the area and ultimately high prices, together with the benefit to acidic soil conditions, is why the farmer uses sand. Miscanthus is not favoured as an alternative, as the farmer sees a risk that it starts degrading and gets warm when used as animal bedding. The main substrates for biogas production in this scenario are; 1,100 t/a dairy cow slurry (Only slurry without high amounts of sand) 100 t/a straw 500 t/a grass silage 650 t/a maize silage Sand is a common problem in biogas production (sinking layer formation, abrasion of technical material). There is technology available that can cope with high amounts of sand; but due to the high investment costs this is not viable for such a small plant. The economic modelling indicates a high risk of business losses when investing in the planned AD plant. A grant of minimum 90% would be necessary to achieve viability. However it will not be possibly to claim 2xROC s when taking a grant, even 100% grant would not enable any profitability. The modelling is based only on the manure without high amounts of sand. Replacement of sand with straw would require 100 t/a straw and would double both the available amount of slurry for biogas generation and the digested straw. This would increase biogas production by 20% to around 820 m³/d. However, the AD plant would still not be economically viable.
3 Case study 1: 75kW AD plant using slurry and energy crops Grants Total Investment Costs: 506,921 Operation/Main tenance/capital Costs Revenue Business Profit/Losses Return on Investment Reflux Capital Payback Period Without grant: 119,219 69,854-49, % 83.7 negative Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 2*ROCs still possible when taking the grant. Grant: 89% 451,515 69,853 69, % % 468,902 67,952 69,854 +1, % % 481,017 66,628 69,854 +3, % Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 1*ROCs only possible when taking the grant. Grant: < 100% 52,159 losses negative 100% 506,921 63,796 52,159-11, The sensitivity analysis shows that at this site, a reduction in the investment cost has the highest potential to increase viability. However, none of the studied parameter variations results in positive Business Profit. In order to achieve a minimum Business Profit, investment costs would need to be reduced by 64% to 183,000, which is rather unlikely. With regards to the electricity value, a minimum profit would be achieved if electricity was worth 27.1 p/kwh (all other parameters unchanged), which currently is not realistic.
4 Case Study 2: 499 kw AD plant with energy crops Site 2 is a vegetable farm which uses poultry manure from a neighbouring farm as the main fertiliser. Both wet and dry digestion are possible technical options. With dry digestion in batch-operated box-type fermenters. The main substrates for biogas production are; Cow slurry 1,500 t/a Grass silage 1,955 t/a Poultry Manure 1 1,350 t/a Stock feed potatoes 500 t/a Poultry Manure t/a Straw 100 t/a Maize silage 4,500 t/a Dry digestion might be favourable due to the high DM-content of the substrate mix, the high amount of available straw and presence of poultry manure. Digestion of higher amounts of lignocellulosic material is often regarded unsuitable in wet digestion, since phase-separation takes place, with the lignocellulosic material floating on top. Eventually, lignocellulosic material might also form a sinking layer and might cause clogging of the outflow pipes. But with dry digestion such problems do not have to be dealt with. However, dry digestion was offered at a very high price. Around three times higher investment costs would be necessary compared to the proposed wet digestion solution in the following. Even with high grants, the dry digestion concept was far away from being economically viable. Dry digestion does require higher investment in mainland Europe as well, but the difference to wet digestion is less distinct. As dry digestion needs less maintenance, has lower electricity demand, is more robust than wet digestion and can also treat substrates that need to be excluded in wet digestion. The concrete price is higher in the UK, which might be a key reason for the very high UK offer.
5 Case Study 2: 499 kw AD plant with energy crops Grants Total Investment Costs: 1,364,085 Operation/Main tenance/capital Costs Revenue Business Profit/Losses Return on Investment Reflux Capital Without grant: 476, , , % Payback Period Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 2*ROCs still possible when taking the grant. Grant: 19% 262, , , , % % 341, , , , % % 611, , , , % Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 1*ROCs only possible when taking the grant. Grant: 78% 1,063, , , % % 1,161, , , , % % 1,225, , , , % The sensitivity analysis points out the decisive influence of the electricity value on the profitability of this project. A 10% higher electricity value (= 16.0 p/kwh) would increase the total Business Profit by 46,130 per year to total 75,328 per year.
6 Case Study 3: 190 kw AD plant with slurry and grass silage Site 3 plans to place an AD plant close to an industrial site with heating, cooling and electricity requirements (offices and light industry, currently in development). The main substrates for biogas production are; Cow Manure (Half stackable) Grass silage Straw 563 t/a 3,600 t/a 100 t/a Due to the high DM content of the input mix and especially due to the high amount of lignocellulosic material, dry digestion e.g. in box-type batch fermenters instead of wet digestion would be optimum choice with regards to process technology. Wet digestion has a risk of phase-separation, with lignocellulosic material floating on top of the liquid. However, as with Scenario 2 of this study, dry digestion was offered at very high cost, making economic viability fully out of reach. While straw would be favourable in dry digestion as it would increase the structure of the substrate stack, only a limited amount should be used in wet digestion, as it further increases stratification risks in the digester.
7 Case Study 3: 190 kw AD plant with slurry and grass silage Grants Total Investment Costs: 953,176 Operation/Main tenance/capital Costs Revenue Business Profit/Losses Return on Investment Reflux Capital Without grant: 271, ,056-31, Payback Period Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 2*ROCs still possible when taking the grant. Grant: 31% 294, , , % % 513, , , , % % 653, , , , % Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 1*ROCs only possible when taking the grant. Grant: 83% 788, , , % % 843, , ,594 +5, % % 878, , ,594 +9, % The sensitivity analysis clearly points out the dominant effect of the electricity value. A 19% higher electricity value (= 17.2 p/kwh) would bring this scenario into profitability. This could be achievable at this site, as supplying electricity to the nearby industrial site would generate a higher revenue per kwh. This would however require additional investment into a private electricity wire from the AD plant to the industrial site.
8 Case Study 4: 105 kw AD plant with slurry and energy crops Site 4 is a dairy farm. Cows are kept in three different places and all are kept free range during the summer months. The AD plant would be placed close to the first site where the majority of the cows are kept. The two other sites are 5.6 km and 3.3 km away. Two options are possible: utilisation of all slurry/ manure from the three sites or utilisation of slurry from the main site only. Despite the additional costs for transport of slurry/ manure from the two further away locations to the AD plant, the economic modelling indicates that digestion of all available substrates can contribute to the economic benefit. The main substrates for biogas production are; Cow slurry 4960 t/a Whole crop wheat silage 500 t/a Cow manure 350 t/a Crop silage 100 t/a Straw 75 t/a Sawdust 14 t/a Grass silage 500 t/a Slurry from the main site could be fed directly into the AD plant. At the other two sites, intermediate slurry storage is already available (around 760 m³ at site B and around 100 m³ at site C). Slurry could be taken out for example once a week in order to be transported to the main site. A 20 m³ tanker is available for transport. There is no slurry pipeline between the three different sites. A major drawback on the economic viability is the lack of potential heat consumers.
9 Case Study 4: 105 kw AD plant with slurry and energy crops Grants Total Investment Costs: 470,054 Operation/Main tenance/capital Costs Revenue Business Profit/Losses Return on Investment Reflux Capital Without grant: 134, ,702-21, % Payback Period Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 2*ROCs still possible when taking the grant. Grant: 41% 193, , , % % 274, , ,702 +9, % % 336,465 96, , , % Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 1*ROCs only possible when taking the grant. Grant: < 100% 80,397 losses negative 100% 470,054 81,555 80,397-1, Without grant an AD plant at Site 4 would hardly be economically viable. However, if an electricity value around 17.5 p/kwh could be achieved, the project would be feasible even without grant. With a higher electricity value, the economic viability would be significantly better. A minimum profit could be achieved by a 21% higher electricity value (17.54 p/kwh), which clearly indicates the significant influence of this parameter. Reducing the investment costs also has good potential to achieve a more viable AD installation. If the total investment costs could be reduced by 30%, this AD project would result in no losses.
10 Case Study 5: 250 kw AD plant with slurry and silage Site 5 is a dairy farm. Presently, the animal barns are newly established, and integration of a biogas plant could be a further option within the farm concept. The potential biogas plant would be run mainly on cattle slurry with addition of some left-over potatoes. Less slurry is produced during periods when a part of the herd is kept free range. Around 50% of the animals are out for half of the year. Co-digestion of potatoes is suitable during this time. However, biogas generation cannot be completely equalized throughout the year; during the summer time the biogas production will be only 71% of the amount in the winter time. The main substrates for biogas production are; Cow slurry Straw in slurry Potatoes 16,000 t/a 1,170 t/a 500 t/a This slurry based AD plant would generate a good Business Profit and would result in a fully acceptable Payback Period even without grant. The initial investment sum would be recovered within 8.1 years. The 10- year projection indicates an accumulated Business Profit of 407,270 for the total period. Even in worst case options there is still a buffer for acceptable payback periods.
11 Case Study 5: 250 kw AD plant with slurry and silage Grants Total Investment Costs: 822,122 Operation/Main tenance/capital Costs Revenue Business Profit/Losses Return on Investment Reflux Capital Without grant: 164, , , % Payback Period Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 2*ROCs still possible when taking the grant. Grant: 1% 4, , , , % % 261, , , , % Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 1*ROCs only possible when taking the grant. Grant: 45% 373, , , , % % 514, , , , % Even without any grant the biogas plant would be economically viable. Acceptance of a grant is only advisable if this does not endanger that 2 x ROCs can still be claimed. This slurry based AD plant has only very limited risk of any process imbalance. In addition, the environmental benefit of slurry based AD plants is to be considered. As mentioned above, the surplus Business Profit of the whole farm would be even higher than the calculated Business Profit of the AD unit, since the AD plant enables cost savings in the dairy unit when establishing the new dairy barns (reduced slurry storage requirement).
12 Case Study 6: 250 kw slurry-based AD plant Site 6 is a pig farm with some beef cattle and some grass silage available. It is one envisaged option at Site 6 to close the beef cattle business and to concentrate on cultivation of energy crops for biogas production. Up to 7,168 t/a of grass silage and 1,759 t/a of maize silage were indicated to be possible if there were no beef cattle kept anymore. The main substrates for biogas production are; Option 1 Option 2 Pig Slurry 17,500 t/a Pig Slurry 17,500 t/a Washing water pigs 1,908 t/a Washing water pigs 1,908 t/a Beef cattle slurry 1,500 t/a Straw in pig slurry 100 t/a Straw in pig slurry 100t/a Grass silage 1,792 t/a Straw in cattle slurry 100 t/a Maize silage 1,759 t/a Grass silage 1,792 t/a The additional energy crops would require investment in extra storage capacity (silage clamps). A much larger AD facility would be necessary. It needs to be taken into account that compared to digestion of slurry longer hydraulic retention times are necessary for efficient digestion of energy crops and higher organic loading rates are achieved. AD processes run on high amounts of energy crops are less stable compared to slurry based processes. Energy crops are substrates with high costs and special attention should be paid not to loose any energy content due to process imbalance or too short retention in the system. 90 m³ 2,669 m³ 10,922 m³
13 Case Study 6: 250 kw slurry-based AD plant Grants Total Investment Costs: 876,590 Operation/Main tenance/capital Costs Revenue Business Profit/Losses Return on Investment Reflux Capital Without grant: 208, , , % Payback Period Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 2*ROCs still possible when taking the grant. Grant: 30% 259, , , , % Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 1*ROCs only possible when taking the grant. Grant: 17% 148, , , % % 384, , , , % % 540, , , , % Option 1 proves to be the more economically viable, with option 2 showing a payback period of 12.3 years. Closing the beef cattle unit and concentrating on energy crops would result in higher revenues from electricity sales, but the higher necessary investment (including silage storage capacity) and the high substrate costs would not allow higher Business Profit. The results of the economic modelling indicate a significantly longer Payback Period. In addition it needs to be taken into account that when deciding in favour of closing the beef cattle business, the farm will not have revenue from the beef unit anymore. This aspect is not considered in the economic modelling above, but it is relevant regarding the whole farm business.
14 Case Study 7: 75 kw slurry-based AD plant (with food waste options) Site 7 is a farm which is embedded in a larger complex including facilities with educational and research purposes. There are different buildings, kitchens, farm land and animal barns. Presently the dairy cow barns are newly established, which offers the possibility to integrate an AD plant in the concept. In principle the buildings of the affiliated education/ research facilities offer good potential for biogas heat utilisation. There are two possible locations for the biogas plant: close to the affiliated buildings or close to the barns. It is one option to take in food waste to improve economic viability of an AD plant at Site 7. Higher electricity and heat production together with the incoming gate fees for accepting wastes considerably increase the revenue. Higher heat generation would justify transport of heat to the buildings in the education/ research area. The economic modelling assumes that biogas heat would be transported for 1 km from the plant to the main buildings, where it would replace 62,000 L of oil per year. However, when accepting food waste, the plant would come under the ABP regulation requiring hygienisation. The necessary hygienisation equipment results in much higher investment costs, details are given in the Annex. A potential amount of 1,000 food waste per year was indicated. This would not bring the AD project into economic viability. With 4,000 t/a food waste, this scenario would be economically viable. A biogas plant at this site could be of additional benefit for the future development of AD in Cornwall. The affiliated education/ research facilities assure that many visitors get into contact with AD technology which could inspire farmers to decide in favour of a biogas plant at their own farm.
15 Case Study 7: 75 kw slurry-based AD plant The main substrates for biogas production are; Option 1: Option 3: Cattle Slurry 4,066 t/a Cattle Slurry Horse manure 360 t/a Horse manure Straw (in slurry) 30 t/a Straw (in slurry) Grass silage 300 t/a Grass silage Maize silage 200 t/a Maize silage Whole crop cereal 100 t/a Whole crop cereal Food waste 4,066 t/a 360 t/a 30 t/a 300 t/a 200 t/a 100 t/a 4,000 t/a Option 2: Cattle Slurry Horse manure Straw (in slurry) Grass silage Maize silage Whole crop cereal Food waste 4,066 t/a 360 t/a 30 t/a 300 t/a 200 t/a 100 t/a 1,000 t/a In order to achieve a minimum positive Business Profit, the economic modelling indicates that at least 2,800 t/a food waste would be necessary at this site. Option 1 shows a negative payback period of 39.9 years Option 2 shows a negative payback period of years Option 3 shows a positive payback period of 7.6 years
16 Case Study 7: 75 kw slurry-based AD plant Grants Total Investment Costs: 464,489 Operation/Main tenance/capital Costs Revenue Business Profit/Losses Return on Investment Reflux Capital Payback Period Without grant: 106,331 59,129-47, % negative Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 2*ROCs still possible when taking the grant. Grant: 91% 423,168 59,128 59, % % 435,551 57,747 59,129 +1, % % 444,748 56,721 59,129 +2, % Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 1*ROCs only possible when taking the grant. Grant: < 100% 42,326 losses negative 100% 464,489 54,519 42,326-12, In addition to farm substrates, a small quantity of vegetable waste/ kitchen waste from affiliated facilities and from schools in the village might be available. Higher revenue is generated when accepting food waste for digestion, but necessary surplus investment for food waste treatment needs to be taken into account. The economic modelling indicates a minimum of around 3,000 t/a food waste needs to be available on long terms in order to assure a minimum profitability.
17 Case Study 8: 861 kw waste, slurry and energy crop AD plant At Site 8, a community based biogas plant is envisaged. Potential substrates are sewage sludge from the municipal water purification plant, fish waste, different food wastes and by-products from food processing, and slurry and energy crops from farms in the surrounding. In the UK, co-digestion of sewage sludge with food residues from municipal waste was trialled by Thames Waste Management in the late 90 s through to However when the Animal By-Products Legislation came into force, it was decided that mixed sourced food waste was no longer acceptable for application to farmland; source separation was required. The requirement for pasteurisation also presented design difficulties for existing plants. Hence there has been no development of co-digestion of food waste and sewage sludge for the past five years. Although it is technically feasible to co-digest sewage sludge with food wastes for landspreading to farmland, in practice the plant would have to work under two separate regulatory regimes, the Water Framework Directive for sewage sludge and Environmental Permitting for other wastes. This has not been successfully tried in the UK, and the cost of the administration of such a scheme would be very high in comparison to the value of the energy and nutrients from the sewage sludge. Food buyers from major retailers are also becoming increasingly reluctant to accept crops grown on land on which sewage sludge has been spread, although this is a marketing issue rather than a real health risk. In conclusion, it is recommended that sewage sludge is not co-digested with other wastes.
18 Case Study 8: 861 kw waste, slurry and energy crop AD plant The main substrates for biogas production are; Cow slurry Maize silage Meat waste Fish waste Food waste Depackaged food waste 31,200 t/a 7,300 t/a 2,080 t/a 150 t/a 300 t/a 1,500 t/a It is recommended to carry out precise waste analyses before taking key decisions in this project. For the economic modelling of this study waste material characteristics including gas yields are taken into account as they were indicated by Site 8 (according to results of a pre-study). Sewage sludge was excluded as an AD input. Cardboard was mentioned as a possible additional substrate at a costs of 30/t. Cardboard is not considered in the modelling; as it is not particularly favourable in the AD process. In addition, availability of some pastry waste at gate fees of 20/t was mentioned; this would be favourable, however it could not be considered in the modelling as it had not been confirmed. For fish waste and meat waste gate fees of 40/t and for food waste and depackaged food waste gate fees of 30/t are considered as revenue in the modelling; gate fees were suggested from the pre-study.
19 Case Study 8: 861 kw waste, slurry and energy crop AD plant Grants Total Investment Costs: 3,157,036 Operation/Main tenance/capital Costs Revenue Business Profit/Losses Return on Investment Reflux Capital Without grant: 934,214 1,009, , % Payback Period Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 2*ROCs still possible when taking the grant. Grant: 17% 531, ,539 1,009, , % % 1,363, ,380 1,009, , % Necessary Grant to achieve a shorter Payback Period. Assumption: 1*ROCs only possible when taking the grant. Grant: 45% 1,415, , , % % 1,973, , , , % % 2,346, , , , % Investment cost reduction has potential to further increase the anticipated Business Profit. This community based AD plant would generate additional benefits. Environmental aspects include greenhouse gas reduction by renewable energy generation and valorisation of waste materials together with reduced transport for mostly local waste materials. It also opens an additional market for local farmers.
20 Conclusions Revenue /a /a Ongoing costs without write-off Total costs including write-off Business Profit/ Losses /a /a 0 /a /a /a /a /a Scenario Revenue ( /a) Ongoing costs without write-off Total costs including write-off Business Profit/ Losses ( /a) payback period (years) neg. 10,7 26,0 32,0 8,1 7,7 12,3 neg. 10,3 installed capacity (kw el.) total investment ( ) of this: energy crop storage (%) 11,4 25,1 15,3 3,0 0,0 0,0 21,
21 Conclusions /a /a /a /a /a 0 /a /a /a /a /a Business Profit/ Losses without grant and with 50% grant Scenario without grant and 1 x ROCs 50% grant and 1 x ROCs without grant and 2 x ROCs 50% grant and 2 x ROCs
22 Summary Total energy generation and greenhouse gas reduction potential: At an installed capacity of 2.30 MW, the 8 CHP units would generate 17,058 MWh/a of electricity. From this 15,345.0 MWh/a could actually be fed into the grid, the rest being self-consumption of the AD facility and energy losses (0.20 MW). This is the annual consumption of almost 4000 average households Assumed heat valorisation would substitute 475,000 litres of heating oil per year. Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 15,000 tonnes CO2 equivalent per year. Better heat utilisation would further improve environmental benefits.
23 Cornwall Agri-food Council Development Team The Old Dry, South Wheal Crofty, Station Road, Pool, Redruth, Cornwall, TR15 3QG
Potential of Farm Scale AD in Ireland Tullamore Court Hotel October 22 nd 2009. Barry Caslin, Teagasc. Bioenergy Specialist email@example.com Ireland Situation 2009 Area Farmed Crops Grassland Hill
ANEROBIC DIGESTION and BIOGAS Anaerobic digestion is the natural biological process which stabilises organic waste in the absence of air and transforms it into bio fertiliser and biogas. It is a 4-stage
Digestate and biogas utilisation practices and perspektives International Workshop, 27 May 2010, Hotel Kong Arthur Using biogas for CHP and/or transportation purposes in the long run Søren Tafdrup Biogas
Options for Sustainable Heat Use of Biogas Plants Dominik Rutz, Rita Mergner WIP Renewable Energies, Munich, Germany Contents 1. Biogas situation in Germany 2. Characteristics of heat from biogas plants
Biogas Advantages Beyond Green Energy Contract No. IEE/09/848 SI2.558364 Project duration 01/05/2010 31/10/2012 Sustainable Biogas Market Development in Central and Eastern Europe Bucharest, 06/04/2011
Biogas - Trends in Germany Biogas as a key in future energy systems Clemens Findeisen Consultant Development Cooperation German Biogas Association 14 th of October 2013, Berlin Outline German Biogas Association
Christian Ege, director The double benefit of biogas Dalian, 28 April 2011 The Danish Ecological Council Photo: Copyright Lemvigbiogas.com >Titel< I Christian Ege, formand 25.1.2006 Renewable energy in
Project: BiG>East (EIE/07/214) Biogas Case Studies in Slovenia Deliverable 6.4 Matjaž Grmek, Ivo Blaznik ApE d.o.o. Litijska 45, Ljubljana SLOVENIA February 2010 With the support of: The sole responsibility
EU legislation regarding manure management in livestock production farms Colin H Burton Independant consultant Workshop on best practices in manure management in livestock production farms Hotel Four Seasons,
BIOMASS TO BIOGAS IN RURAL AREAS PhD Carmen MATEESCU National Research and Development Institute for Electrical Engineering ICPE-CA, Splaiul Unirii no. 313, Bucharest-3, Postal Code 030138, Romania firstname.lastname@example.org
Large Biogas Plants in Denmark -technology and operation experience September 9 2004 by Anne Seth Madsen, email@example.com 1 NIRAS Agenda NIRAS Large Biogas Plants in Denmark Large Biogas Plants concept and
GCE Environmental Technology Energy from Biomass For first teaching from September 2013 For first award in Summer 2014 Energy from Biomass Specification Content should be able to: Students should be able
Biogas Utilization Through Combined Heat & Power Systems Jan Buijk firstname.lastname@example.org (416) 804-2203 GE s Jenbacher gas engines Most important applications Generator sets: On-site power generation Cogeneration:
Waste to Energy CIBSE Presentation Patrick Grange Rural, Business and Renewable Energy Consultants Copyright CIBSE MNW Region 1 Agenda CMS UK Background to Renewables Energy from Waste CHP Units How we
Task 37 Energy from Biogas Biogas from Energy Crop Digestion Dr Jerry Murphy, BioEnergy and Biofuels Research, Environmental Research Institute, University College Cork, Ireland Task 37 Energy from Biogas
Factors that Affect the Price of Manure as a Fertilizer Ray Massey, Economist University of Missouri, Commercial Agriculture Program This paper discusses the value of manure as a soil amendment/fertilizer
Lec1: Prelusion-Significance of livestock and poultry in Indian economy-livestock and Poultry census - role of livestock and poultry in Indian agriculture. Livestock farming is an integral part of crop
Completing the Fertiliser Plan Table : Total Nitrogen and Phosphorus produced by grazing livestock on your holding To prepare your fertiliser plan, you must estimate the numbers and categories of grazing
Biogas from Animal Waste and Organic Industrial Waste Kurt Hjort-Gregersen, M.sc. Institute of Food and Ressource Economics University of Copenhagen Denmark Biogas Plants in Denmark 1973 2008 Under changing
FEASIBILITY STUDIES: WHY AND WHAT SHOULD THEY ENTAIL? P. Ries Asset Resource Management LLC I have been asked to present a paper addressing feasibility studies, as they relate to consideration of a digester
VALUE OF MANURE AS A FERTILIZER Ray Massey, Economist University of Missouri, Commercial Ag Program This paper discusses the value of manure as a soil amendment/fertilizer source. It does not attempt to
From cow dung to biogas in Karnataka, India Beyond Carbon India, 2012 Project summary With the carbon offset project Kolar Biogas Project, myclimate and its local partner SKG Sangha are contributing to
IEE Project BiogasIN Examples for financing of biogas projects in Italy D.3.2., WP3 - Henning Hahn, Dominik Rutz, Erik Ferber, Franz Kirchmayer - November 2010 Contents 1. Introduction... 3 2. Basics of
BIOGAS PLANTS EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGY FOR CLEAN ENERGY INVENTIVE BY NATURE BIOGAS PLANTS Biogas is produced by anaerobic digestion of organic waste from the food industry and agricultural by-products. The
PA Energy Harvest Grant Bortnick Dairy, LLC Final Report A. Technical Report 1. Narrative Description of the Project This project installed a mixed anaerobic digester, engine generator set and solids separator
How mineral fertilizers can feed the world and maintain its resources in an Integrated Farming System european fertilizer manufacturers association Global trends in population growth (Population 1000 million),
Southern Oregon Biogas Plant Feasibility Study Summary of Findings - April 2012 Introduction Jackson Soil and Water Conservation District (JSWCD) in collaboration with Rogue Valley Council of Governments,
Baltic Forum for Innovative Technologies for Sustainable Manure Management KNOWLEDGE REPORT National Scenarios, Best Practices and Recommendations for Manure Energy Use in the Baltic Sea Region By Sari
Harvesting energy with fertilizers Sustainable agriculture in Europe 1 Harvesting energy with fertilizers The reason for agriculture s existence is to supply energy to mankind. Agriculture converts solar
COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS USING SUGAR BEETS AS BIOMASS SUMMARY November 2013 SUMMARY Increasing of the use of renewal energy resources in the national energy balance is a challenge to increase the use of renewable
Village: BHITBUDRAK Taluka: UCHHAL District: SURAT State: GUJARAT Country: INDIA Bhint Budrak Village Jilla /Taluka Panchayat Surat Presently most of the Biogas plants installed traditionally are either
Project: BiG>East (EIE/07/214) WP 3.3 Policy Roadmap for large-scale biogas implementation in Greece Deliverable 3.3 Sioulas Konstantinos, MSc Centre for Renewable Energy Sources (CRES) 19 th km Marathonos
Operators Briefing Note Anaerobic Digestion Operators Guidance Note Effective Digestion of Food Waste 1.0 Background Defra and WRAP have been researching the anaerobic digestion (AD) of food waste as part
Holsworthy (Summerleaze) Biogas Plant Copyright The contents of this case-study are Copyright University of Glamorgan, 2007. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
Lesson 9: Energy Energy in Feedstuffs Overview Most feedstuffs provide energy. While fats, oils, and grains have the highest energy content, roughages and mineral supplements have little or no energy content.
Measures to reduce GHG emissions in the Biomethane supply-chain William Mezzullo Paris - March 2013 Presentation Overview Reducing GHG emissions from biomethane production Overview of biomethane production
Types of Farming In the Standard Grade Geography exam there are three types of farming you need to know about arable, livestock and mixed. Arable farms are ones where the main way of making money is by
Technological and Environmental Impacts Evaluation of Biomass and Biofuels Supply Chain Papapostolou 1, E. Kondili 1, J.K. Kaldellis 2 1 Optimisation of Production Systems Lab 2 Soft Energy Applications
page 1/11 Scientific Facts on Liquid Biofuels for Transport Prospects, risks and opportunities Source document: FAO (2008) Summary & Details: GreenFacts Context - Serious questions are being raised about
BIOGAS TECHNOLOGY- WHAT WORKS FOR GHANA? Wisdom Ahiataku-Togobo** email@example.com Ministry of Power, Ghana & Papa Yaw Owusu-Obeng firstname.lastname@example.org RETT/Energy Commission, Ghana Presentation Outline
Recycling of food waste in Japan Dr. Akikuni Ushikubo President of Tokyo University of Information Sciences June 2013 Supplies for food (84.24 Mt / year) Food-related business operators manufacturers wholesalers
Green Gases Practical concepts for reliable sustainable energy supply Ulrike Daniel, International Project Leader and Head of Consultancy EnD-I AG www.end-i.ag Your green energy supplier Landfill Gas Solar
366-1 NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CONSERVATION PRACTICE STANDARD ANAEROBIC DIGESTER CONTROLLED TEMPERATURE (No.) CODE 366 DEFINITION A managed temperature waste treatment facility. PURPOSE To
Train the Trainer seminar Part 2 (Graz) evolution of a biogas plant (case study 1) from the first idea until today 16. 17. April 2008, Christian Sakulin, Karl Puchas Lokale Energie Agentur Oststeiermark
Farming at dairy (produktion på mælkelandbrug) Process description The present data refer to production on eight typical Danish Dairy in 2000, which combines dairy and (cash) crop production in a mixed
0 1.1 The Purpose of Biomass Utilization 1.2 What is the Biomass Town Plan? 1.3 The Basic Principles for Developing the Biomass Town Plan 1.4 Organization to promote the Biomass Town Plan 1.5 Current Situation
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME PRIORITY 8: Policy-Oriented Research SPECIFIC TARGETED RESEARCH PROJECT n SSPE-CT-2004-503604 Impact of Environmental Agreements on the CAP Document number: MEACAP WP3 D15a Dissemination
Manure Digesters Initiative Summary: Anaerobic digestion is a biological treatment process that breaks down manure, thereby producing biogas which can be converted to heat or electrical energy, improving
Food Waste Recycling Working with NISP John Warren ABP Ltd Presented by Kevin Quigley Business Development Manager - JWarrenABP Ltd Who are we?. A family run business based at Hamsterley near Bishop Auckland
Experience gained while testing soil samples and advising on nitrogen nutrients management in Poland as an extension worker presentation of Agronom software NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PLAN Nutrient management
THE DRANCO TECHNOLOGY: A UNIQUE DIGESTION TECHNOLOGY FOR SOLID ORGANIC WASTE Organic Waste Systems nv Luc De Baere (Luc.De.Baere@ows.be) Accelerated Landfill Degradation The Dranco digestion technology
Biogas plant Venaria Reale (I) Customer La Bellotta Soc. Semplice Agricola (I) Commissioned: 2010 Input: Maize silage, Triticale silage Power electric: 999 kw Plant design and process The input material
My Footprint My Footprint Use footprint checklist Estimate GHG Estimate energy intensity Generate results Set baseline for tracking Quick Start with My Footprint My Footprint allows users to estimate a
Poultry manure as a substrate for methane fermentation: problems and solutions Robert Mazur Ph.D., Jakbu Mazurkiewicz M.Sc. eng. Andrzej Lewicki M.Sc. Eng, Sebastian Kujawiak M.Sc. Eng Poznan University
IEA Bioenergy Task 37, Brazil, April 2-4, 2014 Country Report, Germany Bernd Linke Leibniz-Institute for Agricultural Engineering Potsdam-Bornim www.atb-potsdam.de Production of Biogas Utilisation of Biogas
The Regional Bioenergy Project Lessons Learnt Executive Summary The Regional Bioenergy Project came out of a perceived need to establish a demonstration project for bioenergy. Project aims included installing
28 April 2016 Total Income from Farming in the United Kingdom First estimate for 2015 This release presents the first estimate of Total Income from Farming for the United Kingdom for 2015. Total Income
Waste to Energy EISENMANN biogas systems Focus: Utilizing Anaerobic Digester Outputs February 3rd, 2012 Introducing EISENMANN EISENMANN is a leading international supplier of general finishing environmental
Biowaste and biofuels problems and possible solutions within the framework of waste recycling regulations 23.03.2011, Tartu Peeter Eek Head of the Waste Department, Ministry of Environment email@example.com
Energy and Carbon Management Andrew Gardner General Manager Energy and Carbon Management Severn Trent Water Andrew.Gardner@severntrent.co.uk 30th March 2010 Agenda Why we are investing in Low Carbon Future
Introduction to Västra Götaland s biogas programme Hanna Jönsson Biogas Manager, Region Västra Götaland Outline Climate strategy for Västra Götaland The situation for biogas in Sweden The biogas programme
Range of Biogas Plants designed by Krieg & Fischer Ingenieure GmbH Torsten Fischer and Dr. Katharina Backes Krieg & Fischer Ingenieure GmbH Bertha-von-Suttner-Straße 9, D-37085 Göttingen, Germany Tel.:
Energy from digester gas Optimised biogas utilisation The complete solution The complete solution Our company ENER-G designs, installs and operates biogas combined heat and power (CHP) systems for a variety
Baling straw to generate renewable electricity Farm details FARM NAME Stanley Farms FARMERS Ian,Robyn,Travis, Carmen, Clint & Morwenna Stanley LOCATION Kalannie AVERAGE RAINFALL 280 mm FARM SIZE 23,500
Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Food Feed Bioenergy Nature Forest Urban areas Other non-food Recreational areas Land - a scarce resource Report on the interaction between food, animal
Rudarsko-geološko-naftni zbornik Vol. 23 str. 9-14 Zagreb, 2011. UDC 662.6 UDK 662.6 English 1 2 2 of energy from biogas stations is accounted for by the The targets and conclusions of the above mentioned
Anaerobic Digestion Steve Baertsche Mary Wicks Anaerobic Digestion What is it? How does it work? Is it right for you? What is it? An anaerobic digester is an air tight, oxygen free container that is fed
The Value of Small Digester Technology M. Charles Gould Extension Educator-Bioproducts and Bioenergy Agriculture and Agribusiness Institute Michigan State University SARE Carbon, Energy and Climate Conference
Availability & Sustainability of Biomass for Heating in the UK Dr Patricia Thornley, Mr Andrew Welfle & Dr Paul Gilbert, Tyndall Centre, University of Manchester Overview Background Feedstocks for biomass
Increasing Drinking Water Use Efficiency in a Commercial Alberta Pork Production Facility Dennis McKerracher JV Farms, RR #2, High River, AB T1V 1N2; Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Introduction I am a southern
Sustainably Improving your Bottom Line Small Scale On Site AD Specialists smart BIOSYSTEMS UK AD BIOGAS & WASTE-2-ENERGY TURNKEY SOLUTIONS smart BIOSYSTEMS UK 2 Who we are and what we do AD BIOGAS & WASTE-2-ENERGY
A new plant system for biogas upgrading on a small scale, farm size level What is Biosling? Biogas is produced when certain kinds of bacteria digest organic substances in an anaerobic environment, which
South Campus Anaerobic Digester Project Dana Kirk, Ph.D., P.E. Anaerobic Digestion Research and Education Center Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering 2013 Anaerobic Digestion? The biological conversion
Manure Management Plan A step by step guide for farmers Name Farm Address Date Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs June 2003 Introduction These guidelines have been designed to help you produce
Nordic Biogas Conference August 27 2014 Biogas in the Nordic countries Bruno Sander Nielsen / Danish Biogas Association Brief overview Production Origin Use Development Major challenges / drivers Figures
Job reports Our references incentives for your biogas project Consentis can do it! Listen to our customers. Dear Biogas Prospect, It s obvious: biogas is the only renewable energy source which is available
Development of biogas technology for livestock farms in Thailand Choke Mikled Department of Animal Science and Aquaculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand. E-mail:
Technology and Knowhow about climate change and sustainable energy! Independent and sustainable engineering in the fields of biogas power plants and biomethane production Kuching, 2. December 2015, Hilton
Sustainable production of biogas and bioethanol from waste Waste - Resources on the wrong way Jens Ejbye Schmidt Head of programme NRG Biomass & Bioenergy Biosystem Division Risø The Technical University
Dairyland Power Cooperative Power Through Partnerships Neil Kennebeck September 27, 2013 Dairyland Power Cooperative Headquartered in La Crosse Provides the wholesale electrical requirements for: 25 electric
Veolia Water Outsourcing Waste Water and Energy Recovery Greg Turner Technical Director 23 rd April 2008 Veolia Environnement is the world leader in water services. Water and wastewater services management
THANK YOU THANK YOU Anaerobic Digester Feasibility Study and Business Plan Road Map for Dairy Farms in Florida Summary of Findings Florida Dair Prod ction Conference Florida Dairy Production Conference
Indonesia: Tapping Indonesia's Agrowaste Potential with Innovative Technology PEP Information Workshop 10. September 2014 www.exportinitiative.bmwi.de Suitable biogas technologies for Indonesia Frank Schillig,
FACT SHEET Upgrading Biogas to Biomethane On-farm digester model source: FNR On farm Biogas plant Introduction to Anaerobic Digestion (AD) Anaerobic Digestion (AD) is the process whereby organic matter