Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/67617 Currently, all the Bay states are working to achieve nutrient reduction goals from various pollution sources. Significant reductions in phosphorus pollution from agriculture, particularly with respect to phosphorus losses from land application of manure are needed to support a healthy aquatic ecosystem. Producers in high-density animal agricultural production areas such as Lancaster County region of Pennsylvania, the Delmarva Peninsula, and the Shenandoah Valley region of Virginia, need viable alternatives to local land application in order to meet nutrient reduction goals.
Citation preview
CAN MANURE TO ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES HELP
SAVE THE CHESAPEAKE BAY?
Jane Corson-Lassiter - Farm Pilot Project Coordination, NRCS IPA
Chesapeake Bay
3rd largest estuary in the world
200 miles long, 30 miles across at the widest point
Nearly 12,000 miles of shoreline
64,000 sq. mile watershed including land area in six states
17 million people live in the watershed
Nitrogen Loading 44% from Agriculture - including15% from Animal Manure
Agriculture
Animal Manure
Other Sources
Other Sources
Animal Manure
Agriculture
Phosphorus Loading 45% from Agriculture - including36% from Animal Manure
Delivered Nutrients by Sector
37 million lbs./year6 million lbs./year
Value of Livestock, Poultry, and their Products Sold as Percent of Total Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold -2007
#1 New YorkPennsylvaniaMarylandVirginia
#2 West Virginia
Delaware# 5
Annual Market Value Agricultural Products
sold in Bay states > $16.5 billion
Agriculture’s Economic Impact
The Farm Manure to Energy Initiative has come about to assess emerging technologies that are promising alternatives in manure management.
Funding :• National Fish and Wildlife Foundation• USDA-NRCS• EPA • Chesapeake Bay Funders Network
Are there new tools to reduce delivery to the Bay of animal manure nutrients?
Project Partners
• Sustainable Chesapeake
• Farm Pilot Project Coordination, Inc.• University of Maryland Center for
Environmental Science
• University of Maryland Environmental Finance Center
• Virginia Cooperative Extension
• VA Tech
• Lancaster County Conservation District
• Manure has carbon that can be converted to energy.
Why Manure to Energy?
Manure has enough energy to be valuable, providing moisture is at acceptable level.
Feedstock (Btus/lb) * % Ash * % Dry Matter
Chicken Litter 6,500 20 70
Swine feces 8,000 15 3
Dairy manure 8,000 10 1-15
Feedlot manure 4,500 30 70
Wood 8,000 3 50
Municipal sewage
4,000 – 8,000 15-60 <1-3
Coal, bituminous
12,000 22 80
* Values reported are based on dry matter basis
But can Manure to Energy succeed as a nutrient management tool?
Produces Renewable Energy from Manure
Provides an Economic Return to the Farmer
Enables Removal of Excess Nutrients
• Demonstrations in high priority phosphorus and nitrogen yielding areas of the Chesapeake Bay
• Use different technologies
1) farm scale2) technically feasible3) produce heat and/or electricity4) provided a pathway to remove nutrients
• Situate systems on different farm configurations
What did we find out about technologies and their market readiness?
•poultry litter in thermochemical conversion systems in high temperature range – gasification/combustion
•were developed through University research but had undergone additional steps towards commercialization
•generated heat for poultry houses (electrical generation not fully optimized)
•produced an ash by-product from the poultry litter with significant reduction in weight and volume
• Manure• Poultry Litter
• Ash• Bio-char• Oils• Gases• Compost• Digestate
FEEDSTOCK
EMISSIONS
CAPTURED CO-PRODUCTS
HEAT/ELECTRICITYPyrolysis700 - 1200 °F
Gasification1000 - 1800 °F
Combustion>2000 °F
(Microbial) CompostingAnaerobic Digestion98 – 140 °F
Thermo-chemical Conversion
Is poultry litter ash a valuable co-product?
Nutrient Analysis of Poultry Litter Ash
Source Process Analysis N2-P2O5-K2O
CCE
RAW LITTER na 3-3-2 2
Shenandoah pyrolysis 6-6-4
South Carolina gasification 0.5- 6.3- 1.5 16
Indiana combustion 0-15-13 30
Ireland combustion 0-23-22 30
* Triple Superphosphate 0-45-0
We’ve encountered…
•Regulatory agencies uncertain about new technologies.
•Significant discussion of whether manure is a fuel or waste –we’ve worked with farmers to “self determine” fuel legitimacy
•Need for better emissions data
•Real interest from farmers who understand and support the reach for new manure management tools and are excited that systems may be a new source of farm revenue.
Wider adoption will depend on maturing of technologies,
affordability, and performance.
Adopti
on
Understanding the
economics
Understanding the
equipment
Achieving consistent
performance
Understanding
environmental benefits
