Slashdot Mirror


Manure-Powered Generators On The Rise

Sunkist writes "The San Francisco Chronicle has a report on Marin County rancher Albert Straus that, after 25 years of work, began using a generator powered by manure. While this type of 'power' has been in use for a while, recent legislation has made it more widespread. From the article, 'The Straus Farms' covered-lagoon methane generator, powered by methane billowing off a covered pool of decomposing bovine waste, is expected to save the operation between $5,000 and $6,000 per month in energy costs.' Let's hear it for poop!"

31 of 444 comments (clear)

  1. Word just in from the oil industry by PatrickThomson · · Score: 5, Funny

    Shit.

    --
    I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
    1. Re:Word just in from the oil industry by operagost · · Score: 5, Funny
      Damn, I was just picturing this scenario:
      Wife: Honey, we need more power! The computer's fritzing out and the lights are dimming!

      Husband: *sighs* I'll get the Metamucil.
      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    2. Re:Word just in from the oil industry by Wun+Hung+Lo · · Score: 5, Funny

      We should put one in Washington, D.C. We could light the whole world up like a pinball machine!!

  2. That's all well and good... by Doesn't_Comment_Code · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...but i'll take a shitload of fuel to power a city.

    --

    Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
  3. Tina Turner by chaffed · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's great and all but what does Tina Turner have to say about it?

    --
    What could possibly go wrong?
  4. Just the right time. by mgs1000 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ..and it arrives at the perfect time, the production of bullshit is at an all-time high!

  5. I was there, it's an impressive setup by stratjakt · · Score: 4, Funny

    This little midget riding a huge musclebound retarded guy challenged me to Thunderdome!

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  6. Cows say... by SoTuA · · Score: 4, Funny
    ...that's a great energy source... for me to POOP ON!

    Oh wait... (or is it "moo wait..."?)

  7. Holy cow! by DR+SoB · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So what's the waste generated from this? Obviously CO2, but what else? Is it considered "clean" energy? Is used poop as good at fertilizing as new poop? Would it work with human poop? Can I build a small version myself? Are their poop bylaws? (I can cover my lawn with poop after all..). And most importantly, does it run Linux??

    --
    Mod +5 Drunk
  8. You're shittin' me right? by Ingolfke · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know if I believe this article... something smells kind of funny about it.

    buh-du-bum-ching

  9. Liquid Manure by stoolpigeon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I was a kid we would visit my Uncle's dairy farm. Even with him using a lot of manure to fertilize his fields - getting rid of it all was still an issue. They went to a system where they processed it to liquid and it went into a big liquid manure pond. I can remember watching their dog- walking around on the 'crust' that formed on the top of it. Every so often his legs would slip through. That was a nasty dog.

    Eventually my Uncle's family farm went under and was auctioned off. I wonder if this kind of thing would have been enough to keep him in business? He now works for a big giant 'corporate' farm. Truth be told- from a purely economic perspective he is better off. He gets regular vacation (never had that with his own farm) and makes o.k. money.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  10. What would get me excited is... by Roadkills-R-Us · · Score: 4, Interesting

    a generator I could run off my septic tank to power my house. But my whole family doesn't produce as much poop as one cow. Although when we have TexMex, we rival cows in overall methane production. But who wants to carry a mini-generator attached to their butt?

  11. Re:The inherited problem is still by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's greenpeace FUD, really. There's not nearly as much CO2 staying in the atmosphere as there should be, and noone knows why not. The best theories are that the oceans (which are most of the planet) sink orders of magnitude more CO2 than all the land-based plants.

  12. Lots of poop = lots of electricity by erick99 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I'm a big fan of "alternative energy." More for the technology and gee-whiz factor thenenvironmentalism I suppose. Anyway, this is a very cool project. Here are the parts of the article that I found particularly interesting:

    ..switched on a 75- kilowatt generator.

    On the panel, an electricity meter began running backward, indicating that power originating from a nearby poop-filled lagoon near the town of Marshall was feeding into PG&E's electric power grid.

    ..is expected to save the operation between $5,000 and $6,000 per month in energy costs.

    A well-fed dairy cow produces 120 pounds of manure every day, or 40,000 pounds per year per animal.

    ..a single cow can emit 100 to 200 liters of methane per day.

    These cows are pooping money!

    Happy Trails!

    Erick

    --
    http://www.busyweather.com/
    1. Re:Lots of poop = lots of electricity by Cheap+Imitation · · Score: 4, Funny
      These cows are pooping money!

      If cows are that useful, just imagine if we could harness the output of our politicans!

      Their (previously useless) B.S. could result in a nearly limitless supply of energy!

  13. Arizona Landfills Use a Similar Process by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Our power company, SRP, does a similar thing with landfills. After the landfill is full, they tarp it and collect the methane in order to generate electricity. Then, a few years later when the methane generation slows down enough they remove the power generation equipment and build a public park on top. Three uses for one piece of land is not a bad idea at all.

  14. Popular in India by G4from128k · · Score: 4, Informative

    In India, they call them gobar gas plants (more details in a 1971 Mother Earth New article). As long as one keeps the 30:1 carbon/nitrogen ratio, they can consume other organic waste too (grass clippings, urine, food waste, etc.). The only problem with them is that they tend to create hydrogen sulfide that makes the gas highly corrisive to iron equipment (some people use a filter of steel wool to remove the H2S).

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  15. Re:The inherited problem is still by Doesn't_Comment_Code · · Score: 4, Informative

    Without forrest like we used to have...

    Many forests around the world have been significantly depleted, but the myth of deforestation in the U.S. is just that, a myth. There hasn't been a significant decrease in plantlife except in very urban areas, like New York.

    Also, on a world wide scale, much of the plantlife that handles the CO2 issue is in the ocean. I don't remember the number, but something like 70% of the CO2 converting plants live in the ocean. I think that's the bigger issue.

    --

    Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
  16. Doubtful by INeededALogin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    cows would no longer be slaughtered, but still they'd still be raised commercially

    I see this as more of a way of recycling. Crap is a by-product of an animal using energy. The actual energy needed to produce that crap is immense. Think of the grass that has to grow and the nutrients placed into the soil, then what your body can't use is the crap. When it gets down to it... we would probably save money, and resources just growing tress on that land and burning those(skip the cow). The benefit to the current setup is that we can raise the cow, eat em, and then recycle the by-products.

    1. Re:Doubtful by strictnein · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A good example of made up PETA BS:

      For example, a cow grazing on one acre of land produces enough meat to sustain a person two and a half months; soybeans grown on that same acre would nourish a person for seven years.

      And the point is? Growing those soybeans for food using current methods requires anywhere between 12-18 times the energy that you receive from the food, including lots of nasty things like fossil fuels and fertilizer! OH NO THE PLANET IS GOING TO DIE! 7 years of energy for a human is ~ 7yr * 365days/yr * 2000kcal / day = ~ 5.1 million kCal. The EVIL TOXIC energy needed to create that food: ~61 million kCal - ~92 million kCal!

      Having a cow graze that same acre of land requires no power as the energy in the grass it is eating is from the sun. No nasty chemicals, no icky big tractors. So, 2 1/2 months of food = 375000 kCal. To produce this food required only about 375000 kCal of FRESH HAPPY SUN energy. And they included only meat as a by-product of the cow. I can get milk too.

      So, clearly in this setup (obviously things are different in real life, but I'm just going with what the super-smart folk at PETA tell me), the cow is the better alternative. I can eat its meat, drink its milk (if it's a female), wear its skin, and create power from its shit! All I need to make it through the year is about 4-5 cows and 4-5 acres of grass land. And since I'm using the shit to make power, I'm not relying on the nasty nuclear or dirty coal based energy! Three cheers for Mother Earth! Thanks for making it so clear PETA! If I love my planet, I should raise cows and eat meat!

    2. Re:Doubtful by strictnein · · Score: 5, Funny

      ... once.

      I don't know if you know this, but cows have baby cows. That's where cows come from. Strange but true.

    3. Re:Doubtful by Long-EZ · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You forgot about bone meal, blood meal, hair meal (for your chickens)... plus head and guts to feed your pets.

      Forcing grazing animals like cows and chickens to be carnivors is now illegal after the big agribusiness companies were finally forced to acknowledge science and admit that such unnatural practices cause bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, aka "mad cow disease"), which is passed to people who consume the cows as vCJD, which is fatal. There is no cure, for cows or people. Of course, there is little enforcement and the laws are still widely ignored.

      insulin for the diabetic friends

      For about a decade, insulin has been almost exclusively provided by hard working recombinant DNA bacteria. This is actual human insulin, free of transgenic viruses and foreign proteins that trigger a human immune response.

      We evolved with cows.

      Not even close. In the span of time appropriate for a reference to evolution, it's true to say we evolved with plants. Evidence indicates that humans evolved eating mostly plants, with a small amount of animal protein, much like the diets of chimps, lowland mountain gorillas and baboons. Proto-humans are believed to have supplemented their primarily plant based diet with almost as much insect protein as protein from mammals. It would be almost as correct to say "I've been using a computer my entire adult life, so humans evolved to use computers", or "I've been eating pizza since 1970, so humans evolved to eat pizza." The association with eating cows goes back a few more generations, but not nearly enough to justify a connection with evolution.

      From a health perspective, people eat far too much meat and milk. There are much healthier plant sources of protein. PETA is probably exagerating the energy difference between raising plants for humans versus raising plants for cattle to feed humans, but it's still true that an acre of crops can feed more people than the same acre could feed if routed through a cow. Reasonable estimates I've seen indicate a 7:1 advantage.

      --
      >> My ultraviolent Linux switch video.
  17. You're missing the point -- by oneiros27 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're getting energy from what was considered to be a waste product. If they weren't doing this, we would have to make larger nuclear power plants, or whatever other form of energy product you feel is acceptable for the environment.

    This is a win-win situation, for those involved -- they de-water the waste, compact the waste for easier removal, and get energy back in the process to help offset the operational costs for the process.

    For those who didn't take sewage treatment classes in college, there are four main types of setting -- type 1 is for things that accelerate from gravity (sticks, rocks, etc), type 2 is things that floculate (clump together as they're falling), type 3 and 4 are not typically done in a water treatment plant as they don't happen quickly enough. So, what they do is syphon off the 'mostly' clean water at the top, and dump the sludge at the bottom... but the sludge at the bottom is still mostly water, which is heavy, and bulky. Depending on the area, they'll spread it out to dry in the sun, or use anaerobic digestion (such as in the bottom of a pond), to get it to compress further.

    And let's not forget that composted manure makes great fertilizer, which the farmer might otherwise be buying for the plants that go into feeding the cow. It's all just an example of a nice little ecosystem.

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
  18. Re:The inherited problem is still by stratjakt · · Score: 4, Informative

    I read recently that there's enough old growth forest in the US to make a band as wide as texas from NY to Seattle.

    Much of it is in undesirable areas (mountains etc) or protected parks so it's pretty much safe.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  19. Great Tech - But I have a problem... by HogGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ... with the following statement:

    "With net metering, small producers like Straus can reduce or erase their energy bills but cannot be paid for pumping excess energy into the grid. Net metering has been available to owners of home solar systems for several years."

    Why do we allow laws that strip us of potential income, and benefit companies like PG&E?

  20. Re:So cows ARE worth a shitload! by JPriest · · Score: 4, Funny

    My ancestors didn't fight for millions of years to get to the top of the food chain for me to be a vegetarian.

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
  21. What it's like to live inside of a fart by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is yet another reason why we have the "Sonoma Aroma" in Marin / Sonoma County.

    You'd think the Sonoma Aroma would smell like wine and vineyards. Nope. It smells like shit.... especially in the summer. Nothing beats endless acres of giant turd piles baking, up wind, in 95 degree temperatures.

    If you've ever wondered what it's like to live inside of a fart... move here.

    --
    "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
  22. Referred to commonly as "biomass" power generation by tbmaddux · · Score: 4, Informative

    See the Green-E website. Many landfills already extract their methane emissions. This is good even from a global-warming perspective, as methane is also a greenhouse gas. Finally, the EPA has tips on reducing methane emissions from livestock themselves, as opposed to their turds.

    --
    Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
  23. Environmental impact by operagost · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This naturally occurring methane is a potent greenhouse gas, estimated to be 21 times as damaging to the ozone layer as carbon dioxide.
    Does this make any sense? I think the writer confused the greenhouse effect with the ozone layer. They're two totally different things! CO2 doesn't damage the ozone layer. It makes no sense.
    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  24. Re:inefficient usage by confused+one · · Score: 4, Informative

    They still use it as fertilizer. While it's sitting in the lagoon decomposing, they capture the methane (instead of letting it outgas into the atmosphere). Then they take the good stuff out of the lagoon and spread it.

  25. depends by zogger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    it really just depends. One, you don't have to use manure, you can use a variety of any biomass that will anerobically digest, which is hmm, all of it. One idea I heard of was from jaque cousteau, his was to use kelp, because of it's incredibly fast growing nature and the make-up of kelp makes it ideal for digesting. It seems industrial hemp would be ideal, too, it's cellulose production per acre/year is amazing, and it doesn't require that much fertiliser, you could get by just plowing under 1/2 the plants every year for that, then re apply the slurry as well. If you could see in meat space how much quite useable burnable gas you get from even a small amount you'd see it's very practical and economic. The deal is, the big energy companies CAN'T send you a bill for it,because you can own it, so no way will this be pushed officially by the government or it's controllers, big industry, that much. They *dig* having you pay forever into their monopoly, both with cash and with mindshare. It's the same with solar, with wind generation, etc.

    Second,to get back to some farm savings, although the nitrogen level % remains the same in the manure and water slurry after digestion, it is in a more available form to plants than normal aerobic digestion or composting (farmers just shoot this stuff back on the fields now, with conveyor spreaders or flail spreaders). I have read it is as high as 600% better with anerobic digestion, so you get significant savings on fertilizer (which is a HUGE cost now and going up because artificial fertiliser is made from natural gas), which is what's done with the slurry after it has exhausted methane production potential. And last, it is "relatively" cheap to build these things,and they are incredibly scalable, there's a size and technique to fit any size operation, from joe water buffalo rice farmer on up. There are hundreds of thousands of them around the planet now,of various sizes,just not much in the US, so here it's stayed mostly "experimental",and they have to "study it", etc, that's all, any place else it's just normal, and sunlight is an excellent conversion tool for getting solar energy into various useful products. It's very productive sunlight is,a great energy conversion tool, especially with living plants, and it's the only practical fusion generator we have, and it's "free and open source", the government or industry can't charge you for it directly. They will play act at supporting it, that's about it, it doesn't lend itself to monopoly control, so they spread a lot of economic FUD around it.

    Remember, farming has always been profitable and useful,well, from obvious reasons, food is kinda nice, even before modern techniques were invented, so it's quite do-able. Look at giant forests, grow all on their own, no high tech anything needed for them to grow, just water, dirt, sunlight, air, done. They are just huge biological manufacturing plants, quite sophisticated really, and that's all any farm is, a biological factory, and there's various ways to cut costs and remain profitable, ONCE you as joe big farmer STOP being brainwashed by monsanto and the energy companies and the equipment companies and the banks. You have to break that mindset of "dependence" first before you can wrap your brane around "how to do it" better. That first step is just too much for most people to get over. It's not really their fault, it's how they were taught, and what the "approved" techniques are as taught at ag colleges and in industry orgs. There are VERY few independent farmers around, the vast majority are really just coporate sub contractors and have to follow these corporation rules. The guy I work for owns three large farms, he is controlled by his suppliers and marketing org down to an obscene picky little level like you wouldn't believe on how to run his farm, or he can't market, and that's the biggest problems farmers have now, and they get trapped into it, go along, or go broke. Once in and in debt, they are trapped, it's almost like a form of serfdom on a large scale. It's a hard