Ad plants , you can’t make it up

[thesilentone]

Sustainability is an odd term for a process currently reliant of fossil fuel inputs... I looked long and hard at the facts about 20years ago, most I have long forgotten but when I did a life cycle analysis back then I seem to recall the energy of fossil fuel consumed in growing and transporting a ton of various feedstocks and then spreading the digestate was not vastly lower than the energy produced from digesting 1T that feedstock.. Basically a complex process for converting relatively cheap fossil fuel energy into a more valuable product ie government grant money. If you consume a 39MJ litre of fossil fuel derived energy for every 40MJ of biomethane produced it is hardly a technology to save the planet. I genuinely would like to know though, how do the figures look today? For every MJ of energy exported from a typical AD plant how much energy is used in the full life cycle of the feed stock? Is AD leveraging fossil fuels to create energy or does it simply convert it for little or no net gain?

I don't think anyone would argue with your points. AD is at best carbon negative, at worst carbon neutral, based on what you put in, and what you get out. That still put's it head and shoulders ahead of most competitors providing base load energy.

However, the very under-played benefit is digestate.

If calculating the benefits of digestate to the soil, bioculture and environment AD starts to look very carbon negative and environmentally friendly.

I have read several life cycle assessments, and every one without exception has oil as part of our future fuel make up.

Biogas -Electricity/Heat/Biomethane is up there also, and a big part of our future, and still has (in my view) got a long way to grow in the UK.

The future is very large ' Community ' plants taking in waste from hundreds of farms, as well as waste from processing and commercial and industrial.

As NVZ's and Environmental Scheme's play a bigger role, AD has the ability to manage N, and the use of technology as the solution to a problem.

As long as we continue to grow in numbers, so will the demand for fuel and pressure on the environment.

 

[upnortheast]

So should all the foragers tractors etc involved in chopping maize, grass etc purely for an AD plant be running on white diesel?

Local contractor who has involvement with an AD plant had the man from C & E out to clarify the situation.
Red can be used for all operations relating to the AD plant
He can travel 50 + miles with the umbilical kit to spread slurry on red
To take a bale of hay for the horses up the road on the handler he should be on white

 

[thesilentone]

Local contractor who has involvement with an AD plant had the man from C & E out to clarify the situation.
Red can be used for all operations relating to the AD plant
He can travel 50 + miles with the umbilical kit to spread slurry on red
To take a bale of hay for the horses up the road on the handler he should be on white

As far as I am aware, he cannot transport bales with a handler on the road to a stables/horse owner as you are in breach of it's ' agricultural use ' licence.

 

[farmerm]

I don't think anyone would argue with your points. AD is at best carbon negative, at worst carbon neutral, based on what you put in, and what you get out. That still put's it head and shoulders ahead of most competitors providing base load energy.

However, the very under-played benefit is digestate.

If calculating the benefits of digestate to the soil, bioculture and environment AD starts to look very carbon negative and environmentally friendly.

I have read several life cycle assessments, and every one without exception has oil as part of our future fuel make up.

Biogas -Electricity/Heat/Biomethane is up there also, and a big part of our future, and still has (in my view) got a long way to grow in the UK.

The future is very large ' Community ' plants taking in waste from hundreds of farms, as well as waste from processing and commercial and industrial.

As NVZ's and Environmental Scheme's play a bigger role, AD has the ability to manage N, and the use of technology as the solution to a problem.

As long as we continue to grow in numbers, so will the demand for fuel and pressure on the environment.

Not picking a fight here, just finding the holes in my own thinking. I certainly had not given much consideration to the digestate. Tell me, how can maize grown with fossil fuels ever be carbon neutral? You release 1 unit of carbon from fossil fuels whilst producing 1 unit of maize, the unit of carbon gets sequestered in the crop... carbon neutral at this point but then the crop get digested, the biomethane gets burnt and that unit of carbon gets released into the atmosphere.. how ever you wish to account for it each year a new unit of fossil carbon is added... Does adding digestate to soils genuinely sequester a unit of carbon each year and does it stay there long term? I do remain skeptical than any carbon is the top 20cm of soil is anything more than transient storage and can be lost again rapidly given poor management. Compare the process of using fossil fuels to grow and transport crops and increase soil OM with the digestate vs using that fossil fuel energy directly to provide baseload energy whilst growing a lower input biomass crop chopped and incorporated in field to add OM. The latter would be viewed as less green by some yet, excluding the former benefiting from government grant income, I am not sure the net effect would really be all that different?

 

[sjt01]

Not picking a fight here, just finding the holes in my own thinking. I certainly had not given much consideration to the digestate. Tell me, how can maize grown with fossil fuels ever be carbon neutral? You release 1 unit of carbon from fossil fuels whilst producing 1 unit of maize, the unit of carbon gets sequestered in the crop... carbon neutral at this point but then the crop get digested, the biomethane gets burnt and that unit of carbon gets released into the atmosphere.. how ever you wish to account for it each year a new unit of fossil carbon is added... Does adding digestate to soils genuinely sequester a unit of carbon each year and does it stay there long term? I do remain skeptical than any carbon is the top 20cm of soil is anything more than transient storage and can be lost again rapidly given poor management. Compare the process of using fossil fuels to grow and transport crops and increase soil OM with the digestate vs using that fossil fuel energy directly to provide baseload energy whilst growing a lower input biomass crop chopped and incorporated in field to add OM. The latter would be viewed as less green by some yet, excluding the former benefiting from government grant income, I am not sure the net effect would really be all that different?

Here is the official method of calculation from OFGEM

Here, for example, is the growing maize calculation box from above

 

[Wisconsonian]

As far as I'm aware, AD plants in the US are mostly on large dairies and fed only manure, so growing and harvesting crops to feed a digester is foreign to me.

There is/was a proposed new dairy that would have been reliant on center pivot irrigation, powered by the AD. It would be THEORETICALLY possible to grow alfalfa, corn/maize, and soybeans in a carbon neutral, and imported energy free manner, with the alfalfa and soy fixing the nitrogen, and the entire process being fueled by waste energy from the cow manure, and possibly biodiesel.

This particular dairy was proposed on converted plantation pine, so carbon neutral was never part of the goal, or would have required some very high priced calculations to prove the carbon neutrality. It would have been as close as I've seen to that idea though. It was scuttled by NIMBY'ism, as it was in a suburban area.

 

[upnortheast]

As far as I am aware, he cannot transport bales with a handler on the road to a stables/horse owner as you are in breach of it's ' agricultural use ' licence.

Didn`t you see the old suckler cow in with the horses

 

[essexpete]

I can guess that the carbon equation of the operation I saw briefly in West Essex would not be as beneficial as the theory books. The soil damage was extreme, caused mainly by moving the chopped/ensiled product from the clamp to the road. The fuel that would be needed to rectify, likely long term damage to soil structure due to compaction and exposure to erosion coupled with distance to AD plant. I am not a scientist or clever enough to work it out.

 

[Ben B]

ONLY in the UK would you have AD plants & be able to call them “green” or “environmental”
Anywhere else they’d be a disaster . . .

There building one-up the NSW coast somewhere for food waste and cow manure. these is also plans for one at katunga in northern vic.

 

[essexpete]

There building one-up the NSW coast somewhere for food waste and cow manure. these is also plans for one at katunga in northern vic.

All waste input?

 

[serf]

Let's not forget, Kermit the frog was green...

And made more sense than some of these "green" bullsh!t schemes !

 

[DaveGrohl]

The soil damage was extreme, caused mainly by moving the chopped/ensiled product from the clamp to the road.

Eh? Was the clamp out in the middle of a field? Growing maize for harvest when the weather's wet is a choice, no matter what its end usage. Not a choice I've ever made.

 

[essexpete]

Eh? Was the clamp out in the middle of a field? Growing maize for harvest when the weather's wet is a choice, no matter what its end usage. Not a choice I've ever made.

Clamps not too far from field edges but entrances completely destroyed so moved elsewhere and product hauled across fields to alternative gate/ over or through hedge. The damaged areas around clamps were huge, with out the haul routes.

 

[Simon Chiles]

To take a bale of hay for the horses up the road on the handler he should be on white

We’d need a bit more detail on this one to give a definitive answer. If it was hay that he’d bought in and he was then selling it on they would be correct. If it was hay he’d made himself and was selling it then it’s ok on red. Here’s the extract from the Memorandum of Agreement

Using your tractor to transport agricultural produce​

If you were engaged in an agricultural operation such as the growing or harvesting of crops, you may use red diesel for this purpose and for subsequently transporting the produce to where it will be sold or put to its intended use.

As a hay producer you can imagine that I was keen to be able to keep red for delivering hay to horses. Initially HMRC considered that it wasn’t a legitimate use but when I pointed out that I delivered haylage to a customer who fed the load to his cattle sheep and horses and that it was clearly ridiculous that 2/3 of the load would be ok and 1/3 not we agreed that it didn’t matter what the product was used for providing that you had been part of the agricultural operation in its production.

 

[thesilentone]

We’d need a bit more detail on this one to give a definitive answer. If it was hay that he’d bought in and he was then selling it on they would be correct. If it was hay he’d made himself and was selling it then it’s ok on red. Here’s the extract from the Memorandum of Agreement

Using your tractor to transport agricultural produce​

If you were engaged in an agricultural operation such as the growing or harvesting of crops, you may use red diesel for this purpose and for subsequently transporting the produce to where it will be sold or put to its intended use.

As a hay producer you can imagine that I was keen to be able to keep red for delivering hay to horses. Initially HMRC considered that it wasn’t a legitimate use but when I pointed out that I delivered haylage to a customer who fed the load to his cattle sheep and horses and that it was clearly ridiculous that 2/3 of the load would be ok and 1/3 not we agreed that it didn’t matter what the product was used for providing that you had been part of the agricultural operation in its production.

I would say it's very difficult to Police if any job is combined with another, especially as it's against the law to have twin tanks (one white one red).

Dissecting red diesel rules - Farmers Weekly

The line between doing the right and wrong thing with red diesel is blurry to say the least. To help get to grips with the subject we put a series of

www.fwi.co.uk

relevant to this thread:

Red diesel rules: HMRC explains the law on working with AD plants - Farmers Weekly

Our red diesel feature – Red diesel Q&A: HMRC rules untangled – threw up a few more reader questions, so we’ve been back to the experts for more

www.fwi.co.uk

 

[DaveGrohl]

Clamps not too far from field edges but entrances completely destroyed so moved elsewhere and product hauled across fields to alternative gate/ over or through hedge. The damaged areas around clamps were huge, with out the haul routes.

So basically they've made an @RSE of the job? They'd prob make an @RSE of any job in that case, they just happen to be doing AD.

 

[Ben B]

All waste input?

One up the coast is ment to be waste and manure fed. From what I have read the northern Vic one is going to be crop fed

 

[Exfarmer]

Here is the official method of calculation from OFGEM
View attachment 989479

Here, for example, is the growing maize calculation box from above
View attachment 989480

View attachment 989481

I may be missing something, but as I see this it suggests that 155 litres of fuel producing 73.4 Kg of CO2 are used to produce 33.84 tonnes of feedstock per hectare. How much gas will that produce ? I appreciate the you use the bilk of the waste heat and convert the rest to electricity so keeping conversion with in bounds , but as I understand it AD plants producing Electricity only attain 30-40% conversion efficiency.
The fuel used costs is only part of the equation as it appears to allow nothing for the energy input building and maintaining the plant and associated equipment such as foragers tractor trailers etc.

 

[sjt01]

I may be missing something, but as I see this it suggests that 155 litres of fuel producing 73.4 Kg of CO2 are used to produce 33.84 tonnes of feedstock per hectare. How much gas will that produce ? I appreciate the you use the bilk of the waste heat and convert the rest to electricity so keeping conversion with in bounds , but as I understand it AD plants producing Electricity only attain 30-40% conversion efficiency.
The fuel used costs is only part of the equation as it appears to allow nothing for the energy input building and maintaining the plant and associated equipment such as foragers tractor trailers etc.

That is the official OFGEM method. You can make a carbon footprint whatever you like, by drawing the boundaries of your assessment in different places. Embedded energy in plant and machinery is one that is sometimes included, but what about the embedded energy in the factories that produce the tractors and machinery?
One consideration for us was that if we did not put in the AD plant, we would have had to invest serious money in slurry handling and storage, so the AD must be offset against that.

 

[cows sh#t me to tears]

One up the coast is ment to be waste and manure fed. From what I have read the northern Vic one is going to be crop fed

Is it not being built by the Dutchman that owns Katunga Fresh tomatoes? Possibly fed also on whatever waste the hot houses produce.