The OP on this thread was asking for lagoons to store waste without payment to the receiving farmer. Obviously the waste disposal industry need to dispose of waste in winter when there are limited options of spreading to land, more stringent NVZ rules must have contributed to this. I believe in the above scenario a farm with lagoon capacity is in a very strong position to charge for receiving waste, after all without the waste the farm will continue but without a lagoon the waste disposal company will have to pay to dispose of the waste. If anyone has any idea of the cost of waste disposal it would be very interesting.
The company the OP represented planned to inject the waste to grassland and claimed a benefit from this operation as a subsoiling operation, any farmer will know this is not necessarily the case. It might have been the case that the waste would have been better utilised being spread on arable land.
There is a definite place for waste spreading to farm land, however the agricultural industry is missing a trick by not charging, and even in some circumstances paying for waste products. Obviously there are many regulatory hurdles to jump through such as EA deployments and even planning issues when dealing with waste products but these are not insurmountable.
The company the OP represented planned to inject the waste to grassland and claimed a benefit from this operation as a subsoiling operation, any farmer will know this is not necessarily the case. It might have been the case that the waste would have been better utilised being spread on arable land.
There is a definite place for waste spreading to farm land, however the agricultural industry is missing a trick by not charging, and even in some circumstances paying for waste products. Obviously there are many regulatory hurdles to jump through such as EA deployments and even planning issues when dealing with waste products but these are not insurmountable.