RogueRose
International Hazard
Posts: 1585
Registered: 16-6-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
Processing animal waste (manure) - any way to speed up the process?
In many states there are agricultural communities where there are massive farms that have open pits of manure of millions of gallons and these
pits/ponds are susceptible to flooding problems which causes all kinds of problems with disease and ground water contamination afterwards. Local
regulators seem unwilling to tackle the problems and time and again we see overflows into creeks/rivers not to mention when we have big storms.
From what I have seen the best current method of handling the manure is covering the entire pit with a "tarp" and drawing off the methane. This seems
VERY inefficient when some of the pits are 300ft x 300ft x 4-10ft or larger.
I'm wondering if a similar setup could be used w/o the large area being covered but process the manure in daily batches and then pump the manure into
the holding pond after processing.
I am wondering if it would be possible to first remove the solids by using either a centrifuge or a large filter/press that could make "cakes" of the
solids - possibly centrifuge first and then press the solids left from the centrifuge.
I'm not sure what is in the liquids (as far as compounds/elements) I suspect they would be high in ammonia, urea, potassium and phosphorus (I wonder
how much phosphorus is in 6 million gallons of pig manure??).
Would passing the centrifuge'd liquids through a layer of CaCO3, Ca(OH)2 or some other relatively inexpensive material be useful in treatement of the
manure? Maybe the filter material and or liquid could later be used as a field additive for nutrient?
IDK if it is possible to speed up the breakdown of the manure into methane (in a batch process) as I think the natural anaerobic process is fairly
slow. IDK if changing the pressure and or temp within the batch process or any other manipulation would speed the process?
Does anyone know what the contents would be of the solids from centrifuging or pressing? I've heard of things like this being used a fuel pellets
(not domestically/residential) and burnt possibly with the help of the methane, and then the ash is used as "bio-char" as a field additive. I've also
seen that the solids are composted with wood chips/leaves/grass/etc.
If any of you have knowledge of how manure is handled in your country (even if in the US) I'd be interested in hearing the process and if there any
ways that this can be processed w/o all the infrastructure like municipal waste water treatment plants (check out London't new WW treatment plant -
it's CRAZY big!)
|
|
|
Deathunter88
National Hazard
Posts: 507
Registered: 20-2-2015
Location: Beijing, China
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
None of your proposed ideas are economically viable.
|
|
|
Morgan
International Hazard
Posts: 1660
Registered: 28-12-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Not really on topic of animal manure but perhaps of interest since they can no longer dump human waste into the sea. There are some crazy big holding
tanks that are strangely pretty for what they hold.
This documentary although seemingly flippant/coarse at first, you find the ending chock full of concerning fun facts. And there's some chemistry to
ponder. Seems like there's some degree of secrecy. Interesting that a tobacco company warns against it's use while u-pick strawberries grown with it
are fine. Probably some plants take up the things you don''t want in your food.
You don't know ...
https://youtube.com/watch?v=QV9x79_WYbk
[Edited on 14-10-2018 by Morgan]
|
|
|
RogueRose
International Hazard
Posts: 1585
Registered: 16-6-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
yeah I hear that type of thing a lot. I've been told a lot of things were "too expensive" and it was only because they relied on either manufactured
solutions or some professional to do it for them. How many times have we seen things in this subject (chemistry) done for a mere fraction of the cost
it is done in industry.
I remember before Tesla cars came out people didn't think much of electric cars and someone took an old/original Audi Quattro and a very large motor
from a big old electric forklift and used what amounted to old laptop batteries and made one of the fastest "production" cars to do 0-60 or 0-100mph
for about $800 (they built it themselves and had the car body already) that was faster than all the porsche's, ferarri's, lamborghini's, Merc's,
Audi's, BMW's, etc - but it wasn't exactly luxury inside - just built for speed.
e
My point is, if someone would have asked what's the fastest way to go 0-100mph for $10,000 and can it beat my brothers Porsche 911 Turbo S - no one
would have said "build an electric car" because no one had done that (probably b/c no one took into consideration increase power density of Lithium
batteries yet) - but with new technologies, things that were too expensive 10, 20, 25 years ago may be feasible with current tech.
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5102
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by RogueRose  |
I am wondering if it would be possible to first remove the solids by using either a centrifuge or a large filter/press that could make "cakes" of the
solids - possibly centrifuge first and then press the solids left from the centrifuge.
|
You could probably separate them.
Then you would have two waste streams to deal with.
What would be the point?
As far as I can tell, the most practical solution it to use the waste to generate methane.
The major advantage of that process is that it strips a fair bit of the energy into a second stream of material that contains a small fraction of the
mass, but a large fraction of the value. (and separation of gas is easy- you just need a tank with a vet pipe on the top).
It might be interesting to let the material settle, draw of the most liquid portion of it, circulate that through limestone cobbles and then return
the liquid to the tank.
That way, any soluble phosphates that are set free would be trapped as calcium phosphate from which they might be recovered.
On the other hand, you could take what's left when the methane generation slows down and spread it on the fields- like people have done for centuries.
No need for further processing.
|
|
|
Ubya
International Hazard
Posts: 1232
Registered: 23-11-2017
Location: Rome-Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: I'm a maddo scientisto!!!
|
|
maybe the problem could be solved by using a concrete roof for the manure pits, not just a tarp, the equivalent of a gigantic tank.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
feel free to correct my grammar, or any mistakes i make
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5102
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Ubya | | maybe the problem could be solved by using a concrete roof for the manure pits, not just a tarp, the equivalent of a gigantic tank.
|
People pretty much do that
https://www.motherearthnews.com/renewable-energy/methane-gas...
|
|
|
RogueRose
International Hazard
Posts: 1585
Registered: 16-6-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
Both of those ideas are good and somewhat what is done already in a few places. Most just have massive open air holding ponds. The problem that I see
is that when you have a multi-million gallon pond and you are adding 2-10,000 gallons a day there is massive dilution of the manure when it gets into
the pond and this is why I thought doing batch processing, even something like 3-4 tanks where each tank is 2 days worth (if it takes 6-8 days to
process), then once finished digesting it is then either run through a centrifuge and/or filter bed then pumped into the pond. This way I would guess
much of the smell is removed and probably much of the bacteria/contaminates (killed in aneorobic digestion) and some of the nutrients may be caught up
in the calcium filter.. From there the liquid would be spread on fields.
The way it is now isn't a problem as far as how the manure is used for fertilizer but it is a problem when it comes to contamination during
rain/floods as well as smell problems for up to 10+ miles. Those last two factors are the major issues which may seem small to some people but when
you have 4-10 massive hog farms in one area hot summer days down wind can be unbearable (some people get sick) and storms cause major problems for
everyone downstream (local water supplies).
I would think that if it was process like described above, much of the stuff that contaminates the water supply might be destroyed or contained but
I'm not very familiar with the contents/compounds in waste like that.
|
|
|
Gearhead_Shem_Tov
Hazard to Others
Posts: 167
Registered: 22-8-2008
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Aerobic composting would probably be better all round from an ecological point of view (less fugitive methane emission, less smell, and production of
high quality fertiliser).
The issue would be cost. Feedlots just can't sustain windrow composting the way they are currently set up. But feedlots aren't ecologically or
economically sustainable in the long run if the externalities are properly accounted for: runoff pollution, breeding bacteria with antibiotic
resistance, greenhouse gas emissions from the manure (and from cow farts too because of their feed), energy requirements, and land and water use for
feed.
-Bobby
[Edited on 15-10-2018 by Gearhead_Shem_Tov]
|
|
|
RogueRose
International Hazard
Posts: 1585
Registered: 16-6-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Gearhead_Shem_Tov | Aerobic composting would probably be better all round from an ecological point of view (less fugitive methane emission, less smell, and production of
high quality fertiliser).
The issue would be cost. Feedlots just can't sustain windrow composting the way they are currently set up. But feedlots aren't ecologically or
economically sustainable in the long run if the externalities are properly accounted for: runoff pollution, breeding bacteria with antibiotic
resistance, greenhouse gas emissions from the manure (and from cow farts too because of their feed), energy requirements, and land and water use for
feed.
-Bobby
[Edited on 15-10-2018 by Gearhead_Shem_Tov] |
Thanks for mentioning aerobic composting I thought it was actually slower for some reason or maybe it isn't as complete. I think there is an
advantage to anaerobic decomp, maybe it is that it produces more methane overall - so if it was used for energy production, anaerobic produces more
but is slower..
The times that I stated, 6-8 days , is because there is a large composting facility near me that uses municipal waste (the solids) and mixes them with
organic stuff, mainly wood chips in a huge, hot warehouse with very large piles and gigantic front end loaders to turn/mix it.
I don't think there is much that can be done about cow/pig farts and burps but if both are lighter than normal air, if housed in a large barn/shack
then maybe the gas could be trapped at the apex of the roof (like inverted funnel) and drawn out through duct work - then use that air/gas mix as the
air to burn with the methane produced from the digestion pits - so if there is whatever % methane in the air (.5-3%??) it is burnt along with the pure
methane from digestion.
I want to thank everyone who has participated in this thread. I know it isn't the most enjoyable topic but it is a major problem in many communities
and in most countries (though maybe in small areas).
|
|
|
AJKOER
Radically Dubious
Posts: 3026
Registered: 7-5-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
A faster process?
Perhaps some redox chemistry and sunlight (basically a photo-Fenton like reaction) may assist.
Try adding to the waste iron powder (from scrap iron with or without the addition of copper metal powder from copper pipes), lemon/citrus juice, a bit
of sea salt and pump in air. Sunlight would augment the process as would adding heat treated carbon (from wood) or aluminum powder (from scrap
aluminum).
For details on some of the possible chemistry, see my comments at http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=96347#... .
[Edited on 15-10-2018 by AJKOER]
|
|
|
Ubya
International Hazard
Posts: 1232
Registered: 23-11-2017
Location: Rome-Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: I'm a maddo scientisto!!!
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by AJKOER | A faster process?
Perhaps some redox chemistry and sunlight (basically a photo-Fenton like reaction) may assist.
Try adding to the waste iron powder (from scrap iron with or without the addition of copper metal powder from copper pipes), lemon/citrus juice, a bit
of sea salt and pump in air. Sunlight would augment the process as would adding heat treated carbon (from wood) or aluminum powder (from scrap
aluminum).
For details on some of the possible chemistry, see my comments at http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=96347#... .
[Edited on 15-10-2018 by AJKOER] |
not feasible at all for metric tons of organic waste
---------------------------------------------------------------------
feel free to correct my grammar, or any mistakes i make
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
AJKOER
Radically Dubious
Posts: 3026
Registered: 7-5-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
One could use whole pieces of scrap iron, local organic produce of poor quality (for example, crap apples which is usually rich in citric/ascorbic
acid), oxygen from air and carbon from a burned tree, which could serve as the reagents.
The current process is also chemical in nature dependent on the action of bacteria.
[Edited on 15-10-2018 by AJKOER]
|
|
|
Sulaiman
International Hazard
Posts: 3555
Registered: 8-2-2015
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by RogueRose | | Local regulators seem unwilling to tackle the problems and time and again we see overflows into creeks/rivers not to mention when we have big storms.
|
If regulations are not enforced then there is little prospect of improvement
as the cheapest waste processing method is already in use.
|
|
|
macckone
International Hazard
Posts: 2159
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrical
|
|
There are better ways to process this type of waste. They are used in sewage treatment plants. But there is no incentive to do so for farm waste.
Regulations aren't enforced and they aren't held accountable for releases.
Given that the vast majority of the sewage stream is water, dividing into two streams is actually done to decrease processing time and cost. the
liquid stream is settled and treated to clear it and various chemicals may be added to break down specific components. Oxygenation is a key process
for the liquid stream. Special bacterial mats process out nitrates and urea. They are now using special bacteria to remove drug residues as well.
For the solid stream, it is treated as compost. Composting is a combination of aerobic and anaerobic processes.
Leachate from the solids is added back to the initial stream.
There are many volumes of literature on human waste processing. It is interesting to note that the final step of sludge processing is cooking it to
kill off bacteria.
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5102
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by AJKOER | A faster process?
Perhaps some redox chemistry and sunlight (basically a photo-Fenton like reaction) may assist.
Try adding to the waste iron powder (from scrap iron with or without the addition of copper metal powder from copper pipes), lemon/citrus juice, a bit
of sea salt and pump in air. Sunlight would augment the process as would adding heat treated carbon (from wood) or aluminum powder (from scrap
aluminum).
For details on some of the possible chemistry, see my comments at http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=96347#... .
[Edited on 15-10-2018 by AJKOER] |
That idea is workable to roughly the same degree that sunlight penetrate a few metres of manure.
There are better things to do with scrap metal.
Adding salt pretty much rules out any prospect of recovering value as fertiliser.
Adding charcoal or metals will increase the bulk (and ecotoxicity) of the material.
|
|
|
clearly_not_atara
International Hazard
Posts: 2691
Registered: 3-11-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: Big
|
|
This is basically the status quo. Nothing is cheaper than literally doing nothing. Until and unless manure producers are held accountable for the
pollution they generate, none of this will change.
But assuming we want to do something about it, ozonolysis seems like a particularly good choice here. Ozone will attack many components of manure at
under ambient conditions, including amines, thiols and N-heterocycles -- completely deodorizing and disinfecting it -- but it won't/shouldn't
completely oxidize the contents to CO2/N2/H2O unless it catches fire (bad). Whatever remains might be profitable to extract and convert to polymers or
other value-added products. Ozone also doesn't require any precursors but water (and a PbO2 cathode), which supports on-site manure processing, a big
advantage when you don't want to carry around tons of shit.
Composting by contrast is the approach that is being attempted currently, and it isn't working. It's too slow and the fecal backlog keeps growing.
[Edited on 15-10-2018 by clearly_not_atara]
[Edited on 04-20-1969 by clearly_not_atara]
|
|
|
RogueRose
International Hazard
Posts: 1585
Registered: 16-6-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Sulaiman | | Quote: Originally posted by RogueRose | | Local regulators seem unwilling to tackle the problems and time and again we see overflows into creeks/rivers not to mention when we have big storms.
|
If regulations are not enforced then there is little prospect of improvement
as the cheapest waste processing method is already in use. |
You have highlighted the EXACT point. The local regulators AREN'T willing to enact more strict guidelines for processing waste but would if the
people voted someone in who supported it. It's a BIG issue in some areas.
Also they are using the cheapest method to deal with waste, which is exactly the problem, only a few places (farms) actually do a better job of
management of the waste.
There is PLENTY of room to improve on on processing the waste but people need to demand these processes be used.
|
|
|
symboom
International Hazard
Posts: 1143
Registered: 11-11-2010
Location: Wrongplanet
Member Is Offline
Mood: Doing science while it is still legal since 2010
|
|
Agreed I also find interesting how it is used to generate electricity for people very far from the grid system
Of course sulfur and water must be removed
Even can provide natural gas source for a gas stove in developing areas of the world which can boil and clean dirty water
Take care of waste and have clean water and electricity sounds good to me
[Edited on 17-10-2018 by symboom]
|
|
|
AJKOER
Radically Dubious
Posts: 3026
Registered: 7-5-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Actually, putting aside the cost issue with my photo fenton-like process, there may be a very bad chemical consequence of incomplete breakdown.
I am thinking about the first stage in the breakdown of nitrates by hydroxyl radicals to nitrites:
NO3- + .OH = .NO2 + OH-
.NO2 + .NO2 = N2O4
N2O4 + H2O = HNO2 + HNO3
and now we have a more toxic nitrite presence. Per Wikipedia on nitrite in general (link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrite):
"Nitrate or nitrite (ingested) under conditions that result in endogenous nitrosation has been classified as "Probably carcinogenic to humans" (Group
2A) by International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization (WHO) of the United
Nations.[2][3]"
And, in the case of particular nitrites, like KNO2, even more concerns to quote from Wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium_nitrite ):
"Like other nitrite salts such as sodium nitrite, potassium nitrite is toxic if swallowed, and laboratory tests suggest that it may be mutagenic or
teratogenic. Gloves and safety glasses are usually used when handling potassium nitrite."
[EDIT] And, apparently depending on temperature, KNO2 is between 2 to 20 times more soluble than KNO3, which makes it more likely to get into the
water table.
[Edited on 4-12-2018 by AJKOER]
|
|
|
Texium
|
Thread Split
4-12-2018 at 09:37 |
Ubya
International Hazard
Posts: 1232
Registered: 23-11-2017
Location: Rome-Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: I'm a maddo scientisto!!!
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by AJKOER | Actually, putting aside the cost issue with my photo fenton-like process, there may be a very bad chemical consequence of incomplete breakdown.
I am thinking about the first stage in the breakdown of nitrates by hydroxyl radicals to nitrites:
NO3- + .OH = .NO2 + OH-
.NO2 + .NO2 = N2O4
N2O4 + H2O = HNO2 + HNO3
and now we have a more toxic nitrite presence. Per Wikipedia on nitrite in general (link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrite):
"Nitrate or nitrite (ingested) under conditions that result in endogenous nitrosation has been classified as "Probably carcinogenic to humans" (Group
2A) by International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization (WHO) of the United
Nations.[2][3]"
And, in the case of particular nitrites, like KNO2, even more concerns to quote from Wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium_nitrite ):
"Like other nitrite salts such as sodium nitrite, potassium nitrite is toxic if swallowed, and laboratory tests suggest that it may be mutagenic or
teratogenic. Gloves and safety glasses are usually used when handling potassium nitrite."
|
good to know that in the soil we have Nitrobacter that oxidizes nitrite to nitrate. now just remains the "everything must be radical"
reaction you proposed
---------------------------------------------------------------------
feel free to correct my grammar, or any mistakes i make
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
AJKOER
Radically Dubious
Posts: 3026
Registered: 7-5-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by AJKOER | A faster process?
Perhaps some redox chemistry and sunlight (basically a photo-Fenton like reaction) may assist.
Try adding to the waste iron powder (from scrap iron with or without the addition of copper metal powder from copper pipes), lemon/citrus juice, a bit
of sea salt and pump in air. Sunlight would augment the process as would adding heat treated carbon (from wood) or aluminum powder (from scrap
aluminum).
For details on some of the possible chemistry, see my comments at http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=96347#... .
[Edited on 15-10-2018 by AJKOER] |
Here a direct reference (see https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es00026a011?journalCode... , but H2O2 can be formed in situ by pumping in air/O2 into acidic ferrous, see
"Generation of Hydroxyl Radicals from Dissolved Transition Metals in Surrogate Lung Fluid Solutions" by Edgar Vidrio, et al at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2626252/) with respect to the photo-fenton reaction with citrate in the range pH 3 to 8.
I would void employing any copper with the iron, not because it will certainly assist the fenton process with a very favorable redox couple reaction:
Cu(l)L + Fe(lll)L' = Cu(ll) + Fe(ll) where L, L' are citrates
but because of environmental toxicity concerns with copper.
To keep recycling the ferric to ferrous, solar light and solution agitation from possibly a wind driven device may help. I still think attempting to
active carbon (see https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276120744_Enhanced_... ) from heated charcoal (also removes complex organics) may also assist. Also,
application of electricity with stainless steel electrodes from solar cells is a possibility (see 'Trends in electro-Fenton process for water and
wastewater treatment: An overview' at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001191641... ).
Another option is employing nano iron embedded in an appropriate medium like clays (see 'Clays and oxide minerals as catalysts and nanocatalysts in
Fenton-like reactions — A review' at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016913170...), zeolites (see 'Removal of Nitrate from Water using Supported Zero-Valent Nano
Iron on Zeolite' at http://ijhe.tums.ac.ir/browse.php?a_id=16&sid=1&slc_... ,...).
[Edited on 8-12-2018 by AJKOER]
|
|
|
pneumatician
Hazard to Others
Posts: 409
Registered: 27-5-2013
Location: Magonia
Member Is Offline
Mood: ■■■■■■■■■■ INRI ■■■■■■■■■■ ** Igne Natura Renovatur Integra **
|
|
Reduce the farm?
I want to do the same with my organic trash. first I need to reduce the food to little bits. After this many juices/water is separated, good for
plants, else compact it and last expose to Sun or burn with mirrors or passive heat from the Sun. Also is possible to use worms to recycle trash to
compost. So you need to find some organism happy eating pig shit 
|
|
|
Ubya
International Hazard
Posts: 1232
Registered: 23-11-2017
Location: Rome-Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: I'm a maddo scientisto!!!
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by pneumatician | Reduce the farm?
I want to do the same with my organic trash. first I need to reduce the food to little bits. After this many juices/water is separated, good for
plants, else compact it and last expose to Sun or burn with mirrors or passive heat from the Sun. Also is possible to use worms to recycle trash to
compost. So you need to find some organism happy eating pig shit
|
small scale is much easier, you could turn your trash in compost, or you could feed it to a digester and make methane for your house, or you could
feed it to red wigglers or black soldier fly larvae to produce some protein feed for poultry
---------------------------------------------------------------------
feel free to correct my grammar, or any mistakes i make
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
pneumatician
Hazard to Others
Posts: 409
Registered: 27-5-2013
Location: Magonia
Member Is Offline
Mood: ■■■■■■■■■■ INRI ■■■■■■■■■■ ** Igne Natura Renovatur Integra **
|
|
well, I watch some years ago a doc where say Pentagon have a modified organism that can eat a well of oil in hours? days?, so if you live in usa call
the Pentagon and ask if have one to eat shit, who known?  or contact with
European commission and co. asking or search about the problem of methane from cows, permafrost... The last or provisional option is EQUILIBRIUM, so
use the purines for something else and do not produce more than your system can "digest" / process. Maybe some aquatic plant live happy in this
environment and produce something you can sell.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
