There are several chemical/biological techniques that could in theory be
used to turn manure into petroleum-like fuels. According to one site,
manure is too pricey a feedstock--it has value elsewhere, primarily as
fertilizer, and fuel makers would have to bid against other buyers.
According to another site with different issues, there are lagoons
overflowing with unwanted, unusable manure. Someone who is no more a
farmer than I am suggested that the problem could be seasonal demand and
non-seasonal production. Since I don't know shit, I figure I should ask
some people who actually participate in agriculture:

1) Is there a net surplus of manure, or a net demand for it, or both at
different times of year?

2) Are there farmers currently paying for manure? Are there farmers
currently paying to get rid of manure?

3) Is there any "agricultural waste" (defined as pretty much anything
that used to be part of a plant or animal, or passed through the gut
of an animal) that is genuinely unwanted and could be hauled away for
free, yet whose supply would be more or less predictable and
reliable? (We'll take the jokes about zucchini as already said.)

There are several chemical/biological techniques that could in theory be
used to turn manure into petroleum-like fuels.

According to one site,
manure is too pricey a feedstock--it has value elsewhere, primarily as
fertilizer, and fuel makers would have to bid against other buyers.

According to another site with different issues, there are lagoons
overflowing with unwanted, unusable manure.

Someone who is no more a
farmer than I am suggested that the problem could be seasonal demand and
non-seasonal production. Since I don't know shit, I figure I should ask
some people who actually participate in agriculture:

1) Is there a net surplus of manure, or a net demand for it, or both at
different times of year?

2) Are there farmers currently paying for manure? Are there farmers
currently paying to get rid of manure?

3) Is there any "agricultural waste" (defined as pretty much anything
that used to be part of a plant or animal, or passed through the gut
of an animal) that is genuinely unwanted and could be hauled away
for free, yet whose supply would be more or less predictable and
reliable? (We'll take the jokes about zucchini as already said.)

Paul Ciszek <nospam@nospam.com> writes

There are several chemical/biological techniques that could in theory be
used to turn manure into petroleum-like fuels.

Yes, methane production for one. This is used at a household scale in
parts of india because burning cow dung loses nutrients, particularly
valuable phosphorus.

According to one site,
manure is too pricey a feedstock--it has value elsewhere, primarily as
fertilizer, and fuel makers would have to bid against other buyers.

It has a significant value as fertiliser, and as a soil micro-organism
food, and as a physical soil quality ameliorator.

First, I would like to thank both of the people who responded to my
question.

In article <lxzWU7AXpSUHFwAJ@farmeroz.port995.com>,
Oz <Oz@farmeroz.port995.com> wrote:
Paul Ciszek <nospam@nospam.com> writes

There are several chemical/biological techniques that could in theory be
used to turn manure into petroleum-like fuels.

Yes, methane production for one. This is used at a household scale in
parts of india because burning cow dung loses nutrients, particularly
valuable phosphorus.

Thermal depolymerization and thermochemical conversion are faster and
more total, and more likely to be profitable in first world countries.

According to one site,
manure is too pricey a feedstock--it has value elsewhere, primarily as
fertilizer, and fuel makers would have to bid against other buyers.

It has a significant value as fertiliser, and as a soil micro-organism
food, and as a physical soil quality ameliorator.

Is manure or other farm waste ever processed into manufactured
fertilizer, or is it only used as-is?

Paul Ciszek <nospam@nospam.com> writes

Thermal depolymerization and thermochemical conversion are faster and
more total, and more likely to be profitable in first world countries.

Improbable as a feedstock given the very variable and impure nature of
manures. Almost anything else would be better.

In article <A5pf2JA9A6UHFwk1@farmeroz.port995.com>,
Oz <Oz@farmeroz.port995.com> wrote:
Paul Ciszek <nospam@nospam.com> writes

Thermal depolymerization and thermochemical conversion are faster and
more total, and more likely to be profitable in first world countries.

Improbable as a feedstock given the very variable and impure nature of
manures. Almost anything else would be better.

"Impure"? Thermal depolymerization works on wood chips, turkey guys,
old tires, AND manure. The trouble is, they made a big commitment to
the turkey-guts based operation, since their supplier wanted to get rid
of them, but after a while there were competing demands for turkey guts
and they had to start bidding against others.

My understanding was that
manure was also wanted elsewhere, but it sounds like there are places
where they should be able to get it for free.

Paul Ciszek <nospam@nospam.com> writes

Is manure or other farm waste ever processed into manufactured
fertilizer, or is it only used as-is?

Used as-is. Processing costs without adding any value whatsoever (and
probably reducing it).

I've read that in The Philippines, chicken manure is mixed with pure rice
hull, carbonised rice hull, some 'beneficial' bacteriae (Lactobacillus
something) to treat soil acidity and attract nitrogen,

degrading
bacteriae or enzymes, and micro-nutrients, to produce a compost which is
high in nitrogen, has a high silicon content in a form ready for take-in
by the plant.

I think one could call this a 'manufactured organic fertiliser'?

There are several chemical/biological techniques that could in theory be
used to turn manure into petroleum-like fuels. According to one site,
manure is too pricey a feedstock--it has value elsewhere, primarily as
fertilizer, and fuel makers would have to bid against other buyers.
According to another site with different issues, there are lagoons
overflowing with unwanted, unusable manure. Someone who is no more a
farmer than I am suggested that the problem could be seasonal demand and
non-seasonal production. Since I don't know shit, I figure I should ask
some people who actually participate in agriculture:

1) Is there a net surplus of manure, or a net demand for it, or both at
different times of year?
I know several feedlot owners but never thought to ask. It

2) Are there farmers currently paying for manure? Are there farmers
currently paying to get rid of manure?

3) Is there any "agricultural waste" (defined as pretty much anything
that used to be part of a plant or animal, or passed through the gut
of an animal) that is genuinely unwanted and could be hauled away
for free, yet whose supply would be more or less predictable and
reliable? (We'll take the jokes about zucchini as already said.)

2) Silica (if available) is toxic to plants.

Paul Ciszek <nospam@nospam.com> writes

In article <A5pf2JA9A6UHFwk1@farmeroz.port995.com>,
Oz <Oz@farmeroz.port995.com> wrote:
Paul Ciszek <nospam@nospam.com> writes

Thermal depolymerization and thermochemical conversion are faster and
more total, and more likely to be profitable in first world countries.

Improbable as a feedstock given the very variable and impure nature of
manures. Almost anything else would be better.

"Impure"? Thermal depolymerization works on wood chips, turkey guys,
old tires, AND manure. The trouble is, they made a big commitment to
the turkey-guts based operation, since their supplier wanted to get rid
of them, but after a while there were competing demands for turkey guts
and they had to start bidding against others.

Doesn't sound very economic to me. More of a disposal.

ario <joe@somewhere.org> writes

I've read that in The Philippines, chicken manure is mixed with pure
rice hull, carbonised rice hull, some 'beneficial' bacteriae
(Lactobacillus something) to treat soil acidity and attract nitrogen,

?? Attract nitrogen?

Poultry manure from layers is often quite alkaline.

degrading
bacteriae or enzymes, and micro-nutrients, to produce a compost which is
high in nitrogen, has a high silicon content in a form ready for take-in
by the plant.

1) Nitrogen is never fixed in manure.

2) Silica (if available) is toxic to plants.

I think one could call this a 'manufactured organic fertiliser'?

If you think so.

Most would call it the local midden with all the waste organics dumped
thereon.

Doesn't sound very economic to me. More of a disposal.

Um, that was exactly the point. To make oil out of biomass that other
people were trying to dispose of--i.e., stuff you could get for free, rather
than having to grow a crop explicity for the purpose of turning it into
fuel. In Brazil, they make ethanol from the leftovers of the sugar
industry.

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:08:52 +0000, Oz wrote:

ario <joe@somewhere.org> writes

I've read that in The Philippines, chicken manure is mixed with pure
rice hull, carbonised rice hull, some 'beneficial' bacteriae
(Lactobacillus something) to treat soil acidity and attract nitrogen,

?? Attract nitrogen?

Yes, there 'seem' (because I don't have experience with that) to be
nitrogen fixating bacteriae, see for instance
http://hcs.osu.edu/hcs300/bact.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_fixation
Ohw, sorry, if your objection was with the word 'attract' then you're
right of course. They don't attract, merely fixate it.

Poultry manure from layers is often quite alkaline.

Thanks, I didn't know that, so this could especially be helpful for de-
acidification of the soil in rice fields which have long been supplied
with chemical fertilisers and herbicides and pesticides, which seems to
turn the soil quite acidic, inhibiting a proper growth.

degrading
bacteriae or enzymes, and micro-nutrients, to produce a compost which is
high in nitrogen, has a high silicon content in a form ready for take-in
by the plant.

1) Nitrogen is never fixed in manure.

Well, I didn't say it is fixed in the manure. Rather, the manure is mixed
with rice hull in both pure and carbonised form. So maybe it can be fixed
in the organic matter from the rice hull?

2) Silica (if available) is toxic to plants.

I've been told that the rice plants needs a high amount of silicon for
its rice hull. Maybe it's not in the form of silica then?

I think one could call this a 'manufactured organic fertiliser'?

If you think so.

Most would call it the local midden with all the waste organics dumped
thereon.

Here it's sold for quite a lot of money. It's also said that rice grows
very well on it. The price, for sufficient application, is almost the
same as for chemical fertiliser, but that one keeps only increasing in
price.