The many uses of manure
Dairy farms are putting in digesters, creating methane to power electrical generators, fertilizer, and cattle bedding. One problem: hydropower in the Northwest is so cheap that farmers can't make money selling their kilowatts.
EPA
The rear ends of Dan DeRuyter’s 4,500 dairy cows are powering hundreds of homes in Central Washington. At George DeRuyter & Sons’ 2,000-acre farm in Outlook, in the Yakima Valley, 150,000 gallons a day of cow manure from the corrals flow downhill in chutes and are collected in a large underground concrete tank. There, the waste is heated to 100 degrees by two big generating engines manufactured in Spain and installed by Ferndale-based Andgar Corp., which sets up anaerobic manure digesters. Bacteria in the tank decompose the waste, producing methane, which fuels the two nearby engines that crank 1.2 megawatts of electricity directly into Pacific Power’s grid.
That juice, enough to power 600 to 800 homes, nets DeRuyter up to $35,000 a month. The dairy also makes money selling credits for reducing carbon emissions on the new Chicago Climate Exchange. DeRuyter sells the solid byproduct, which has lost its stink and looks like soil, as cattle bedding or as a peat moss replacement for nurseries. The liquid byproducts, nitrogen and phosphorus, will be sold as fertilizer if researchers can figure out how to concentrate it to save on transportation costs.
DeRuyter’s digester is one of four at dairy farms across the state. There are digesters in Lynden and Monroe, and one under construction in Skagit County; more than 100 dairies around the country are participating. DeRuyter installed the system in late 2006 using a $1.9 million state loan and a $500,000 federal grant; the total cost was $3.8 million.
Some manure-digester operators in Washington also feed in industrial food waste, such as skins from juice and vegetable processors. Dairy farmers earn additional revenue from the “tipping fees” paid by these processors for handling their organic waste.
If the manure of half the state’s 250,000 dairy cows were run through digesters, up to 25 megawatts of electricity would be produced, serving 25,000 households, according to Washington State University research. Experts see the digesters as a money-making way to address the problems of odor and groundwater contamination at large dairies, while providing electrical power from a renewable, non-fossil fuel source.
“Our neighbors have commented on how this reduces the smell,” says DeRuyter, a no-nonsense farmer who doesn’t fit the usual image of an environmentalist. “The digester is a technology that’s good for everyone, for the dairy farmer and for the environment,” adds Todd Kunzman, general manager of Andgar. “It takes a waste product and creates electricity, it mitigates odor hazards, it creates a great bedding source for cattle, and it reduces greenhouse gases.”
Green energy projects like manure digesters offer particular appeal in the agricultural communities east of the Cascades. For instance, in the wheat-growing Odessa area, “these green technologies fit beautifully into an agricultural community that is being forced to diversify its economy,” comments Pam Kelley, executive director of the Lincoln County Economic Development Council. “Green businesses are the key to future prosperity.”
A recent report, “Carbon-Free Prosperity 2025,” agreed that Washington and Oregon have clear regional advantages for green economic growth, such as a strong natural resource base. But they lack adequate venture capital, a modern electrical grid for transporting green energy from east of the Cascades, and a coordinated regional strategy.
State bioenergy coordinator Peter Moulton sees surging interest around Washington in launching renewable energy projects. His office recently did an online survey of interest in applying for $6 million in new Energy Freedom loans offered by his office, and received 70 responses. “There’s huge interest,” he says, “ranging from modest pilots to over $100 million plants.” But he acknowledges that the $6 million available for state loans “is a small amount given the hopes for green energy.”
A big problem for DeRuyter is that Washington’s abundant hydropower keeps electricity rates too low to make his sale of power very profitable. He receives just 5 cents per kilowatt hour. On the west side of the Cascades, he would receive about 7 cents per kilowatt hour, and in California he would get a lot more. “It’s not a big moneymaker,” concedes DeRuyter, who complains that he’s losing hundreds of thousands of dollars a month on his dairy operation overall due to low milk prices.
DeRuyter hopes he’ll soon be able to sell the liquid byproducts, nitrogen and phosphorus, as fertilizer. The liquid fertilizer is more than 99 percent pathogen-free, and, unlike standard fertilizer coming from petroleum, it’s renewable. But there remains a perception problem since the fertilizer comes from cattle waste, and local tree fruit farmers currently don’t want to use it on their orchards. Transporting it to other markets is too expensive until he can figure out how to concentrate it.
One other advantage of the digester is that it helps keep those nutrients out of the groundwater. “Every dairy farmer has to have a plan for managing the manure,” Kunzman said. “The ground can only take so much nitrogen and phosphorus. These digesters are a tool that can help that.”
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!











Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Wed, Jul 8, 10:31 a.m. Inappropriate
Industrial animal waste is suspect because of inputs. What type of feed does the dairy operation use? Growth hormones? Antibiotics? Mr. Meyer fails to explore the input-side of industrial dairy farming, opting for a promotional piece on political and financial schemes.
Industrial solutions to industrial ills is not a sustainable pathway. Dairy operations pose a threat to groundwater because animals are over-concentrated; this is accomplished by importing feed largely derived from fossil-fuel fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, and sprawling transport networks. Again, the author ignores the input side, so we're left to assume. One can not credibly establish the viability of such schemes without an examination of the input side.
Posted Fri, Jul 10, 3:36 a.m. Inappropriate
I disagree Mr Wade.
This is a great program and should be fully supported. I just wish it could actually MAKE money so subsidies would not re required.
As a county conservation supervisor, I would, and regulary do, vote funds for projects such as this.
Posted Fri, Jul 10, 8:12 a.m. Inappropriate
Agreed with Mr. Wade that the farmers need to take a look at their inputs, but that shouldn't stop us from applauding their efforts to responsibly deal with their outputs. Such efforts are all too rare in modern industrial farming operations.
Perhaps there's a way to close the loop and send the liquid nitrogen and phosphorous back to where the feed was grown? The feed gets delivered to the farm somehow--rather than going back empty maybe those trucks can be modified to carry the liquids away?
Posted Tue, Jul 21, 7:44 a.m. Inappropriate
Just a little information for Mr Wade. We are a family farm not an industrial farm, I work with my father and grew up on this dairy, I also live on the farm with my wife and my five kids. We care for the animals and strive to treat them well and take care of the land. Cows are fed a nutritionally balanced died and eat better than most homans do. There are no hormones fed to the cows and rBST is not allowed to be used throughout our milk coop. There is no trace of insecticides in the milk and we have not seen any in the feed that has come in. We only give antibiotics to sick animals as anyone that cared for their animals would if they were sick and needed to be cured. None is used in the feed. Our milk is tested four times before it is shipped to the plant to make sure it is free of antibiotics. We care about our enviornment and our community, and we think that we are taking steps in improving things for the future.
Dan DeRuyter
Posted Sat, Feb 20, 5:06 p.m. Inappropriate
You want to see Mr. Deruters so called family farm? Come over to the Yakima Valley and see the 80 industrial dairies and feedlots; we will take you on a tour and show you what the dairymen don't want to know. They can't even get it straight how many cows they have. Pop in unexpectedlly on any of these industrial polluters. You will be met with a "No tresspassing" sign. Look at their illegal, unlined lagoons, their spray guns shooting raw sewage into our air and polluting it. Take a look at the cows tails. Some dairies cut them off. Refuse to take the pre canned, cleaned up tour Mr. DeRuyter would take you on. Better yet, rent an airplane and fly low over these cesspools.The EPA has just designated Yakima Valley as the top 10 areas of concern for groundwater pollution. Ask Mr. DeRuyter how much of his own money he put out for the boom doggle they call a digester. Poor Mr. DeRuyter is only clearing $35,000 a month off of your taxpayer money. We don't want anymore cows or digesters in Yakima County. We have become the toilet bowl of the state. BOO HOO Mr. DeRuyter, put a few more adds on the radio; it might fool a few city people who don't know any better.
Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.