This little pig went to carbon market
And we all thought that climate change could be fought simply by erecting a whole bunch of wind turbines and solar panels around the place, planting more trees, and using less energy.
Australians, it seems, are finding much more exotic ways of reducing emissions, encouraged by the federal government’s carbon farming initiative that passed through the House of Representatives earlier this month.
The latest proposal is to capture the methane emissions produced by the tonnes of pig poo at the nation’s piggeries. The idea is to cover the open ponds where this poo is usually left, often two metres or more deep, capture the enormous amounts of methane that is created and either flare it or burn it to create heat and electricity.
The pig industry estimates that about 1.25 million tonnes of greenhouse gases from the nation’s 682 enclosed piggeries are emitted in this manner per year, and from other associated emissions from the pig industry.
It is estimated that about one million tonnes a year could be abated by 2020 if the 100-biggest piggeries decided it was worth the cost of investment to harness the methane emitted from the manure. The slumping cost of these technologies, and the ability to cash in on credits generated by the scheme, is likely to make that investment worthwhile, with a payback as short as 12 months or less.
Harvesting pig poo is the latest methodology to be submitted for the government’s carbon farming initiative, following on from proposals to cull wild camels – there are more than one million of them and they are each responsible for emitting around one tonne of greenhouse gas a year – as well as various forms of reforestation initiatives.
Future methodologies will include better management of cattle herds, particularly in the far north. If cattle producers can improve their management skills, reduce the rate of still-births and early mortality, encourage richer grazing and get them to grow quicker and “spend less time on planet Earth," then they too could generate carbon credits from reduced emissions.
This was the intention of the carbon farming initiative – to engage farmers in a positive way in the carbon pricing issue, and to provide an incentive to correct practices that are either wasteful, or not environmentally friendly.
But, exotic as it may sound, as far as piggeries go Australia is just catching up to the rest of the world. In Europe, piggeries receive a feed-in tariff guaranteed for 20 years for the electricity and heat that they generate from the effluent from their farms.
There are only about three farms in Australia that capture their methane, according to Janine Price, the manager of environment and climate change at Pork Australia, the producers’ peak body. But more are expected to embrace the idea, inspired not just by the inclusion of the practice in the carbon farming initiative, but also by the development of bio-gas technologies in New Zealand that dramatically reduce the cost of the practice – the price of scrubbers that remove hydrogen sulphides so the emissions can be used in biogas plants now amount a few hundred dollars, rather than a heavily engineered system costing in the tens of thousands.
If the credits generated by the piggeries qualify under the government’s carbon pricing plan, then they will get the fixed price set by the government. At $20/t, Pork Australia estimates the returns will be around $3 a pig, and up to $4.50 a pig at $30/t. If it is not included, the credits will be sold on the voluntary market, at a price more likely to be around $5/t.
Still, the technology changes means that farms with as few as 400 sows should be able to make money from the investment, and pay back within four years, even without carbon credits and renewable energy certificates.
Bigger farms could get pay-back within 12 months, because they will be able to install systems to generate heat and electricity for farm use. The industry as a whole could generate $20-$30 million of credits by 2020, depending on the uptake and, of course, the carbon price.
Comments on this article
wasteful
carbon pricing issue, and to provide an incentive to correct practices that are either wasteful, or not environmentally friendly.gelddomina
chatting
An iPhone might even disable itself deliberately for security reasons. Thanks. removals
Its good to see such an
Its good to see such an interesting post like this very informative and interesting one really enjoyed this post.
Trade Show Displays
chatting
extraordinary blog layout. But seriously, I think your site has one of the freshest theme I've came across. It really helps make reading your blog a lot easier.... gelddomina
Giles, that was interesting
Giles, that was interesting and very informative. Love reading blogs like that because the keep me educated.
jak schudnac
Really i am impressed from
Really i am impressed from this post. The person who created this post is a genius and knows how to keep the readers connected.Thanks for sharing this with us. I found it informative and interesting. Looking forward for more updates.
nokia mobile prices
I am so excited that I have
I am so excited that I have found this your post because I have been searching for some information about it almost three hours. You helped me a lot indeed and reading this your article I have found many new and useful information about this subject. clubmz reviews
Nice review
How-do-you-do, just needed you to know I have added your site to my Google bookmarks because of your extraordinary blog layout. But seriously, I think your site has one of the freshest theme I've came across. It really helps make reading your blog a lot easier....
cell spyware
Useful intro
How-do-you-do, just needed you to know I have added your site to my Google bookmarks because of your extraordinary blog layout. But seriously, I think your site has one of the freshest theme I've came across. It really helps make reading your blog a lot easier....
cell phone spy software
I have been searching for
I have been searching for this quality blogs regarding this niche. Searching in Yahoo drove me here, I just found this kind of satisfactory readings i was looking for.valentines day cards | iPhone jailbreak I must bookmark this website to avoid missing it again.
Interesting
Thanks for posting this article and for the interesting debate. I am definitely tired of struggling to find relevant and intelligent commentary on this subject. bijuterii online
I understand that they could
I understand that they could capture pig's methane and use it, but what's their problem with the wild camels? Greenhouse story that claims it's produced by industry is already an exaggerated idea as volcano are producing every year more CO2 than all global industry, and all they've got is this wired idea to cull wild camels in order to reduce CO2?bijuterii argint
Not True
I think you are the one who has the ignorance. The idea is not to generate electricity for the grid,but to use what you can on farm and emit CO2 rather than the more harmful methane that comes of the pods at the moment.
You have got to be joking
I think you would be well advised to learn some basic chemistry and thermodynamics so you can stop publishing rubbish such as this. There is no way this piddling by-product will ever power anything of significance. This is the biggest problem with the alternative energy crowd - pig ignorance of basic energy equations.
Remember fuel cells
Ideally, bio-methane would be oxidised in fuel cells rather than by combustion; this would increase thermodynamic efficiency by ~30%, so that with waste heat recovery efficiency would exceed 80%.
Furthermore, while it still releases CO2, bear in mind that the emitted CO2 is not FOSSIL carbon; that is, because the carbon in biofuels is already in the climate system (having been absorbed from the atmosphere by photosynthesis in the first place), it is not an addition of MORE carbon to the climate system. Ergo, it is not adding to the problem.
To the extent that biofuel use replaces fossil fuel use, biofuel is actually part of the solution.
Picking winners and losers
The big story behind the CFI is that the emitters in agriculture (about 130mtCO2 per annum, including landclearing but excluding sequestration) get paid to reduce their emissions, while the emitters in manufacturing and mining (about 200mtCO2 per annum) pay a tax. Economic distortion by design.
Just one more reason why the carbon pricing scheme being proposed by the Government will not be the economic efficiency reform it claims.
Michael Hitchens, Australian Industry Greenhouse Network
Erm what about the CO2
I fail to understand why burning Methane, with a relatively short halflife in the atmosphere (measured in years) and turning it into CO2, with a long half-life (measured in decades - I've seen 30 to 90 years as estimates) would improve the greenhouse gas situation significantly in the long term.
Giles - many a true word...
Giles your opening comment.......And we all thought that climate change could be fought simply by erecting a whole bunch of wind turbines and solar panels around the place, planting more trees, and using less energy.
...truly exposes the problem of frustration. Renewables have been vastly oversold, and gullible folk with preconceived ideas thought everyone else was asleep, or vested interest, lazy or just dumb.
The fact is reality of economics and the consequences of making decisions and full cimmitments too early is meeting the anxiety of those who need answers NOW GODDAMIT. For oce little Johnny can't have his icream now simply by writing a policy paper or twittering someone for the answer to today's homework problem.
Very hard for people to be stunned by an industry that forever just quietly went about sustaining everyones life style, at low cost, and made everything possible. The answers are available, but ignorance and fear mixed with utopian ideals doesn't make a good cocktail, floating as it does on a bed of instant experts.
Put a price on carbon, and then let the Government sheltered work shop types ____ off, and let the best technology win, not set frameworks to self-select outcomes.
By the way...who decided emissions per capita was the right measure to use for carbon guilt?? On this measure Australia is 12 and CHINA IS 80 !!!!!!!!! Doesn't make any sense.
Just Playing Catchup
Anyone would think this was a new revelation. Just a little research would have uncovered this type of 'harvesting' of methane gases has been around for decades, albeit with marginal returns.
Decades ago I recall being conducted on a guided tour of the Malabar, NSW sewage works where surprise, surprise this very same harvesting of methane gases was being undertaken (for primarily safety purposes) with the output in those days being flared to the atmosphere by a continuous flame,
A useful supplement (like wind & solar) but hardly a baseload power generation solution. Back to the drawing board Giles.
Plantations as carbon sinks
Another interesting story from the government's carbon farming initiative is the virtual exclusion of plantations. Apparently they use too much water, unlike environmental plantings, which are allowed. Methinks there is another agenda happening here!
Appropriate technology (AT)
This is a well propagated AT for habitants in isolated remote locations out of reach of the electricity grids of less developed countries back in the 1960's. Not of a large scale but. People just use the methane gas for household cooking or night lighting instead of wood or fossil fuels.
That's mad
You've been watching Mad Max III haven't you Giles? That's where Bartertown got its energy from. Brilliant. I'm getting reality blurred with fiction.