The conversion you ask for is fairly straightforward, but I don't have time right now to run down all the numbers.  Maybe I'll do it later if someone else doesn't beat me to it.

From a GHG perspective, this is likely a pretty decent deal: for each unit of methane thus generated, not only do you offset the burning of an equivalent amount of natural gas, but you render that methane into CO2, which has 1/22 as much GWP as the methane.  (That's assuming that the manure decomposing under natural conditions, would produce a similar amount of methane, just over a longer period of time.  That may not be a correct assumption.)

I agree, though, that this is a highly suspect bill.  For one thing, it really favors CAFO production methods over free range grazing.  (On the other hand, I know that the Strauss dairy in Marin County has a methane digester and generator that produces a surprising amount of electricity, and they are a free range operation.  So it can be done.)

A better bill would provide a more substantial one-time tax credit (or even a rebate) for the construction of the facilities.  The amount of the incentive would be proportional to the design capacity of the facility, and would be contingent upon measured production at a reasonable percentage of design capacity over a period of at least a year.  That way, you're encouraging the switch from open manure ponds to close biodigesters (which are a good idea, even if you just flare the gas) without actually distorting the price of the fossil fuels.

Well I agree with biogas.
What I don't agree with is that we need a subsidy.

Natural Gas, in particular, is more volatile in pricing than Oil.

Hence why so many utilities are looking towards coal.

You don't need a subsidy to make biogas be profitable.
And even if you did, the subsidy shouldn't go to the producer, it should go to the power plant operator.

i.e. Target the decision makers, and limit the externalities by focusing on what you specifically want to happen.

Whatever happened to the polluter-pays principle?

This is Michael Pollan's suggestion for attacking the industrial food system, specifically industrial meat production.  If the CAFOs were required to follow the same environmental standards as a human city of a similar size, that would be the end of open manure pits and many other travesties.  CAFO's would cease to be economic, at which point they would largely cease to exist.

Good luck on that one, though.

(1) Consuming meat is considered, by some, immoral, and, by most, a serious environmental problem

(2) One way to reduce consumptiton of meat is to eliminate subsidies that lower the price for consumers. Make us carnivores pay for our bad habits.

(3) Waste from livestock contributes to global warming and other environmental problems.

(4) We can derive energy from the waste, reducing greenhouse gases and other environmental problems.

(5) If that energy is sold, it reduces the rancher's expenses and reduces the price of meat for consumers.

(6) And the wheel continues turning, grinding the biosphere into dust.

How does one resolve this conundrum?

And there are many many other products derived from cattle... not just beef... all supporting the industry.

Forward!

I can see that large scale biogas fed by factory farms isn't that good.

But small scale distributed biogas in developing countries is rather beneficial.
i.e. toss pig slop into a sealed vat, and then pipe it into the house for heating and lighting.

The Chinese used their septic tanks for gas cooking in their homes.

Im in favor of digesting all of the manure and waste into bio-gas and have been for over 30 years.The mixture can be adjusted to provide a proper fuel by adding different types of feed stocks to the manure mix to provide the proper carbon/nitrogen ratio rendering the gas with more BTU and much less co2.The facilitys should be run by the system though and everything trucked to them using the gas as the transport fuel with the only subsidy a loan program for those without an existing slurry storage tank.All garbage should be picked up again as it was in my home town when I was a youth and put in a different digester at the same facility.The facility will also take all plastics from mandatory recycling and turn them into oil for fuel and heat and diesel fuel for the trash trucks in one of the two processes I am familiar with that turns the plastic to oil.With a comprehensive mission,proper processes can be engaged that farmers just do not have the time to task nor the skills.The system will eventually use co-generation with the human waste going to digestion to keep the rivers clearer and our aquifer cleaner.They do it now folks and use the gas to assist power plants.As I have stated before,hydrogen will replace the coal burning as the coal burning has caused intellect damage and genetics damage to humans and animals all over the planet from mercury emissions.For those of you who got this far in my tirade,remember to check the fish consumption warnings everywhere for mercury that caution against child bearing women and small children from consuming all fish without restriction,Check it out and for those reaslly curious why those of us from Earth Services have been screaming about the coal query me or check out the fact that there are all kinds of modern society artifacts uncovered in coal production regularly,"CHECK IT OUT" Ask me how that happens to be,I may tell you,and I definitely know,I assure you as most of you folks dont know of the organization I am employed by as an earth scientist. But I have beat some of the taskers to bits here for their foolishness of accepting the greenhouse gas fiasco as truth and gospel instead of hearing my words,as I will assure you again are "ACCURATE" Not many scientists really understand earth science unfortunately,but they of course insist they do.I am 100 percent pro our eco-system and the proper use and disposal of all products and processes from the earth.The bio-gas and the garbage/trash system will eventually be tasked by the system,private companies have proven to be improper stewards.

Earth Shaman

I made it through your tirade, though I would hardly call it a tirade. I'm hoping I might be rewarded with some information.

I read an article about a waste processing system I like to call "The Turkinator" -- because the pilot study involved processing waste from a turkey slaughter house -- in Discover Magazine well over a year ago. It could take any waste -- including hazardous agricultural, human, or medical waste -- and turn it into inert dry matter, energy, water, and -- I think -- high-quality fuel. Once one primes the system, the process runs off of a fraction of the energy contained in the feedstock. I don't know the proper engineering terms. Sorry about that.  Last I heard, it was up and running in Europe. It is economical over there because it is too expensive to dispose of garbage and the primary product, the fuel, can compete with high-priced gasoline and diesel fuel. Landfills and gasoline are still too cheap here.

Anyway... do you know whether it will be appearing soon in a city near me... or anyone else in the United States? It seems ideal for getting rid of municipal waste, I think it is carbon-neutral, and it looks like gasoline will soon be at least $4.00 per gallon.

Forward!

[Yikes. That sounds like some sort of pick-up line.]

Do you know whether the type of septic tanks used in the U.S. can be tapped for gas to burn for heating or cooking? Can it be stored? Is it legal anywhere in the U.S.?

Forward!

Yes the Con-Agra plant that processes turkeys uses the process which is a pyrolisis process.They shut the process down for a time because of excessive emissions.The resultant oil from the process they sell to a bio-diesel refiner.I am in favor of digesting the animal by products though as it is in my opinion a better alternative to that process and rendering.Although ,digesting would require a few years further de -completion after digest before food growth with the compost,it could be used in many other areas.Even though I am not the poster "Sunflower" there are composting toilet systems that collect gas and the are code legal in some areas and code required in places like Denmark and are the best way to de -complete us away from sewage treatment plants.They have large scale "Clivus Multrum " installations in commercial buildings that only require compost removal after many thousands of uses.Most systems just vent to outside,and some are convertible to gas.A gas refrigerator is one of the applications I have seen and in India they use the gas for cooking.One must use a bubbler filter process to clean the "Sour  Gas" for properness also.Check out the composting toilet companies.

Earth Shaman

Poster,what type of municipal waste are you referring to,as digesting is the only proper way for garbage and vegetative/animal waste.It also fuels itself and takes the bacterial problem out of the picture.You should consider and others also that the animal waste poured on our farm fields has the animal bacteria that feeds from the starches and carbo-hydrates that are not fully consumed and will lay dormant and apply itself to the next crop such as corn for silage and be put right back into the cows food chain and conversely into the tissues of the animal that ingest it,and our food chain.The farmers use anti-biotics constantly as they just dont understand what they do to our food chain.With digestion and proper yard/animal cleanliness,we would have less health problems,by a huge margin.All of the colon cancers are caused by ingesting red meats and starches/carbohydrates that feed the starch bacteria that bloom the bacteria that eats holes in the colon walls and sores develop from fecal matter in contact with the bodys meat.Simple and sweet.I am the health Papa in my mission and do not eat the red meats and clean out the bacterias and oils from my system and others at our mission and we just dont get sick,period.Keeping the bacterias down the right way will keep you alive for a long time when also you use "The Blood Type Diet" As written by Dr.Peter D'Adamo.

Earth Shaman

Erik, thanks for the link. From a quick perusal, the set-up sounds like a voluntary commercial exchange. And, in any case, in one way or another it is the electricity rate-payer who pays, not the taxpayer.

That is far from what is being proposed in Senator Nelson's bill. In that case, taxpayers will be financing the treatment of waste from large-scale operations that probably could afford to do it themselves. And it seems to be designed in a way that particularly favors the ethanol industry -- consumption of whose product is mandated by government.

You forgot a huge source of GHG methane Ron.  And a major plus of biogas digestors.

When manure runs off into wetlands it facilitates the conversion of biomass that stores CO2 into methane.  Furthermore, chemical agriculture is essentially hydroponic.  It depends on constantly flooding the soil with chemical fertilizer.

That chemical fertilizer also runs off into wetlands.  Add in lawns and golf courses to agribusiness run off, and it's a huge nitrogen source.  Biodigestion of the stored biomass depends upon the carbon to nitrogen ratio.

Generally this biomass is starved of nitrogen and the digestion proceeds very slowly, but when run off boosts the nitrogen levels it speeds up.

By using organic fertilizer from biogas digestion in soil it locks the nitrogen into a living ecosystem of micro-organisms in the soil.  No more runn off.  No more soil as sterile growing medium needing constant flooding with fertilizer that then runs off.

I don't like CAFO operations either, or ethanol.  It is a shame to see biogas used to further these very bad practices.

I am told that biogas to electricity from the local landfill used to generate power in an internal combustion generator is profitable to the landfill if the utility pays 16 cents per kwh.  With a solid oxide fuel cell/turbine that is over three times the efficiency, that lowers that profit level to less than 6 cents per kwh.

And used as a backup for wind and solar, the average cost for profitability would be even lower.  Biogas is a good biofuel, unlike fuel farmed ethanol or biodiesel.  Does it deserve a separate subsidy?  I think the subsidy for renewable electricity would suffice.

But some sort of policy that incorporates biodigestion of manure and farm waste and organic fertilizer for energy production and building depleted soil back up into a huge carbon sink might call for a whole scale reform of farming subsidies.  Rewrite that farm bill and make every farm a potential wind, solar, and biogas distributed power plant.  Biogas is easily stored for times with no wind or sun energy input.

A comprehensive distributed renewable energy grid with a signifigant fraction of farms, homes, factories, buildings, malls converted to wind, solar, and/or biogas energy production would power the rest of the nation.  

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

A normal digestor won't eliminate metals, but it will break down a lot of the hormones and antibiotic and other human constructed compounds in the waste stream.   For human waste and hormone/antibiotic toxin fed CAFO animals containing the most contaminants, extra digestion at higher temperatures would be a good idea.  Organic farming (digestors produce organic fertilizer)and grass feeding would eliminate the CAFO toxins.  

To separate metals from the final biodigestion product bacteria have been employed that atract these contaminants.  Another process that could prove effective is the electromagnetic separation of non-magnetic metals.

This is very effective in garbage separation.  First the magnetic metals are removed with regular magnets, then an electromagnet induces electric current in the remaining metals, like aluminum, and they are then separated by another magnet.

This could be possible on a microscopic level as well, as in the case of heavy metals in biodigestor fertilizer.

In the case of industrial compounds, like PCBs in the sediment in the hudson river (for example), digestion of the contaminated sediment and concentration of the PCBs by the process would make it possible to subject them to heat and pressure for a final breakdown to basic, harmless compounds.

Biodigestion concentrates toxins, making them possible to deal with.  The usual plan is to dig up whole sections of contaminated sediment and landfill it.  A very bad and very expensive plan.

Attacking biogas digestion in the same mode as we attack farmed biofuels will be difficult.  And in my view wrong headed.  Biogas is part of the solution.

on the whole subsidy issue, once again it is fine to stand against subsidies on principle, but that means you must either advocate the elimination of all subsidies or equal subsidies for competing technologies that ACTUALLY reduce GHGs.  Ethanol and biodiesel from farming actually increase GHGs.

Biogas digestion clearly reduces GHGs, because methane is 23 times worse a GHG than CO2.  Organic fertilizer from biogas digestion converts soil back into a carbon sink, that absorbs cO2.  And stops chemical fertilizer run off, that releases huge amounts of methane and CO2 from wetlands.  Biogas as a backup for wind, water, and solar power could save another whole huge amount of GHGs.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

That link you posted is a load.  Almost pure disinformation in the biogas aticle at least.

Technical illiteraties (hehey) took the standard argument against fuel farming and inserted biogas.  In order to do this sort of substitution it is still necessary to understand the subject matter at hand.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

The dung would continue aneroebic methane emission until it dries and cracks or is diffused with rain.

Aerobic digestion emits cO2, less of a problem than methane.  Believe it or not Ron, farmers actually have dung collecting attachments for their equipment.  To remove it from fields.

This seems bad, but is it?  Collect the dung, digest it, get the energy (with fuel cells, then trap the cO2 and other gases in solar algae growing collectors), get the organic fertilizer, build the soil by applying it with pinpoint injection in liquid form, increase the CO2 storing potential of soil (for prairie soil it is 1.8 tons of cO2 per acre per year).  

I think grass feeding and humane farming could work well with biogas energy backup for solar and wind.  And organic farming that produces quality food at a comparable price with modern agri-chem farming.

Farmers could make as much from selling the nation energy in the form of renewable kwhs from wind, solar, and biogas as they make from quality organic food and grass fed milk, eggs, and meat.

For a farm bill and an energy bill and a GHG bill we can ask our representatives to support.  Obama and other farm state candidates take note.  This will get more votes than ethanol exagerations.  The signs are there beside the road top read.

Look out your bus window candiates, they say, "Ethanol Free Gas Here!"  at many gas stations.  We know even E10 lowers mileage 10% in many vehicles.  Costing us an extra gallon bought and burned to go the same mileage.

And an extra gallon of gas and diesel, bought at the price of US soldiers and civilian lives,to make the ethanol.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog