Saturday, March 14, 2009
commentary
The bathroom numbers of 140k come from a General Contractor with over 25 years experience, are itemized line by line, AND includes a 25% profit in that 140k figure. THAT is the actual cost of building the bathroom. He assures me that 20-25% profit is the usual and customary profit margins for new construction in S Fla. So WHY did we pay 414k+ ??? Thats 280k MORE than the actual cost. WHERE did that 280k go? When I ask Gym he has NO answer, except, "You dont understand". I do understand that 280k of our tax monies disappeared on that project, along with 350k on the CC project. This is what I mean when I say there is NO accountability or transparency in our City government. Is there ANYBODY who disputes these numbers? If so, lets see their numbers, and explanations. 558 square feet each bathroom times 2 is 1116 square feet. Times $125 a square foot = 140k. $125 a square foot is usual and customary building costs according to my insurance company and the GC. I say again- WHERE did the EXTRA 280k go? AND the extra 350k for the CC project? Dr. Mel P. Johnson
commentary
Telling a Council who approved 207k bathrooms they did a GREAT job makes one a HERO? Giving compliments to a City Manager who FORGOT to include water, sewer, and electrical hookups to those bathrooms was a sign of excellence in management? A Council that willingly paid $600 a square foot for the CC enclosure, FIVE TIMES what it SHOULD have cost, is doing a great job? A Council that refused to let the people vote on the new gym is showing leadership? A Council that wouldnt have let the people vote on annexation until we FORCED them to with a 1371 signature petition is listening to and responsive to the residents??? Please. These guys cant spell the words oversight and supervision, much less DO IT! THIS is the Council Chet is sucking up to. This makes him a hero? Not in my book. Anybody with an ounce of common sense and decency could see right thru them. He probably IS a hero to all those making those obscene profits at our expense! Dr. Mel P. Johnson
Friday, March 13, 2009
commentary
Keeping the golf course as it is, and NOT allowing high rises into the City are NOT Springs issues? What planet are YOU on? The golf course is the most valuable natural asset in the City. NOT allowing high rises that would spoil our small town atmosphere is also an important issue. Since when, and by whom, has those issues been deemed to be unimportant? They are certainly important to the residents I talk to as I travel around the City! Signs are being stolen, defaced, and run over; rumors, lies and innuendos are being spread all over town; old ladies with challenger signs are having their house egged, and yet some people are upset about a flyer in their mailbox???? Unbelievable. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
take your own advice
There used to be a cleaning commercial and the star was a bald-headed guy named Mr Clean. Hmmmm. Wonder if THIS Mr Clean is bald-headed? or close to it? Lets see, Gym is almost bald, right? I wonder if Mr Clean could be our own Gymbo? Come on, Gym, for ONCE sign your post instead of hiding behind the anonymity that you use, but dont want others to use! We KNOW you monitor this site regularly and frequently rail against those who dont sign. Set a precedent. Take your own advice. You have said in the past that those who dont sign are cowards. Are YOU one of those cowards, Gym? Have a nice day. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
comments
I went on the MS.gov site but was unable to find the annexation pamphlet. Garcia said that all the details would be on the website. Are they there and I just missed it? Or perhaps they arent there, another detail FORGOTTEN (like the bathroom hookups). Whooops! Perhaps its not forgotten, just incredibly DELAYED due to the exotic and complicated technological and software requirements for that particular task! It may very well NOT happen anytime soon, perhaps, to take a wild guess, right AFTER the election! It is similar to the arduous, time-consuming, and demanding task of putting the agenda on the website when it might actually have some use! BEFORE the meeting! Gorland is in charge of IT - nuff said. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
Mind Readers Anonymous
Well I am certainly relieved to hear that I dont own all the town, and therefore responsible for all the towns problems. Somehow, I AM now responsible for there not being more business and customers in our town. The ever-deepening recession has NOTHING to do with it- its all my fault. Even more troubling to learn, I have now become a fire-starter and arsonist. Perhaps we should call in an arson investigator as apparently I have started several fires recently and neglected to have somebody come to put them out. This would be amusing if it wasnt so transparent, pathological, and pathetic. For the 26th time I invite ANYBODY to dispute the numbers I have presented here regarding the bathrooms and the CC addition. Simply present your verifiable nubers and the rationale behind them. When I asked Gym to justify those numbers in his office all he could say was," You dont understand", at least seven times while shaking his head back and forth. NO REPLY, transparency, or accountability. If there are others out there who wish to present numbers they feel are better reflections of those projects feel free to present them HERE. Remember, these are the numbers straight from City Hall. After 20+ years in mental health working with troubled people I was very surprised and even a little shocked to learn that I dont like people. Fortunately, we have highly trained and experienced people in our community who can, and have, analyzed me completely and are prepared to tell me what I like and dont like in no uncertain terms! They are mind readers, somehow, and there are apparently several of them here in town. People spend thousands of dollars and years in psychotherapy yet our experts do it in a couple weeks for free! For those tortured and miserable souls I can only hope they find the right antipsychotic medication soon. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
frugal vs folly
When the City Manager says ".. we have always been a frugal city", hes joking, right? Does he call paying 280k OVER AND ABOVE the actual cost for the bathrooms being frugal? Does he call spending an extra 350k over and above the actual cost of the CC addition being frugal? How so? Can he explain that? IF we had that 630k that disappeared from those TWO projects alone the proposed 1.3 million deficit would be cut in HALF! IF we put a new roof, floor, walls, plumbing, electric, and sprinkler system on the current gym for TWO million INSTEAD OF the 6.8 million in additional tax burdens of a new gym, we would have plenty of money left and NO NEW DEBT. THAT is being frugal, while getting the job done with the money we have on hand. It is living within our budget and doing what we can afford. HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of our tax dollars disappearing is not frugal; it is folly, or worse. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
commentary
I never cease to be amazed at what is written here. I am now accused of being the reason why the Pino project was not done. That claim is preposterous, of course, and has NO basis in fact. How could I, a single resident with no party affiliations or elected status, stop a multimillion dollar project? Absurd. I wasnt even posting ANYWHERE at the time. I did like a couple things about the concept, and the expanded tax base was one of them. However, at what cost? The density would have increased, along with the traffic and congestion. and our already crowded schools would be further burdened. The tradeoffs just wouldnt be worth it for us. For those reasons I favor office condos, where people come to work, and go home afterward. Having some retail and restaurants in this area would also be a plus to increase our tax base and make it more convenient for our residents and business people to have a place to take clients, etc. So, while I appreciate all this phantom power that is attributed to me somehow, as the sole reason the Pino project was not completed, it really is unwarranted. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
Thursday, March 12, 2009
costs are important
The City Manager says he is, "paying attention to revenue streams because that is what dictates our expenditures. Some questions are, will we have to raise prices or cut services? We have to remember, can the people afford it?" Why wasnt he concerned about what the residents can afford when the issue of the new gym came up? We CAN build a new gym on the old footprint for 1.6 to 1.8 million according to Pistorino. THAT is what we can afford - a new roof, floors, walls, plumbing, electrical, and sprinkler system. We have THAT in the bank and require NO NEW DEBT to have THAT option. Where was all this concern about what the residents can afford back then? Billy would like us to have a Rolls Royce of gyms, but we can only afford a really nice Cadillac Escalade. I too, would LIKE to have a Rolls, but I cant afford it. Neither can Miami Springs afford a Rolls Royce of gymnasiums. Where was all this phony concern back then? IF we had the 280k that disappeared on the bathrooms and the 350k that disappearred on the CC addition we would HAVE the money in the bank and maybe they wouldnt have to raise our taxes AGAIN! I dont believe the Mayor and Council are really concerned, however. They will just raise more money by raising our taxes and fees AGAIN to make up for the disappearances of HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of our tax dollars on those two projects alone! Incredibly stupid at best; criminal at worst. You decide. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
comments
Yes, you are wrong on this, again. What I said was I would think that an office park of office condos and some retail might fit in there nicely, a mixed use concept like that. The Pino project was just too big and incorporated residential condos, not office condos. That property has been an eyesore for more than 20 years and adds nothing to our ambiance or the culture of our city. It is in need of a well-planned and conceptually congruent development idea that would compliment and enhance our city. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
a reply
If a business goes bankrupt it HAS no monies to pay for any cleanups! THAT is the very nature of bankruptcies. You cant squeeze blood out of a turnip! Going back thru a series of bankrupt companies isnt going to bring any better results either. Are you suggesting that on a property that has been taken back by a bank, the BANK would pay for necessary cleanups? Thats simply ridiculous, of course. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
a response
I would be in favor of a calculated, rational, and gradual development of the 36th street corridor that would not burden the infrastructure or the residents, yet add to the commercial tax base. My first thought is office condos, where they come here to work, and go home at night. There are a couple areas in town that would be suitable for an office park or similar development. 36th street is not limited in the height required by the FAA as it isnt in their flight path and the building themselves would act as a sound buffer. I have not looked at this in much depth so far, but that is my initial inclination. It seems that the area across from Brysons might be an area to consider for an office park. SOMETHING needs to be done to remedy that eyesore that is consistent with the land use plan. If annexation passes, however, I see no need to rush to develop 36th street, as we will be awash in excess revenues that the Council cant wait to get rid of! Or so I have heard. Dr. Mel P. johnson
Corradino questions
When Mr Corradino says that he does not think "environmental liability would be an issue" in annexation he bases his opinion on the misguided belief that the owners would always be liable, whether the owners are still in business or not. Defunct or bankrupt businesses are not going to pay for any cleanups, and WE could be left on the hook for remediation. Why didnt he mention THAT fact? Additionally, what are his environmental qualifications, experience, and training that would enable Mr Corradino to make that determination? Thinking there isnt an environmental problem doesnt make it so, and sounds very close to HOPING there isnt a problem, and isnt good enough in this case. Is he willing to state with certainty that there ARE no environmental pollution concerns to be concerned with? Until the County states, in writing, that THEY will be responsible for any pollution cleanups in the areas under consideration for annexation, we could easily get stuck with a significant cleanup and I couldnt vote for it until that happens. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
pollution concerns
The Council still has no idea of the finances required to support annexation. I have yet to see even one page in an agenda package showing an actual pollution report for the annexation area. I would very much like to see one with a date indicating when the inspection was done, cleanup required, responsible party and future cleanup requirements. I am afraid that without this type of info we are being subjected to a bunch of slick used car salesmen marketing their agendas without a lemon law to protect us. And while a little flier will paint a rosy picture, there are no hard financial facts to back it up.
The reason the poster hasnt seen ANY proof regarding the possible pollution problems in the proposed annexation areas is because THERE ARENT ANY. Dotson has asked Gym TWICE to have a DERM representative come and address the Council without success. One million-dollar+ cleanup will wipe out any profits we may get from annexation. They admit to having 27 sites open currently but have NOT said the County will be responsible for any further needed cleanups! And there is nobody saying that those 27 sites are ALL the pollution there is. EPA says the Miami Drum site is pretty well taken care of but doesnt address other possible (probable?) pollution sites. To NOT address these issues and just HOPE we wont get hit with a big cleanup is BAD BUSINESS for the Springs. Until this and the other issues about mitigation fees, zoning, and the FEC properties are examined and resolved in our favor, I could not, in good conscience, vote for this. IF these issues WERE to be addressed and resolved in our favor, I would be for it. DR. Mel P. Johnson
The reason the poster hasnt seen ANY proof regarding the possible pollution problems in the proposed annexation areas is because THERE ARENT ANY. Dotson has asked Gym TWICE to have a DERM representative come and address the Council without success. One million-dollar+ cleanup will wipe out any profits we may get from annexation. They admit to having 27 sites open currently but have NOT said the County will be responsible for any further needed cleanups! And there is nobody saying that those 27 sites are ALL the pollution there is. EPA says the Miami Drum site is pretty well taken care of but doesnt address other possible (probable?) pollution sites. To NOT address these issues and just HOPE we wont get hit with a big cleanup is BAD BUSINESS for the Springs. Until this and the other issues about mitigation fees, zoning, and the FEC properties are examined and resolved in our favor, I could not, in good conscience, vote for this. IF these issues WERE to be addressed and resolved in our favor, I would be for it. DR. Mel P. Johnson
another TRIPLE for MS
Check the records for the last Council meeting. Dotson brought up that the tax rate for the proposed anexation areas will go from 2 to 6+, which IS a triple, and goes along perfectly with the TRIPLE we pay for EACH and EVERY construction project the City Manager is associated with. If the Springs TRIPLED its tax rate there would be a lot of unhappy people HERE, so why would anybody be surprised to hear that those people would be upset? Has anybody considered the wants and needs of those 250 residents of the proposed annexation areas? Or dont they matter? Dr. Mel P. Johnson
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
manure to methane
Okay now for the real scoop, and I do mean scoop.
The bad news-
Your average well fed dairy cow makes over 100 pounds of manure per day.
The good news-
Your average well fed dairy cow makes over 100 pounds of manure per day
Q. Why is that good news?
A. Through a process called anaerobic digestion manure can produce a gas which is mostly methane, the same thing as "natural gas".
Q. After eating 2 bowls of bean soup I had a lot of anaerobic digestion myself and yes, I did pass gas. Although this seems quite natural why should I consider it good news? None of my co-workers did!
A. Lets get back to the subject which is supposed to be cow manure not your personal indiscretions. As I was saying it is good news that cows make a lot of manure because certain types of bacteria convert the manure to methane through a process known as anaerobic digestion. This bio-methane can do all the same things natural gas does but it is better than natural gas because it is renewable.
Q. How many cows will I need so I can stay warm and stop paying my power bill?
A. It would depend on how much power you use, but 4 to 6 cows can produce enough manure to provide enough methane for the average home. However it is unlikely that your neighborhood zoning will allow you to keep cows in your yard. And even if you live in a cow friendly ‘hood there is the cost of building a collection and storage facility for all the manure. Generally speaking you will need a large tank that must be filled with the right percentage of manure solids and water. Plus you would have to buy and install a generator. Then there are some technicalities involved in keeping the manure warm enough so the bacteria can digest it and produce methane. Now you can see that this anaerobic digestion stuff is not something the average citizen can do for herself. However if you are operating a dairy with 500 or more cows you will have enough manure to produce all the electricity you need for your dairy plus you may be able to sell extra electricity to your electric utility company.
Q. So why aren't all the dairies producing electricity as well as milk? Couldn't we use biogas methane to replace a lot of the oil we buy from the Arabs?
A. Unfortunately in the US very few dairies use anaerobic digestion to produce electricity. Electric utilities in the US often make it difficult for dairies to use the power they generate and will not buy power. Also the initial cost of installing the anaerobic digester and power generation equipment is around 1 million dollars for most dairies and although a digester can pay for itself in about 6 years it can be difficult to raise the money for such an operation. In many European countries anaerobic digestion is used to produce methane and generate electricity from many types of waste, including human sewage and garbage. The US could reduce its dependence on Arab oil, reduce global warming, reduce pollution, and improve the environment by anaerobically digesting waste, all kinds of waste.
But this won’t happen until we (us citizens) insist on changes. We need to become informed, write letters to our elected officials tell them we want our sewage and garbage used to generate electricity. We want dairies, other farmers, food processors, municipal sewage operators and landfills to be able to sell power they generate to the electric utilities. We need to be willing to volunteer to pay a little more for this environmentally friendly alternative energy. We need to say we would rather pay a few cents more for home grown power than spend billions to buy oil from countries that support terrorists.
The bad news-
Your average well fed dairy cow makes over 100 pounds of manure per day.
The good news-
Your average well fed dairy cow makes over 100 pounds of manure per day
Q. Why is that good news?
A. Through a process called anaerobic digestion manure can produce a gas which is mostly methane, the same thing as "natural gas".
Q. After eating 2 bowls of bean soup I had a lot of anaerobic digestion myself and yes, I did pass gas. Although this seems quite natural why should I consider it good news? None of my co-workers did!
A. Lets get back to the subject which is supposed to be cow manure not your personal indiscretions. As I was saying it is good news that cows make a lot of manure because certain types of bacteria convert the manure to methane through a process known as anaerobic digestion. This bio-methane can do all the same things natural gas does but it is better than natural gas because it is renewable.
Q. How many cows will I need so I can stay warm and stop paying my power bill?
A. It would depend on how much power you use, but 4 to 6 cows can produce enough manure to provide enough methane for the average home. However it is unlikely that your neighborhood zoning will allow you to keep cows in your yard. And even if you live in a cow friendly ‘hood there is the cost of building a collection and storage facility for all the manure. Generally speaking you will need a large tank that must be filled with the right percentage of manure solids and water. Plus you would have to buy and install a generator. Then there are some technicalities involved in keeping the manure warm enough so the bacteria can digest it and produce methane. Now you can see that this anaerobic digestion stuff is not something the average citizen can do for herself. However if you are operating a dairy with 500 or more cows you will have enough manure to produce all the electricity you need for your dairy plus you may be able to sell extra electricity to your electric utility company.
Q. So why aren't all the dairies producing electricity as well as milk? Couldn't we use biogas methane to replace a lot of the oil we buy from the Arabs?
A. Unfortunately in the US very few dairies use anaerobic digestion to produce electricity. Electric utilities in the US often make it difficult for dairies to use the power they generate and will not buy power. Also the initial cost of installing the anaerobic digester and power generation equipment is around 1 million dollars for most dairies and although a digester can pay for itself in about 6 years it can be difficult to raise the money for such an operation. In many European countries anaerobic digestion is used to produce methane and generate electricity from many types of waste, including human sewage and garbage. The US could reduce its dependence on Arab oil, reduce global warming, reduce pollution, and improve the environment by anaerobically digesting waste, all kinds of waste.
But this won’t happen until we (us citizens) insist on changes. We need to become informed, write letters to our elected officials tell them we want our sewage and garbage used to generate electricity. We want dairies, other farmers, food processors, municipal sewage operators and landfills to be able to sell power they generate to the electric utilities. We need to be willing to volunteer to pay a little more for this environmentally friendly alternative energy. We need to say we would rather pay a few cents more for home grown power than spend billions to buy oil from countries that support terrorists.
Texas manure as fuel
Biomass Energy: Manure for Fuel Jump to: Biomass Energy | Regional Differences | Crops for Fuel | Electric Generation | Urban Biowastes | Competing for Land | Ethanol | Biodiesel
The livestock industry is creating economic opportunity for agribusiness in Texas. Beef, dairy cattle, hogs and poultry manure, also known as feedlot biomass, can be put to practical use as a renewable energy source, with dry manure and liquid manure producing different types of energy. Manure can be used for gas, electricity and fuel for a boiler, or it can be burned directly for cooking or lighting.
The best approach to using animal wastes for power depends on the amount of moisture and non-biodegradable solid materials that are contained in the manure. Both methods solve a manure disposal problem while mitigating odors and negative environmental effects.
Dry Manure for Fuel
Dry manure has long provided heating and cooking fuel for rural societies. If the water content of manure is low enough (less than 20%), dry manure can be burnt directly. Solid, dry manure includes manure from beef feedlots and dairy drylots. Burning dry manure can also release energy for the production of biogas. While supplying its own energy needs, a cattle feedlot operation could also solve its manure disposal problem, reduce odors, provide jobs, and increase the local tax base - all by installing a manure-to-energy generator on site.
The environmental benefits to processing manure into fuel include cleaner air and water. Some dairies get rid of manure by sluicing it off to lagoons, which produce methane that escapes into the air. Methane has a global warming effect that is 21 times that of carbon dioxide, so using the methane for energy production significantly reduces greenhouse gas emissions. And because manure that is used in the biogas plant is not washed off land surfaces by rain and irrigation into local rivers and streams, the local watershed also benefits.
Source: Texas A&M University
Texas A&M Dry Manure Research
The Texas Agricultural Experiment Station's test results focus on using pulverized manure samples as reburn fuel in a secondary combustion chamber to lower the nitrogen oxides and specific metal emissions from coal-firing in the primary combustion chamber.
Because solid feedlot waste must be processed differently from the liquid waste of dairy operations, Texas A&M researchers are trying to determine what process and what mix of the product will create the most useable heat and, as a result, energy.
Return to Top of Page
Manure Fuels Texas Ethanol Plant
Texas is the nation's leading cattle state, with an abundance of animal waste that can be used to create energy. Because transporting dry manure far distances to power plants is impractical, it is most often used as a fuel regionally. Hereford, located in the Texas Panhandle, is known as the cattle capitol of the world with more than one million head of cattle and 100,000 dairy cows located within a 100-mile radius of the town. Hereford has added another name to their city - the ethanol capitol of Texas (see video). The area is supplying a new ethanol plant with fuel in the form of manure from cattle feedyards, eliminating the need to burn expensive natural gas.
In 2005, Panda Ethanol began construction on a $120 million ethanol plant on a 380-acre site in Hereford which is expected to be in full production in 2008. The Hereford plant is a fine example of what can be achieved when the ethanol and livestock industries work together for the benefit of both the industries and the community. Projected energy savings are equivalent to 1,000 barrels of oil per day and transportation costs are greatly reduced as well. To take advantage of another waste resource, Panda is using gray water from the city wastewater facility.
The Panhandle area was selected because of the close proximity to the facility's source of fuel (manure) as well as the feedstocks (corn and milo) that will be used. The plant utilizes a technology involving a bubbling bed fluidized gasifier that converts cattle manure and cotton gin waste into clean-burning biogas to power the plant. Corn is readily available, as this area already ships in most of their corn from the Midwest by unit train to supply the local feedyards. At harvest time, local corn will be used. Milo (a small drought-resistant grain sorghum), produced in the Panhandle, will also be used.
Local farmers have contracted with Panda to supply the manure free of charge just to get rid of the mounds of waste rather than paying to have it carted away. The Hereford ethanol plant will bring new jobs and an increased tax base to the community. About 500 to 600 workers are needed during construction of the plant and after it is fully operational, it will employ about 60 people on a permanent basis. The plant is expected to produce 100 million gallons of ethanol fuel each year.
For information on other ethanol plants in Texas, see Texas Ethanol Plants.
Wet Manure for Biogas
Anaerobic Digestion and Methane Recovery
Wet manure that is produced from dairy cattle and hogs confined in enclosed areas produces biogas, which contains about 60% methane, which is a greenhouse gas and contributor to smog that remains in the atmosphere trapping heat for 9-15 years.
Methane is also a primary component of natural gas and an important source of energy. Biogas from manure can be captured and purified to yield pipeline grade methane that is chemically the same as natural gas. It can be used on the premises for electricity or to fuel boilers or other thermal applications. Pipeline grade methane can be transported by pipeline for sale to the local power grid to run electric generators. Manure deposited on fields and pastures, or otherwise handled in a dry form, produces insignificant amounts of methane.
Liquid manure usually occurs when flushing livestock pens with water. In the anaerobic digestion process this manure is collected and broken down by bacteria in a low-oxygen environment which generates methane emissions (biogas). Anaerobic digesters (or methane digesters) such as airtight digester tanks or covered anaerobic lagoons are used for this process.
Methane digesters particularly appeal to dairy farmers because it provides a safe means of disposing of manure and avoiding odors while creating a usable energy source. Using methane in this way also prevents animal waste from polluting the ground water, and methane from seeping into the atmosphere, thereby rising levels of greenhouse gases and smog.
Anaerobic digesters are available at competitive rates and are currently in use on farms across the country, although on a small scale. For a description and photos of a covered anaerobic lagoon, see this PowerPoint presentation by the California Polytechnic State University: Construction and Operation of a Covered Lagoon Methane Recovery. At the beginning of 2008, there were 111 anaerobic digesters operating across the U.S. that produce electricity or gas to fuel boilers.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established a voluntary program to reduce methane emissions in the livestock industry. This program, known as the AgSTAR Program, encourages adoption of anaerobic digestion technologies that recover and combust biogas (methane) for odor control or as an on-farm energy resource.
Creating energy through anaerobic digestion.
Copyright© The Pembina Institute 2006
Illustrator: David Mussell
Cowpower Video
Many livestock operations store the manure they produce in waste lagoons, or ponds. A growing number of these operations are placing floating covers on their lagoons to capture the biogas. They use it to run an engine/generator to produce electricity.
Cow Power
It takes 2.4 kilowatt-hours (kwh) of electricity to burn a 100-watt light bulb for a day. The electrical energy available in one cow's daily manure contribution can produce 3.0 kwh of "cow power."
Photo courtesy of DOE
Anaerobic Digester Tank
The air-tight anaerobic digester tank converts biomass waste to methane. Capping and channeling the methane into a productive use, instead of releasing it into the atmosphere, helps to mitigate global warming while producing a renewable energy that can be used for heating, electricity, or operation of an internal combustion engine.
The material drawn from the anaerobic digester is called sludge, or effluent. It is rich in nutrients (ammonia, phosphorus, potassium, and more than a dozen trace elements) and is an excellent soil conditioner. It can also be used as a livestock feed additive when dried.
Methane digesters add significantly to cattle feedlot operations, as they:
•add revenue to dairy operations;
•cut waste management costs;
•provide electricity and power needs;
•reduce manure odor by as much as 95%;
•reduce pesticide costs;
•reduce surface and groundwater contamination;
•help minimize run-off and other water quality issues;
•capture methane, sulfur compounds and other gases, which would otherwise have been released into the atmosphere; and,
•create nutrient-rich fertilizer, compost, livestock feed additive, and cow bedding out of the left-over byproducts.
Animal Waste Management and Water Quality
The management of animal waste is a serious concern for farm operators across the country. Large dairy and cattle operations produce enormous quantities of manure and thus methane, one of the most potent greenhouse gases. In addition to creating unpleasant odors, pathogens in manure can make water unsafe to drink or to use for recreation. Dairy farms, livestock holding areas and feedlots are areas of concentrated animal waste which can be washed off of land surfaces by rain and irrigation into local rivers and streams, and end up contaminating the local groundwater (water beneath the earth's surface in underground streams and aquifers).
Phosphorus and nitrogen in surface runoff are the major contributors to the contamination. Increasing, dairy farm owners are looking towards anaerobic digestion as a possible solution for animal waste management. Dairy cattle confined in enclosed areas such as freestall barns, produce wet manure that can be flushed into a covered anaerobic treatment lagoon to prevent pollution and odors while producing energy for livestock production operations.
Anaerobic Digester-Phosphorus Removal Project
In 2004, the City of Waco brought an environmental lawsuit against 14 dairy farmers located along Bosque River for polluting (phosphorous-loading) the watershed (higher land that drains water into the river). In a proactive move, the Central Texas Broumley Dairy Farm partnered with several Texas state agencies on a demonstration anaerobic digester-phosphorus removal project that has two objectives: to improve the water quality, water which was being polluted by dairy run-off near the Bosque River; and to generate enough electricity for the farm's operations to sell back to the grid. The project has been a great success, and is expected to begin full operation in 2008.
Texas Plant Installs Manure-to-Gas Digester Tanks
Microgy has invested $12 million in an anaerobic digester biogas production and gas conditioning facility at Huckabay Ridge in Stephenville, Texas. The facility is the first of its kind in the U.S. It is composed of 8 anaerobic digester tanks that digest manure from up to 10,000 cows. Each tank has a capacity of 916,000 gallons. The Huckabay Ridge facility has the capacity to produce 650 million Btu of natural gas per year, enough to provide all the energy needs for more than 10,000 average Texas homes. Microgy plans to build three more similar facilities.
Huckabay Ridge facility
The digesters produce pipeline-grade methane, which is purified, compressed, and fed into a nearby natural gas pipeline that carries it to Austin, Texas, where it is used by the Lower Colorado River Authority as fuel to produce electricity. In October 2008, the natural gas will also be sold to Pacific Gas and Electric Company under a new 10-year contract. The digesters also produce a nutrient-rich compost that is sent back to Producers Compost Incorporated which is situated adjacent to the Microgy facility and provides it with the cow manure used in the digesters. See this U.S. Department of Energy article.
Return to Top of Page
Additional Resources
For an overview of the use of feedlot biomass, see the Feedlot Biomass Overview in the Texas Comptroller's 2008 energy report.
Dairy Waste to Energy
This SECO report includes feasibility studies on the economic implications of anaerobic digesters on Texas dairy farms. The study provides the information needed to allow state facilities that utilize and generate revenue from agricultural land use to evaluate renewable energy production as a viable economic tool. The biogas digester capital budget sheet is available upon request.
Managing Manure with Biogas Recovery Systems: Improved Performance at Competitive Costs
This is an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publication.
The AgSTAR Program is a voluntary effort jointly sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Department of Energy to encourage farm methane recovery from anaerobic digestion. AgSTAR focuses solely on the production of power from the anaerobic digestion of biomass such as livestock manure.
AgSTAR FarmWare 3.0 & Handbook
The AgSTAR FarmWare 3.0 software is a computerized decision support program that assesses whether or not a methane production, capture, and utilization system can be integrated into your farm's existing or planned manure management system. FarmWare estimates how much the system will cost and the financial benefits that may be gained by producing energy for on-farm use or sale or both. (scroll to end of page to download the software)
Anaerobic Digesters for Farms and Ranches
A DOE web site.
What is an Anaerobic Digester?
A University of Nebraska article.
Cowpower Video
An humorous, informative video that discusses the role of manure in the productive channeling of methane gas.
Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credits
Produced by the Northeast Regional Biomass Program.
Build Your Own Biogas Generator
This web site includes teacher materials and a student showcase.
Manure Digestion System Check List
Learn more about evaluating the benefits of an on-farm digester as a means of manure processing. A check list for producers to use to determine if a digester is a viable option for them is provided. This is an Agricultural Utilization Research Institute web site.
Methane's Greenhouse Gas Properties
This is an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publication.
The livestock industry is creating economic opportunity for agribusiness in Texas. Beef, dairy cattle, hogs and poultry manure, also known as feedlot biomass, can be put to practical use as a renewable energy source, with dry manure and liquid manure producing different types of energy. Manure can be used for gas, electricity and fuel for a boiler, or it can be burned directly for cooking or lighting.
The best approach to using animal wastes for power depends on the amount of moisture and non-biodegradable solid materials that are contained in the manure. Both methods solve a manure disposal problem while mitigating odors and negative environmental effects.
Dry Manure for Fuel
Dry manure has long provided heating and cooking fuel for rural societies. If the water content of manure is low enough (less than 20%), dry manure can be burnt directly. Solid, dry manure includes manure from beef feedlots and dairy drylots. Burning dry manure can also release energy for the production of biogas. While supplying its own energy needs, a cattle feedlot operation could also solve its manure disposal problem, reduce odors, provide jobs, and increase the local tax base - all by installing a manure-to-energy generator on site.
The environmental benefits to processing manure into fuel include cleaner air and water. Some dairies get rid of manure by sluicing it off to lagoons, which produce methane that escapes into the air. Methane has a global warming effect that is 21 times that of carbon dioxide, so using the methane for energy production significantly reduces greenhouse gas emissions. And because manure that is used in the biogas plant is not washed off land surfaces by rain and irrigation into local rivers and streams, the local watershed also benefits.
Source: Texas A&M University
Texas A&M Dry Manure Research
The Texas Agricultural Experiment Station's test results focus on using pulverized manure samples as reburn fuel in a secondary combustion chamber to lower the nitrogen oxides and specific metal emissions from coal-firing in the primary combustion chamber.
Because solid feedlot waste must be processed differently from the liquid waste of dairy operations, Texas A&M researchers are trying to determine what process and what mix of the product will create the most useable heat and, as a result, energy.
Return to Top of Page
Manure Fuels Texas Ethanol Plant
Texas is the nation's leading cattle state, with an abundance of animal waste that can be used to create energy. Because transporting dry manure far distances to power plants is impractical, it is most often used as a fuel regionally. Hereford, located in the Texas Panhandle, is known as the cattle capitol of the world with more than one million head of cattle and 100,000 dairy cows located within a 100-mile radius of the town. Hereford has added another name to their city - the ethanol capitol of Texas (see video). The area is supplying a new ethanol plant with fuel in the form of manure from cattle feedyards, eliminating the need to burn expensive natural gas.
In 2005, Panda Ethanol began construction on a $120 million ethanol plant on a 380-acre site in Hereford which is expected to be in full production in 2008. The Hereford plant is a fine example of what can be achieved when the ethanol and livestock industries work together for the benefit of both the industries and the community. Projected energy savings are equivalent to 1,000 barrels of oil per day and transportation costs are greatly reduced as well. To take advantage of another waste resource, Panda is using gray water from the city wastewater facility.
The Panhandle area was selected because of the close proximity to the facility's source of fuel (manure) as well as the feedstocks (corn and milo) that will be used. The plant utilizes a technology involving a bubbling bed fluidized gasifier that converts cattle manure and cotton gin waste into clean-burning biogas to power the plant. Corn is readily available, as this area already ships in most of their corn from the Midwest by unit train to supply the local feedyards. At harvest time, local corn will be used. Milo (a small drought-resistant grain sorghum), produced in the Panhandle, will also be used.
Local farmers have contracted with Panda to supply the manure free of charge just to get rid of the mounds of waste rather than paying to have it carted away. The Hereford ethanol plant will bring new jobs and an increased tax base to the community. About 500 to 600 workers are needed during construction of the plant and after it is fully operational, it will employ about 60 people on a permanent basis. The plant is expected to produce 100 million gallons of ethanol fuel each year.
For information on other ethanol plants in Texas, see Texas Ethanol Plants.
Wet Manure for Biogas
Anaerobic Digestion and Methane Recovery
Wet manure that is produced from dairy cattle and hogs confined in enclosed areas produces biogas, which contains about 60% methane, which is a greenhouse gas and contributor to smog that remains in the atmosphere trapping heat for 9-15 years.
Methane is also a primary component of natural gas and an important source of energy. Biogas from manure can be captured and purified to yield pipeline grade methane that is chemically the same as natural gas. It can be used on the premises for electricity or to fuel boilers or other thermal applications. Pipeline grade methane can be transported by pipeline for sale to the local power grid to run electric generators. Manure deposited on fields and pastures, or otherwise handled in a dry form, produces insignificant amounts of methane.
Liquid manure usually occurs when flushing livestock pens with water. In the anaerobic digestion process this manure is collected and broken down by bacteria in a low-oxygen environment which generates methane emissions (biogas). Anaerobic digesters (or methane digesters) such as airtight digester tanks or covered anaerobic lagoons are used for this process.
Methane digesters particularly appeal to dairy farmers because it provides a safe means of disposing of manure and avoiding odors while creating a usable energy source. Using methane in this way also prevents animal waste from polluting the ground water, and methane from seeping into the atmosphere, thereby rising levels of greenhouse gases and smog.
Anaerobic digesters are available at competitive rates and are currently in use on farms across the country, although on a small scale. For a description and photos of a covered anaerobic lagoon, see this PowerPoint presentation by the California Polytechnic State University: Construction and Operation of a Covered Lagoon Methane Recovery. At the beginning of 2008, there were 111 anaerobic digesters operating across the U.S. that produce electricity or gas to fuel boilers.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established a voluntary program to reduce methane emissions in the livestock industry. This program, known as the AgSTAR Program, encourages adoption of anaerobic digestion technologies that recover and combust biogas (methane) for odor control or as an on-farm energy resource.
Creating energy through anaerobic digestion.
Copyright© The Pembina Institute 2006
Illustrator: David Mussell
Cowpower Video
Many livestock operations store the manure they produce in waste lagoons, or ponds. A growing number of these operations are placing floating covers on their lagoons to capture the biogas. They use it to run an engine/generator to produce electricity.
Cow Power
It takes 2.4 kilowatt-hours (kwh) of electricity to burn a 100-watt light bulb for a day. The electrical energy available in one cow's daily manure contribution can produce 3.0 kwh of "cow power."
Photo courtesy of DOE
Anaerobic Digester Tank
The air-tight anaerobic digester tank converts biomass waste to methane. Capping and channeling the methane into a productive use, instead of releasing it into the atmosphere, helps to mitigate global warming while producing a renewable energy that can be used for heating, electricity, or operation of an internal combustion engine.
The material drawn from the anaerobic digester is called sludge, or effluent. It is rich in nutrients (ammonia, phosphorus, potassium, and more than a dozen trace elements) and is an excellent soil conditioner. It can also be used as a livestock feed additive when dried.
Methane digesters add significantly to cattle feedlot operations, as they:
•add revenue to dairy operations;
•cut waste management costs;
•provide electricity and power needs;
•reduce manure odor by as much as 95%;
•reduce pesticide costs;
•reduce surface and groundwater contamination;
•help minimize run-off and other water quality issues;
•capture methane, sulfur compounds and other gases, which would otherwise have been released into the atmosphere; and,
•create nutrient-rich fertilizer, compost, livestock feed additive, and cow bedding out of the left-over byproducts.
Animal Waste Management and Water Quality
The management of animal waste is a serious concern for farm operators across the country. Large dairy and cattle operations produce enormous quantities of manure and thus methane, one of the most potent greenhouse gases. In addition to creating unpleasant odors, pathogens in manure can make water unsafe to drink or to use for recreation. Dairy farms, livestock holding areas and feedlots are areas of concentrated animal waste which can be washed off of land surfaces by rain and irrigation into local rivers and streams, and end up contaminating the local groundwater (water beneath the earth's surface in underground streams and aquifers).
Phosphorus and nitrogen in surface runoff are the major contributors to the contamination. Increasing, dairy farm owners are looking towards anaerobic digestion as a possible solution for animal waste management. Dairy cattle confined in enclosed areas such as freestall barns, produce wet manure that can be flushed into a covered anaerobic treatment lagoon to prevent pollution and odors while producing energy for livestock production operations.
Anaerobic Digester-Phosphorus Removal Project
In 2004, the City of Waco brought an environmental lawsuit against 14 dairy farmers located along Bosque River for polluting (phosphorous-loading) the watershed (higher land that drains water into the river). In a proactive move, the Central Texas Broumley Dairy Farm partnered with several Texas state agencies on a demonstration anaerobic digester-phosphorus removal project that has two objectives: to improve the water quality, water which was being polluted by dairy run-off near the Bosque River; and to generate enough electricity for the farm's operations to sell back to the grid. The project has been a great success, and is expected to begin full operation in 2008.
Texas Plant Installs Manure-to-Gas Digester Tanks
Microgy has invested $12 million in an anaerobic digester biogas production and gas conditioning facility at Huckabay Ridge in Stephenville, Texas. The facility is the first of its kind in the U.S. It is composed of 8 anaerobic digester tanks that digest manure from up to 10,000 cows. Each tank has a capacity of 916,000 gallons. The Huckabay Ridge facility has the capacity to produce 650 million Btu of natural gas per year, enough to provide all the energy needs for more than 10,000 average Texas homes. Microgy plans to build three more similar facilities.
Huckabay Ridge facility
The digesters produce pipeline-grade methane, which is purified, compressed, and fed into a nearby natural gas pipeline that carries it to Austin, Texas, where it is used by the Lower Colorado River Authority as fuel to produce electricity. In October 2008, the natural gas will also be sold to Pacific Gas and Electric Company under a new 10-year contract. The digesters also produce a nutrient-rich compost that is sent back to Producers Compost Incorporated which is situated adjacent to the Microgy facility and provides it with the cow manure used in the digesters. See this U.S. Department of Energy article.
Return to Top of Page
Additional Resources
For an overview of the use of feedlot biomass, see the Feedlot Biomass Overview in the Texas Comptroller's 2008 energy report.
Dairy Waste to Energy
This SECO report includes feasibility studies on the economic implications of anaerobic digesters on Texas dairy farms. The study provides the information needed to allow state facilities that utilize and generate revenue from agricultural land use to evaluate renewable energy production as a viable economic tool. The biogas digester capital budget sheet is available upon request.
Managing Manure with Biogas Recovery Systems: Improved Performance at Competitive Costs
This is an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publication.
The AgSTAR Program is a voluntary effort jointly sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Department of Energy to encourage farm methane recovery from anaerobic digestion. AgSTAR focuses solely on the production of power from the anaerobic digestion of biomass such as livestock manure.
AgSTAR FarmWare 3.0 & Handbook
The AgSTAR FarmWare 3.0 software is a computerized decision support program that assesses whether or not a methane production, capture, and utilization system can be integrated into your farm's existing or planned manure management system. FarmWare estimates how much the system will cost and the financial benefits that may be gained by producing energy for on-farm use or sale or both. (scroll to end of page to download the software)
Anaerobic Digesters for Farms and Ranches
A DOE web site.
What is an Anaerobic Digester?
A University of Nebraska article.
Cowpower Video
An humorous, informative video that discusses the role of manure in the productive channeling of methane gas.
Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credits
Produced by the Northeast Regional Biomass Program.
Build Your Own Biogas Generator
This web site includes teacher materials and a student showcase.
Manure Digestion System Check List
Learn more about evaluating the benefits of an on-farm digester as a means of manure processing. A check list for producers to use to determine if a digester is a viable option for them is provided. This is an Agricultural Utilization Research Institute web site.
Methane's Greenhouse Gas Properties
This is an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publication.
Better Fuel Through Pig Manure
Better Fuel Through Pig Manure
By Brandon Keim June 12, 2008 | 4:41:34 PMCategories: Animals, Energy, Environment
Gasoline made from pig manure might not smell nice, but sometimes you've just got to pinch your nose and bear it.
In a study published today in the journal Fuel, researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology provided the most detailed analysis yet of pig manure-based biofuel. It's not quite ready for the road, they found, but researchers now know what to fix.
Even more importantly, said NIST fuel expert and study co-author Tom Bruno, the methods used in the study could transform fuel analysis.
"The real significance of what we have done is not so much contributing to the development of this particular fuel source, but rather the development of a measurement technique that can be applied to all manner of fuels, including those derived from bio or renewable feed stocks," Bruno said.
Bruno's samples came from an experimental pig manure processing plant designed two years ago by Yuanhui Zhang and Les Christianson at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. By heating and pressurizing manure, they turned it into crude oil.
Boasting a manure-to-fuel efficiency of 70 percent, the researchers predicted that a single pig's production-cycle excretions could yield 21 gallons of crude oil and a neat per-pig profit of $10.
Multiply that by the 100 million pigs slaughtered each year in the U.S., and it's a billion-dollar industry. And while the amount of oil produced would be relatively small in comparison to total U.S. fuel consumption, every drop counts -- and it could help rehabilitate the 110 million tons of waste produced each year on U.S. hog farms. Much of that waste ends up in rivers, and has fed the expansion of a New Jersey-sized dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico.
That, however, remains hypothetical. The NIST analysis showed that so-called pig manure crude is still quite crude. It's about 15% water by volume, reducing its energy efficiency, and suffused with sulfur, heavy metals and nutritional supplements -- all of which could end up back in the air.
Pig crude, said Bruno, is at present "less 'clean' than petroleum-derived fuel. Of course that will change if the process is tweaked."
Such tweaks require further fine-grained analysis of the fuel -- and though NIST isn't actually involved in its production, other researchers could use their methodology, which improved upon the so-called distillation curve traditionally used to measure fuel composition and performance.
As with regular distillation curves, Bruno's team observed the fuel's change during heating. But they did so by heating the sample in precise gradations, broke down the energy and pollutant content of fuel burned at each stage of heating, and bombarded leftover char with neurons to detect the heavy metals inside.
That process gives an unusually clear picture of the fuel, and can be used to analyze other biofuels.
"Could that have a carbon emission impact, either in revising current estimates or improving fuel use?" I asked.
"You betcha," he said
By Brandon Keim June 12, 2008 | 4:41:34 PMCategories: Animals, Energy, Environment
Gasoline made from pig manure might not smell nice, but sometimes you've just got to pinch your nose and bear it.
In a study published today in the journal Fuel, researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology provided the most detailed analysis yet of pig manure-based biofuel. It's not quite ready for the road, they found, but researchers now know what to fix.
Even more importantly, said NIST fuel expert and study co-author Tom Bruno, the methods used in the study could transform fuel analysis.
"The real significance of what we have done is not so much contributing to the development of this particular fuel source, but rather the development of a measurement technique that can be applied to all manner of fuels, including those derived from bio or renewable feed stocks," Bruno said.
Bruno's samples came from an experimental pig manure processing plant designed two years ago by Yuanhui Zhang and Les Christianson at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. By heating and pressurizing manure, they turned it into crude oil.
Boasting a manure-to-fuel efficiency of 70 percent, the researchers predicted that a single pig's production-cycle excretions could yield 21 gallons of crude oil and a neat per-pig profit of $10.
Multiply that by the 100 million pigs slaughtered each year in the U.S., and it's a billion-dollar industry. And while the amount of oil produced would be relatively small in comparison to total U.S. fuel consumption, every drop counts -- and it could help rehabilitate the 110 million tons of waste produced each year on U.S. hog farms. Much of that waste ends up in rivers, and has fed the expansion of a New Jersey-sized dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico.
That, however, remains hypothetical. The NIST analysis showed that so-called pig manure crude is still quite crude. It's about 15% water by volume, reducing its energy efficiency, and suffused with sulfur, heavy metals and nutritional supplements -- all of which could end up back in the air.
Pig crude, said Bruno, is at present "less 'clean' than petroleum-derived fuel. Of course that will change if the process is tweaked."
Such tweaks require further fine-grained analysis of the fuel -- and though NIST isn't actually involved in its production, other researchers could use their methodology, which improved upon the so-called distillation curve traditionally used to measure fuel composition and performance.
As with regular distillation curves, Bruno's team observed the fuel's change during heating. But they did so by heating the sample in precise gradations, broke down the energy and pollutant content of fuel burned at each stage of heating, and bombarded leftover char with neurons to detect the heavy metals inside.
That process gives an unusually clear picture of the fuel, and can be used to analyze other biofuels.
"Could that have a carbon emission impact, either in revising current estimates or improving fuel use?" I asked.
"You betcha," he said
algae as energy source ?
Posted By: Mwalimu @ 02/21/2009 3:39:18 PMPerhaps because of a shortage of space, Guteri failed to mention one way to make China greener: algae. This possibility was mentioned in John Tickell's documenary Fuel, was well as an article in National Geographic magazine last year. Exhausts from coal-fired plants could be recycled to produce algae. In addition, algae could be produced from sewage treatment plants. Another possibility, mentioned in an interview between Fahreed Zakaria and Greg Vetter in a July edition of Newsweek, is getting fuel from bacteria. The latest research I got from Internet indicates that at present algae is an expensive fuel, so we need to conduct research on how to reduce the costs, but developing green fuels from algae and bacteria are one way to reduce carbon emissions.
According the an article I read today on Earthlink.news by Charles J Hanley, we are running out of time. Hanley quotes Lord Nicholas Stern, a global warming expert, as saying that we must reach zero carbon emissions in both power and road vehicles by 2050, or we face catastrophic conditions.
The problem we face in this country is the party of NO - namely the GOP who get a lot of their funding from the oil industry. Too many politicians in this country, as well as too many journalists in the media - including CNN, Fox NEws, and Newsweek believe either that global climate change is a leftist hoax and/or that it is not a serious problem. This premise is phenomenally ignorant and irrespoonsible, and when John McCain screams about 'generation theft" he has no idea of how his and his wife's carbon-consuming life style is destroying the planet.
Economically, green technology is a hot industry - we need to start investing in this immediately; As far as the zombie banks that are currently threatening to engulf the worlds' GDP - let's let the billionaires finance their own bailout by by taxing all the billions of dollars they stole from everyone else. Even if billionaires had to pay a 90% income tax, they 'd have far more money than any of the rest of us could ever dream of owning.
Saving the planet is far more important than coddling the rich.
According the an article I read today on Earthlink.news by Charles J Hanley, we are running out of time. Hanley quotes Lord Nicholas Stern, a global warming expert, as saying that we must reach zero carbon emissions in both power and road vehicles by 2050, or we face catastrophic conditions.
The problem we face in this country is the party of NO - namely the GOP who get a lot of their funding from the oil industry. Too many politicians in this country, as well as too many journalists in the media - including CNN, Fox NEws, and Newsweek believe either that global climate change is a leftist hoax and/or that it is not a serious problem. This premise is phenomenally ignorant and irrespoonsible, and when John McCain screams about 'generation theft" he has no idea of how his and his wife's carbon-consuming life style is destroying the planet.
Economically, green technology is a hot industry - we need to start investing in this immediately; As far as the zombie banks that are currently threatening to engulf the worlds' GDP - let's let the billionaires finance their own bailout by by taxing all the billions of dollars they stole from everyone else. Even if billionaires had to pay a 90% income tax, they 'd have far more money than any of the rest of us could ever dream of owning.
Saving the planet is far more important than coddling the rich.
Green cars
Posted By: gabotech @ 01/21/2009 9:00:36 AMBut how can we produce the electricity required to supply a lot of electric cars?
Report Abuse
Reply
Posted By: dpct @ 01/18/2009 11:17:39 PMThere is no question that the electric car is the answer. 98% efficiency, zero emmisions etc. I'm preaching to the choir. BUt if we are going to re-thing our infrastructure, we should take the opportunity to think or revolutionarly solutions instead of evolutionaly ones.
The main draw back with the electric car is how to carry or create the electricity. Batteries and fuel cells are still in their infancy. They also represent evolutionay change. How do we make electicity behave like fossil fuel. What if it doesn't have to? The fact is, we solved this problem decades ago. It's called the electric train.
The TRAIN you say? Yes. As soon as you realize that the car doesn't need to carry the electricity, your options become nearly limitless. Here is a scenario for how this could look.
Trains run on tracks and get their electricity from either a third rail or Catenary wires overhead. Now that doesn't really work. Cars need to change lanes so third rails are out. They would also be a hazzard to people who need to walk on road. Catenary wires also don't work. A Kenworth truck and a Honda Civic vary greatly in heigh. But.. why have a connection at all. Technology already exists for electricity to be transmitted without contact. Does anyone have a cordless toothbruch? Here is how it works.
Into every interstate highway and State road, transimision coils are imbeded in the road surface. Cars have a duel power system. When you leave your home in the morning, you car runs on batteries, a small generator, a fuel cell. When you get to a main road the car would switch it's power source the "the grid". It's the exact opposite of a hybrid. You now have virtually unlimited range while on the major roads. When you pull off the main road to go to the mall or office, you switch back to internal power, which was paoosibly recharging the whole time you were on the grid.
It is a win/win for everyone. We can create jobs in order to build the infrastructure. Car companies will have a huge demand for new cars that can have some pretty radical designes. Consumers win since we get lower cost transportation. Since the roads will still be drivable by conventional cars, they don't have to upgrade until they are ready or able. The enviornment wins since the production of electricity at a plant can be controlled more readily than at a tail pipe With the availavility of WiFi technology and GPS, it would be simple enough for power companies to bill for electricity used no matter where you traveled.
We need a revolution in the way we travel not an evolution. This idea, while expensive, merges the best of public transportation with the freedom we have all come to expect from the car. John F Kennedy once challange us to send a man to the moon and return them safely to earth by the end of the decade. No one knew how. Why let that stop us now.
Report Abuse
Reply
Posted By: dpct @ 01/18/2009 11:17:39 PMThere is no question that the electric car is the answer. 98% efficiency, zero emmisions etc. I'm preaching to the choir. BUt if we are going to re-thing our infrastructure, we should take the opportunity to think or revolutionarly solutions instead of evolutionaly ones.
The main draw back with the electric car is how to carry or create the electricity. Batteries and fuel cells are still in their infancy. They also represent evolutionay change. How do we make electicity behave like fossil fuel. What if it doesn't have to? The fact is, we solved this problem decades ago. It's called the electric train.
The TRAIN you say? Yes. As soon as you realize that the car doesn't need to carry the electricity, your options become nearly limitless. Here is a scenario for how this could look.
Trains run on tracks and get their electricity from either a third rail or Catenary wires overhead. Now that doesn't really work. Cars need to change lanes so third rails are out. They would also be a hazzard to people who need to walk on road. Catenary wires also don't work. A Kenworth truck and a Honda Civic vary greatly in heigh. But.. why have a connection at all. Technology already exists for electricity to be transmitted without contact. Does anyone have a cordless toothbruch? Here is how it works.
Into every interstate highway and State road, transimision coils are imbeded in the road surface. Cars have a duel power system. When you leave your home in the morning, you car runs on batteries, a small generator, a fuel cell. When you get to a main road the car would switch it's power source the "the grid". It's the exact opposite of a hybrid. You now have virtually unlimited range while on the major roads. When you pull off the main road to go to the mall or office, you switch back to internal power, which was paoosibly recharging the whole time you were on the grid.
It is a win/win for everyone. We can create jobs in order to build the infrastructure. Car companies will have a huge demand for new cars that can have some pretty radical designes. Consumers win since we get lower cost transportation. Since the roads will still be drivable by conventional cars, they don't have to upgrade until they are ready or able. The enviornment wins since the production of electricity at a plant can be controlled more readily than at a tail pipe With the availavility of WiFi technology and GPS, it would be simple enough for power companies to bill for electricity used no matter where you traveled.
We need a revolution in the way we travel not an evolution. This idea, while expensive, merges the best of public transportation with the freedom we have all come to expect from the car. John F Kennedy once challange us to send a man to the moon and return them safely to earth by the end of the decade. No one knew how. Why let that stop us now.
clarification
How did Owen attack Billy? He was just trying to get some things into the record that Billy didnt want in there, for whatever reason. The lady NEVER said she hates kids. She said she didnt want to pay for other peoples kids. An example of that idea can be found at the pool now. We are paying 300k+ per year to keep the pool open year-round for the MDAC swim team that is 95% Doral kids, and which pays about half of what the facility is worth. We expect to pay for OUR kids. We dont expect to pay fo everybody elses kids too. Let the private swim team pay the usual and customary rates. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
commentary
Let me make this perfectly clear- I NEVER said Paul Dotson does not know about the numbers that are discussed in Council sessions! He is the ONLY one who knows numbers! I also NEVER said he doesnt know what hes voting for, or against. There may be some votes he regrets now, but at the time he thought it was the best result for the citizens. Other information and figures may have surfaced since then, and he is entitled to change his mind, like anybody else, in view of his most current understanding of a situation. Let those who have NEVER changed their mind about anything cast the first stone. The Gazette is, once again, the chief cheerleader for annexation this week. Does anybody NOT believe that annexation will bring in more ads to the Gazette from the annexed businesses? His allegiances are clear. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
commentary
In my travels around the city talking to people, I ran into a guy who owns a business in the proposed annexation area. When informed that, under the present plan his taxes will TRIPLE, he simply said he would close it down and move to a different area that is less expensive. IF a lot of those businesses do the same the tax revenues there will fall off a cliff and those rosy tax projections will wind up being a disaster for us. Has anybody on the Council ever considered THIS possibility? Or is it just ANOTHER possibility that is being ignored? Dr. Mel P. Johnson
comments
Obviously, the ONE who has the powers to know what everyone else in town is thinking is back. Gym, really, I sign my posts, why dont YOU? In any case, by the powers he has authorized in himself to speak for everybody in town, Gym has declared my facts and figures invalid, somehow. Let Gym demonstrate what he believes to be the correct figures and why mine are in error. I have made that offer on several occasions but have received NO REPLY. We paid 415k for bathrooms that can easily be built for 140k - where did that EXTRA 280k go Gym? When I am in your office and ask those questions all I get is your head shaking NO repeatedly and "You dont understand" ten times. Not even an attempt to explain the missing money. We KNOW its only COSTS 140k - why did we pay 415k? Was it poor planning? poor execution and supervision? Why did it take TWO YEARS to build two small bathrooms? Perhaps the cost overruns were due to the FORGOTTEN water, electric, and sewer connections? Perhaps some of that money went to pay outrageous bills to elevate the bathrooms? Or the 500% or 600% markups on the sewer hookups? Eight dollars a linear foot times 400 feet = $3200, plus $1800 labor, = $5000, NOT FIVE or SIX times that amount! Let me suggest on your next visit to your psychiatrist that you ask for a supplementary antipsychotic medication, as it appears the Haldol is not completely curtailing your grandiose and delusional thinking processes. Psychotherapy is a wonderful thing, Gym. You may want to try it sometime. Just trying to help. Have a nice day. Again, I DO sign my posts. You might also want to try that sometime. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
commentary
Yes, both the City Attorney and the City Clerk received votes of confidence. it is interesting that at least one person believes that Dotson "was put in his place" at the Council meeting. What "place" was that exactly? Council is supposed to supervise and oversee the City Manager. They DONT do it, but it IS their job and role to do that. Dotson is the only one who takes that responsibility seriously and frequently points out errors in judgement (Giglio), failures to do what is asked of him (DERM), and constant and continuous change orders and cost overruns in each and EVERY construction project the City manager is associated with. Dotson could have also thrown in the "forgotten" water, sewer, and electric hookups for the bathrooms, and the outrageous bills for connecting them, the electricity we paid for Santana, paying at least TRIPLE the usual and customary costs for the CC enclosure, and other fiascos and debacles that seem to occur regularly on his watch. After all those facts and figures have been presented, the best Gym can come up with is a questionable recollection several months ago? I have known Chet Fields for over thirty years and have considered him a friend, but after his past two comments in Open Forum praising the Council and blasting Paul Dotson, that is not the positive, friendly, and helpful guy I have known over the years. It is a sad thing to witness, as I obviously dont know him, or agree with him, now. How he can make those statements with a straight face is beyond my comprehension. I am witnessing a shell of the principled and positive guy I used to know, and its sad to watch. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
commentary
The funeral home and the pawn shop items were pulled, for some reason, and not addressed. The ex-chief sent an email to Gym, at Gyms request, regarding what the ex-chief said regarding the warehouse police station in the proposed annexation areas. Dilling and Dotsons recollections of that conversation are different. The City Manager is unhappy because Dotson rightfully took him to task for Giglio disaster, among other blunders. I agree we must look beyond the daily dustups to the bigger picture of what needs to be done in the coming months. Tax revenues will surely be down, and just as surely, city officials will raise our taxes to compensate for their allowing several hundreds of THOUSANDS of our tax dollars to disappear on the bathroom and Country Club projects. We could have used that money NOW! How can they hold a ground-breaking for a project that hasnt been approved yet? Have the variance problems been worked out? I thought that was in the works, but not completed yet. Anybody know? IF several hundreds of thousands of our tax dollars disappeared in their last two project, AND THEY DID, how many MILLIONS do you think will disappear with this gym project? The two prior construction projects both came in at more than TRIPLE the actual costs- triple 6.8 million and you will get an idea how much this one could easily cost us. Absurd. Ridiculous. Bankrupting? Dr. Mel P. Johnson
Council comments
It will take more than prayers to get a good government here in the Springs. God helps those who help themselves, I believe. We, the residents, need to take action and MAKE it happen. The Mayor and Council gave the City Manager the discretion to charge whtever he deems right to the soccer guys, just like he does at the pool. Apparently most of the guys are from Hialeah (sound familiar?) and arent allowed to play there because of the wear and tear to the fields. VG locks their gates to prevent outside soccer leagues from playing there. True to form, Garcia suggested that we may want to consider putting in a couple million dollars worth of Astroturf and drainage at our fields to accomodate additional playing time because costs are immaterial and irrelevent, and we have PLENTY of money to spend! I was a few minutes late to the Council meeting but I heard the Chet Fields attacked Dotson relentlessly at the beginning of the meeting. I will have to see it on Comcast for myself before making any comment. The City Manager also went out of his way to try to discredit Mr Dotson regarding a statement made by the previous Chief of Police about the propsed annexation police substation being in a warehouse. Mr Dotson was a witness to that statement so, if the Chief NOW says he didnt make that statement, somebody's memory is faulty. Mr Dotson was pretty clear about it, for his part. It may be the old Chief is concerned about possible references, etc. in the future and is backtracking to protect those things now. In any case, it appears there was a concerted effort to discredit Dotson by Chet Fields and Borgemann. After ALL the financial disasters, hiring fiascos and secret pool handshake debacles by the City Manager, this is all he can find to dispute? If he wants to dispute Dotsons numbers- fine. Let him present numbers he believes are more accurate and the rationale behind it. BTW, the annexation pamphlet is supposed to be on the website for the scrutiny of everybody who is interested too. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
Monday, March 9, 2009
rolling the dice
Sigh. What did junior high kids do in the past, BEFORE the Internet, to amuse themselves? While I believe that criticism of a public figures performance, or lack of same, is fair game for this forum, I cant see any benefit in attacks of a personal nature in resolving the issues. It is interesting how those who call others names, etc. usually FORGET to sign their names tho. They use the anonymous nature of this platform in the EXACT SAME MANNER of those they accuse. Go figure. One of the most important issues at tonights council meeting was the annexation pamphlet, which extolls ALL the benefits that we will get and NONE of the drawbacks! Apparently the Council believes that issues like pollution cleanups, mitigation fees, questionable numbers, costs of policing and a new substation, and zoning are IRRELEVENT and IMMATERIAL. As they failed to do in the new gym issue, nothing CLOSE to DUE DILIGENCE has been done! Dotson asked for DERM to show up and explain the possible pollution issues but the City manager has faikled to produce anyone from DERM, TWICE. Why would we annex polluted property? First, we cant build on it, so we wont be collecting taxes. Second, we may very well be charged with the cleanup of those polluted areas if the previous owners are out of business. They have acknowledged that 27 sites are currently being cleaned up but we have NO assurances that there are no more polluted sites, or who will clean them up if they are found. We are just rolling the dice and HOPING there will be NO more pollution found. Thats BAD business, and poor management priciples. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
Haldol is good for delusions of grandeur
In my business, when any one self-righteous and smug individual says they are speaking for 13,000+ other residents and can somehow read their minds and know their collective wants and needs, we call that delusions of grandeur, or worse. Schizophrenia is worse. The residents I talk to are VERY interested in their tax monies being spent wisely. As noted previously, those absurd comments have a Twilight Zone feel about them and bear NO remblance to the reality I find knocking on residents doors and talking to them. It sounds like that poster could benefit from an increase in their Haldol dosage, as they have lost all contact with the everyday realities of the rest of us. Expenses and costs ARE relevent and material to our lives! Dr. Mel P. Johnson
signs of the times
I spoke with Tex Ziade this morning and he assured me that zoning has none of my signs. The question remains: who DOES have my missing signs? All we need to do is catch ONE person stealing signs and put their name and picture in the Gazette for all to see, and that behavior will very likely stop! We will also report the missing signs to the police, make a police report, and replace them. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
illiteracy is NOT a pretty thing to see
ur just to let may say like McCain ... WHAT does that group of almost words mean? I have pretty well written off the heavily medicated, illiterate, and incomprehensible voters, and I can live with that. I am shooting for those who CAN put eight words together and actually make sense! I can also easily identify with those with a weak stomach! For instance, I get sick when I see our tax dollars disappearing by the truckloads! Dr. Mel P. Johnson
Sunday, March 8, 2009
commentary
Those who doubt my numbers need only to make their own FOI and confirm them. I encourage that. Its not hard to do, although it CAN take some time and persistence to get the results. I have copies and will pass them out to those who are interested. I cannot prove there is anything illegal YET. I DO know that the bathrooms can be built for 140k, and we spent almost 415k for them. Those are itemized and detailed FACTS. Where did the 275k we paid, over and above the actual cost of construction, go? Where did the 350k go on the CC project, over and above the actual costs? We KNOW it doesnt cost that much to build them, so WHERE did that money go? We have the only 207k bathrooms in the country! I dont believe that Donald Trump has 207k bathrooms, but WE DO. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
commentary
There is a receipt for the rental of the gym for the Iggy Pop commercial Nov 18,19, 20, and 21 for $2500 in the form of two checks, # 4517 and #4518. I am NOT saying Mr Suco is responsible for my signs missing, as I have NO proof of that at this time. I AM saying some of my signs are missing, damaged, and/or knocked down, along with other challenger signs. I find that in my travels around the City that residents are VERY interested in the outrageous sums the City paid for the bathrooms and the CC enclosure. To them, costs are NOT immaterial OR irrelevent. Costs are VERY relevent to them in their daily lives, and in the taxes they pay into the City. Residents are struggling to pay their bills and DONT want additional tax hikes OR their tax monies to disappear from constant change orders and cost overruns. Period. It is a message that makes rational sense to them and it sells itself. I am just the messenger. The only ones who are upset are those that are being exposed for the shady deals and highly questionable expenses. Have a nice day. Dr. Mel P. Johnson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)