Biogas in Quebec with household waste

Renewable energies except solar electric or thermal (seeforums dedicated below): wind turbines, energy from the sea, hydraulic and hydroelectricity, biomass, biogas, deep geothermal energy ...
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 21/08/08, 10:45

well it's not their fault they are just engineers! not technicians ;-)
no I'm kidding but it's spur it's a little unforgivable, to always believe the best the French while we have not invented hot water ... there are countries where they have experience, finally good ! I will not denigrate biogas because of a fault of engineers! -)

but you speak of announcement effect ... normally this term is used for politics or lobbies ... which lobby would this announcement effect come from? I can hardly understand there ...

as for Cmoa I am sorry but he said that the technique had not evolved since Cromagnon and that the 70% remained on the spot, alros that they are used as fertilizer ... and the fertilizers, where do they come from? - )
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 21/08/08, 10:47

Small precision: Tenneville is in Belgium ...

http://environnement.wallonie.be/data/d ... /09_0C.htm

Interesting information (at the very end, biogas management): http://environnement.wallonie.be/data/d ... _exp05.pdf

Read the tu vera it's less simple than you think biogas ... running a stove in Africa has nothing to do with a cogeneration installation of several million euros!

This document dates from the end of 2007, including before the destruction of cogeneration (called recovery unit in the text).

Biogas management

- The operator prevents the migration of gases into the air and into the soil surrounding the site. To do this, it installs a biogas recovery network.
The operator ensures that the distance planned between the biogas capture wells makes it possible to carry out an active and as complete as possible capture of the biogas at the places where it is generated.
The mass of biodegradable waste is permanently maintained under vacuum using an efficient device installed progressively from the start of operation. Biogas is mechanically collected. The degassing wells are installed as the operation progresses.

- On the basis of the theoretical biogas flow which will be produced within 5 years of this authorization, the power of the treatment installation respects a coefficient of "over-equipment" of 1,3 minimum.
In addition, the number of units making up the treatment installation is such that, in all circumstances, if a unit is shut down, all of the biogas production is always treated.
At least every 3 years, the operator checks the actual biogas production. On this basis, if necessary, the treatment installation is adapted. The results of these investigations are immediately communicated to the technical official.

- The equipment participating in the collection of biogas is regularly serviced and kept in perfect working order. Any defects and leaks are immediately repaired.
The necessary measures are taken to protect the components of the system - pipes, wells, measurement and control stations, condensate trap, etc. - cartage - shocks, crushing, vibrations, safety distances - and vandalism.
Condensate separators are installed at the low points of the degassing lines. These condensates are managed in the same way as percolates.

- In case the biogas cannot be recovered to produce energy in a recovery facility, it is burned in flares whose operation meets specific conditions.

- In any event, the biogas recovery facilities are accompanied by at least 1 flare. The latter must be dimensioned so as, in the event of shutdown of the recovery unit, destroy all the gases generated by the CET
In the event of accidental shutdown of the biogas recovery facilities or if these do not ensure the combustion of all the biogas they receive, the operator shall immediately inform the officer responsible for monitoring by fax.
As soon as the placement of a temporary or permanent upper drainage waterproofing complex is completed in a specific sector, an additional device for collecting and transporting biogas is produced through this complex.
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 21/08/08, 11:09

so it's simple on paper, and too complicated in practice?

I do not agree; and it's not more complicated than a nuclear power plant, which does not do cogeneration ... is nuclear more simple?
biogas uses waste and avoids the release of greenhouse gases (kyoto), I don't understand you. there is not only ONE way to make biogas.

some like you stop on the practical aspect, and do nothing. in the LDPE they did not wait.

I do not see where you are coming from, I kill myself to explain the good points to you, and you continue to draw the bad examples, but not the good ... I would have to talk about waste, excrement, consumption , back to nature, natural cycle?

you don't understand: biogas is the future, healthy for the planet in every respect. for the countries which started, it is them which will sell this NRJ, which represents for me 3/4 of the future NRj.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 21/08/08, 11:25

jonule wrote:some like you stop on the practical aspect, and do nothing.


: Shock: I do nothing? Hey you want a slap? To my knowledge, you're still heating up with oil, right? It's been 12 months since I stopped this shit ... besides will not be long in selling the boiler I think.

Where are your solar panels and your wood boiler? Rolling in oil is good but it is not enough ...

Otherwise sometimes it is better to do nothing than a project doomed to failure for lack of reflection do not you think?

jonule wrote:I do not see where you are coming from, I kill myself to explain the good points to you, and you continue to draw the bad examples, but not the good ... I would have to talk about waste, excrement, consumption , back to nature, natural cycle?


You are a dreamer ... that's all ...

jonule wrote:you don't understand: biogas is the future, healthy for the planet in every respect. for the countries which started, it is them which will sell this NRJ, which represents for me 3/4 of the future NRj.


Yes yes ... I don't understand ...

I calculated above that it could not meet more than 10% of transport needs in Strasbourg and you consider biogas as "the future" ...

Know that biogas projects are profitable in France ONLY because Edf is obliged to buy back the kWh "at the limit of profitability" so it is nuclear that finances them: the contribution is on everyone's bills but it remains indirect nuclear kwh ....

Exactly like wind turbines except that there is generally less technical annoyance with wind turbines ...

When YOU are ready to pay a 0.5 € per Kwh from biogas then we will discuss it again ...
Last edited by Christophe the 21 / 08 / 08, 11: 47, 1 edited once.
0 x
the middle
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4075
Registration: 12/01/07, 08:18
x 4




by the middle » 21/08/08, 11:46

You both managed to make me puzzled.
I do not know what to think anymore..
Who is right ?
But I like your "fight"; and I would like it to remain "healthy" even if it is not obvious.
0 x
Man is by nature a political animal (Aristotle)
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9




by C moa » 21/08/08, 12:28

Well friends : Shock: You do not get upset like that, we are here to discuss .... PISSSSSE (ah no it's PEACE but good) : Cheesy:

Jonule, if you take back what I said you will see that I am talking about the operators of STEP and CET not industrial gas.

Airliquide is a fine company at the forefront of the production of industrial gases. Still happy that they know how to treat and purify these gases. Now that their new system improves purification does not change the overall performance of the installation (30%).

Again, what I criticize these installations is on the one hand their production / volume ratio (I would come back to this) and on the other hand that they keep 70% of the material which will take many years to degrade.
Contrary to what you think, these 70% are not recovered to become fertilizers. To make a CET, it is very complicated because there is no need to discharge into the groundwater, it is obviously necessary to recover the by-products (gaseous and liquid) so here too precautions are to be taken ...

In general (to my knowledge but I'm not a fertilizer specialist), when we want to make fertilizers with organic compounds, we recover globally stable and homogeneous biomass, we do a treatment plant and forward! !!

Otherwise, I agree that we must not drop everything because technically it is not easy but we must do it with means worthy of our ambitions if not tomorrow, we will build our houses on the roofs of CET because all the place will be taken.

Regarding your remark on nuclear, it is true that a power plant is not easy to design and control, but the yield / production / releases / area ratio is nevertheless interesting.
Personally I am rather against wind turbines because if we look at the figures seriously, we realize that to replace a power station like Chinon which has 4 REP 900, it would take 1800 wind turbines which rotate PERMANENTLY.
Be critical, the day you pass next to a "field" of wind turbines you will see that there are 1/3 or even 1/4 of them turning. For 1800 running, 5400 must be installed ....
When we know that it takes 300 tonnes of concrete to build one, when we know that cement factories are not examples in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. When you know that it takes a lot of fresh water to bind cement, sand, gravel ...

Me it leaves me dreaming !!!
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 21/08/08, 12:32

Well said!
This is what Jonule is missing: the critical mind.

On the other hand it seems to me that he is too passionate ...

I also have the 2nd aspect, I was reproached for it during my pantone pfe wish! As if an engineer should not be passionate about what he does ... Pfffuuu
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 21/08/08, 13:41

ah but I never said that, and besides when I say "some like you stop on the practical aspect, and do nothing." : I say yes some like you, but I did not say and I would not say that you do nothing; so the slap you can put it away ;-) there is no point in comparing us (on the other hand I use my fuel boiler to get up in the morning in a preheated room, which stops when I go to work, the rest it is rosewood wood stove + Jotul slow combustion wood stove).

I just see that you are a little against biogas even if you want to say that no, as proof, you take up the argument "only 10% of intramural road needs" is sufficient, whereas just before we had agreed that for the city's public transport it was a very good solution, easy to implement (bus already running on gas). and even if it was only 10%, while it is only a pilot plant and the tonnage of total waste has not been calculated, we must in any case rely on this complementarity, and welcome it .

I have as much trouble following you when you say that biogas is financed by nuclear power: you are going too fast. the carbon credits that the mayor of quebec receives do not come from nuclear energy, they are basic public funds, taxes, not a "nuclear donation" ... photovoltaic panels, okay;

when I talk about the natural cycle, it is that the consumption of NRJ often tends to look just at what arrives at the meter and not what returns there (nuclear waste), whereas when recovering waste it is the cycle integer which is taken into account. the bacteria prevails over the atom, modified as are the GMOs: the practical disaster of the theoretical idea, I agree that wind turbines include less risk ...

you will see, biogas will have its share if public and political will are taken into account. in France it is still difficult to take into account, too bad for us we will buy up the valued NRJ waste from others ... I say too bad that's all, alros that it is possible. however the problems of spreading and manure nitrates fertilizers are a major problem in France.

Cmoa wrote:Contrary to what you think, these 70% are not recovered to become fertilizers.

yes but they should be, it is not because they are not today that the technique must be blamed, it is the logistical choice that must be blamed. to recover the byproducts obviously it is necessary to take precautions, like any respectable instalaltion (not to say respectful).

the fertilizers nowadays massively used in industrial agriculture do not come from organic matter for the most part but from the petroleum industry.
"Oil is used to manufacture fertilizers and insecticides essential for modern and polluting agriculture"
"Farmers are being harassed by fertilizer dealers who claim their chemical concentrates are more effective than manure."


here is the double game of the petroleum industry not to want this technology and to try to disqualify it ... it is a little naive to say that it comes from the nice stable and homogeneous biomass, WHO IS SO NOT YET VALUED ON THE SCALE it should be.

to say that technically it is not easy is an answer from developed French ... do you take our engineers for dummies? -)

we are not going to talk about nuclear power here, you are in one when you say that the yield is interesting, you do not see the problem as a whole: ore extraction, transformation, transport, waste, maintenance, dismantling of factories etc. .. you wow when you talk about 5400 wind turbines is to take the calculation backwards.

short about Biogas I will only have one thing to say: prout : Mrgreen:
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 21/08/08, 14:32

Good, for those who want more serious info to dig:

just by going to meat eaters: 1 cow = 15 m3 of gas per day, it pollutes well + than a euro V car with FAP for greenhouse gases.

Methane, representing 55 to 85% of the volume of biogas produced, can be used as an energy source, so 1m3 of methane (8 kcal) is the equivalent of one liter of fuel oil.
1m3 of methane is equivalent to 1.7 L of methylated spirits, 1.15 L of petrol, 0.94 m3 of natural gas, 1.3 kg of coal, 1 liter of fuel oil, 9.7 kW / h of electricity.
The quantities of sludge obtained are low (5 to 10 times less than aerobically) in the case of effluent treatment. Active biomass has limited needs and adapts to a wide variety of effluents. The process requires little energy for its operation. The carbon footprint is neutral.
source:
http://www.methanisation.info/methanisa ... #avantages

Methanisation produces on average 3 times less CO2 than a conventional aerobic fermentation, spreading of manure for example. The combustion of methane gives off water vapor and a small amount of CO2. In the example of a perfectly controlled industrial installation, anaerobic digestion contributes to the protection of the ozone layer and is an important source of renewable energy.
source:
http://pierre-lemaire.fr/

a biogas plant treating 10.000 tonnes of waste per year produces around 250 kW of electricity and supplies up to 1.000 homes with electricity and 500 homes with heating.
source:
http://www.naskeo.com/methanisation-dechets.html

Food processing activities produce large quantities of polluting effluents: viticultural or dairy effluents, slaughterhouse waste, biscuits, cereals as well as animal oils and fats.
The management of the effluents generated is now an integral part of the activity of a farm. The objective is environmental and aims to reduce:
* pollutant discharges to groundwater and surface water
* release of greenhouse gases and smelly fumes caused by the uncontrolled degradation of this waste.
Biogas is renewable natural gas or GNR.
http://www.aria-enr.fr/spip/rubrique.php?id_rubrique=2

The technology used has been proven: the first units built by KVIC in India have been operating smoothly for over 30 years. Overcoming their self-esteem, European countries could be inspired by it. Of course, the social and economic conditions are very different here. But the good reasons would not fail to relaunch "biogas on the farm" if we think in terms of protection of the local environment (elimination of bad odors) and fight against the greenhouse effect (transformation of methane into CO2).
source:
http://www.biogaz.atee.fr/news/fullstor ... iques.html

Anaerobic digestion is the natural method of processing organic waste.
http://www.industries.veolia.com/fr/lex ... ation.aspx

other links:
http://www.eden-enr.org/spip/
http://www.solagro.org/site/005.html
0 x
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9




by C moa » 21/08/08, 15:14

jonule wrote:
Cmoa wrote:Contrary to what you think, these 70% are not recovered to become fertilizers.

yes but they should be, it is not because they are not today that the technique must be blamed, it is the logistical choice that must be blamed. to recover the byproducts obviously it is necessary to take precautions, like any respectable instalaltion (not to say respectful).

You will find right after links which will show you how a CET works and is built. It is not a question of logistics but of technique. To put it simply, if we want to recover the residues, we must break everything and therefore it is the very principle of CET that we must question.

A CET project in ... Africa (to please you jonule :D )
presentation of a European company

the fertilizers nowadays massively used in industrial agriculture do not come from organic matter for the most part but from the petroleum industry.

Completely agree, that's why I'm saying it's better not to bury and create biogas but to keep the "raw material" to make fertilizer. Except that this is not easy either, technically we have mastered it for once but other obstacles exist ....
In Brittany, a region very concerned by liquid manure and other agricultural waste, a union of pork producers had planned to create a factory for this purpose. The entire slurry would have been transformed into fertilizer. this project was not able to see the light of day because of local residents and ... green people. So

to say that technically it is not easy is an answer from developed French ... do you take our engineers for dummies? -)

Uh no : Shock: but how does he do the engineer if he has no means to develop new techniques and / or improve old ones ??

you wow when you talk about 5400 wind turbines is to take the calculation backwards.

Well I don't know which way you want me to take it so I'm going to present it to you differently.
A plant like Chinon has an installed capacity of 3600 MW (4 reactors of 900 MW each).
On average, the most powerful wind turbines can produce 2MW when it rotates at their optimal operating speed.
So you need 3600/2 or 1800 wind turbines that work at the same time to replace these 4 reactors.

Now do as you wish:
- You are taking up the latest report by Yann Arthus Bertrand;
- You are looking for an old 20hours report, from Nicolas Hulot, from Greenpeace, from any ecological program;
- You take your car and you go to the Rhône valley, in Normandy, or you want as long as there is a field of wind turbines;
- ....

And you look !!! I'm not asking you to believe me, I'm just telling you to watch and count how many are running and how many are stopped.

You will realize that there is only 1/3 or even 1/4 that works.

So coming back to Chinon, if you want to shut down the reactors and replace them with wind turbines, at least 5400 will be necessary ....
It will therefore require 1620000 tonnes of concrete + water, sand, gravel ... which go with it. Plus the tank carriers to take the 16200 pale which are 150 m long. Not to mention the space it will take to install them (we don't have too much desert in France).

I'm not sure that we really gained from an environmental point of view ....
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "hydraulic, wind, geothermal, marine energy, biogas ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 215 guests