Replies

My question is related to economics, as well. I'm assuming they've crunched their numbers based on the assumption of 'free' chicken guts. Many of the items they propose to turn into fuel currently have some monetary value.

For instance: refrigerators, stoves, computers and other white goods hold some value to recyclers. Granted it is not a high dollar value, but value, just the same. Have their numbers been crunched based on the assumption that people will give them these fuel sources? How long will people give away something that has value?

I just had my son, the pig farmer, read this article. The area where we live is composed of family farmers and almost all of them raise livestock of some kind. Livestock sometimes die before they go to market and the farmers must pay a rendering truck to pick the 'deads' up. Son thinks our county could build one of these. But the reality is: altho a dead cow, pig, chicken, whathave you has no monetary value to a farmer, once it becomes a fuel source it will have value and farmers wouldn't be willing to give it away. See my point?

This is a facinating article. I'm glad I'll be home all day to track it.

Conservativegreatgrandma: Too bad about the septic being pumped yesterday. Perhaps by the time you need it done again, they will pay you to haul your stuff away.

Son thinks our county could build one of these. But the reality is: altho a dead cow, pig, chicken, whathave you has no monetary value to a farmer, once it becomes a fuel source it will have value and farmers wouldn't be willing to give it away. See my point?

I do see your point but look at it from this angle also. Right now the farmer/agricultural producer has to PAY someone to get rid of his wastes. It's not even a new cost for them. They are already paying it. What if the Thermal depolymerization company charges less to haul off the waste?

The farmer saves money, the TDP company gets PAID for taking their raw materials rather than paying for those materials. Everyone wins. (except the rendering plant which loses it's raw materials)

This also drives the cost-benefit equation down on the cost side as the raw material costs are negative and the fuel costs are partially negative (gas generated by the process is used in the process).

I think that when the options for the farmer/waste producer are dispose of it yourself or pay someone to dispose of it or pay TDP less to dispose of it, they'll gladly pay TDP.

Conservativegreatgrandma: Too bad about the septic being pumped yesterday. Perhaps by the time you need it done again, they will pay you to haul your stuff away.

Hubby says when they pumped the septic tank they found Democrats down there.