IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ijameu/149785.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Costs of slurry separation technologies and alternative use of the solid fraction for biogas production or burning – a Danish perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Jacobsen, Brian

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to analyse different separation concepts in order to evaluate the overall costs based on a systems approach from stable to field. When livestock are produced in livestock intensive areas the distribution of manure without creating a surplus of nutrients is often a problem. Separation of the slurry into a liquid nitrogen rich fraction and a more solid phosphorus rich fraction, which is exported away from the farm, may alleviate this problem. Separation offers an alternative to transporting the slurry further away, renting more land or buying more land. The need for P-balance is stricter in Denmark than before, but developments in feeding, changes in regulation and the reduction of livestock numbers in Denmark have made separation less favourable. This article compares dominant separation technologies in Denmark, such as decanter and flocculation, as well as source separation, in order to establish the overall costs. Key parameters are livestock density, transport distance, price of additional land and cost of separation. The conclusion is that unless land prices or prices on slurry agreements are very high, traditional handling of animal manure has the lowest costs. Decanter separation can be the cheapest if area is limited and co-operation with neighbours is possible as large volumes reduce separation costs per tonne. Flocculation is the best if much P has to be removed from the farm in the solid fraction. Separation will in the future in many cases be combined with biogas production as the solid fraction gives a much higher gas production per tonne than slurry.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacobsen, Brian, 2011. "Costs of slurry separation technologies and alternative use of the solid fraction for biogas production or burning – a Danish perspective," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 1(2), pages 1-12.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ijameu:149785
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.149785
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/149785/files/11-Jacobsen%20text%20to%20CW%2024-10-11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.149785?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mathijs Harmsen & Charlotte Tabak & Lena Höglund-Isaksson & Florian Humpenöder & Pallav Purohit & Detlef Vuuren, 2023. "Uncertainty in non-CO2 greenhouse gas mitigation contributes to ambiguity in global climate policy feasibility," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Asai, Masayasu & Langer, Vibeke & Frederiksen, Pia & Jacobsen, Brian H., 2014. "Livestock farmer perceptions of successful collaborative arrangements for manure exchange: A study in Denmark," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 55-65.
    3. Ole Bonnichsen & Bran H. Jacobsen & Juan Tur-Cardona, 2018. "Danish farmers’ preferences for bio-based fertilisers – a choice experiment," IFRO Working Paper 2020/15, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    4. Stefan Borsky & Alexej Parchomenko, 2017. "Identifying Phosphorus Hot Spots: A spatial analysis of the phosphorus balance as a result of manure application," Graz Economics Papers 2017-04, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    5. Case, S.D.C. & Oelofse, M. & Hou, Y. & Oenema, O. & Jensen, L.S., 2017. "Farmer perceptions and use of organic waste products as fertilisers – A survey study of potential benefits and barriers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 84-95.
    6. Willems, Jaap & van Grinsven, Hans J.M. & Jacobsen, Brian H. & Jensen, Tenna & Dalgaard, Tommy & Westhoek, Henk & Kristensen, Ib Sillebak, 2016. "Why Danish pig farms have far more land and pigs than Dutch farms? Implications for feed supply, manure recycling and production costs," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 122-132.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ijameu:149785. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifmaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.