Anaerobic Digestors, does anyone know anything about them?

[BusyBee]

I come across quite a few digesters on my travels through Lincolnshire and close counties. I have never noticed any appreciable smell but one irritating thing can be the constant stream of tractors towing trailers which transport the plant material to them. They do travel much faster than tractors of old though. For the most part, the digestable material in Lincolnshire has little to do with animals, as far as I am aware. They appear to grow fields of crops purely for digestion. Lincolnshire has few cattle herds and is mostly arable except for parts of the wolds.

Tracy

[CambridgeWorks]

Been speaking to a neighbour opposite who until a year ago worked on generation equipment using methane from rubbish tips. He said the digesters themselves do not emit too many nasty odours when correctly installed and operated as designed and are well maintained.
The problem is the "stock feed" smell if left outside due to not being required immediately, especially rotting veg like cabbages, which here is the intended product to be used. Literally thousands of tons per year.
He has seen some sites out in the countryside that absolutely stink at times!
This site has schools, shops and thousands of people living less than a mile away.
Currently, I am studying the planning application, but there is a good deal of information missing. I have had to uee google to get some idea of what could be happening here. Working back from their GWh output to estimate tonnage of input product. Best I can find for one particular example is 200-300 tons, quite a wide margin. How many lorry or trailer loads? All this data is omitted, which is unacceptable to me.
One important aspect is the annual tonnage and vehicle movements, together with all details of storage facilities on site, ventilation used and any odour control.
The actual site operation needs describing as well, especially measures available if things go wrong.

I feel an appointment at the planning department is called for.
Rob

[ppppenguin]

Can you give us the link to he planning application please.

Talking of problems with feedstock, that's what we had at Hemswell Cliff. Tens of thousands of straw bales went up in smoke.

[CambridgeWorks]

Here you are:

https://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaW...&module=pl

EDIT: Fixed link (moderators)

[ppppenguin]

Problem with the link. If I click on it, it says "illegal access attempt". If I copy and paste the whole link, including the & and after it fails because it's been shortened for display by the forum software. See the ... in the middle.

[ppppenguin]

PS got it, with a copying, pasting and furtling around. I've given it here as "code" to avoid it being corrupted.

Code:

https://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/showDocuments?reference=H16-1096-23&module=pl

At first glance, some of the documents referenced in the Design and Access statement may be missing or incomplete. For instance PO4 3899b.

[CambridgeWorks]

Thanks Jeffrey. My neighbour said there were missing items and as a planming application it was unacceptable for such errors.
The problem I have is the only way at the moment I can get some idea of the overall system operational process is via google.
Indeed, one site goes into great detail about how many seconds a door is allowed to be open for vehicle access before closing, something very specific like 38 seconds. A lot of other talk as well to give reassurance. But, it seems this is from a system manufacturer and supplier. They will talk it up won't they.
It is when things don't turn out as planned and a nuisance is caused these things become headlines.
Too late then, as planning is already granted and fines are a last resort.
Council planning departments are a bit like toothless and mute guardogs. It is all the local residents that are the ones that suffer.
Rob

[ppppenguin]

I'm now something of a veteran in planning battles. I've been one of the leaders of a local group fighting absurd overdevelopment of a site very near my house. Taylor Wimpey have failed on two applications and then on appeal. Their 3rd application is more or les acceptable but has some major flaws.

Of course I now know my local planners and councillors reasonably well and my voice will be heard. For example I got the current application re-opened for public consultation because TW made some major amendments after close of the main consultation period.

In general, there's a massive shortage of good planning officers in local authorities and it shows.

[CambridgeWorks]

Been reviewing just the Design & Access statement and quite a few errors!
There is a point made:
"In terms of gas yield the AD plant would be expected to generate around 70GWh of biomethane
to be produced from the plant and injected into the grid per year.
In addition the plant will generate around 8GHh of power which will feed the adjacent plant
based extraction facility and fed into the grid."

So, it is mostly commercial energy production, not agricultural in my opinion.
The pedestrian and cycle access is straight on to the very busy A16 bypass, with no footpaths!

Reference to "Proposals for the plant based protein extraction facility
emerged during 2020 with the first concepts developed the
first quarter of 2021. Following approval and construction of
the extraction factory discussions have turned in the last few
months to the Anaerobic Digesters Plants and Rangell Gate
and also the Surfleet site."
is the nearly complete factory site at the North end of the propose site making protein type products from cabbage waste on Rangell gate, adjacent the roundabout...
https://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaW...16-0959-21&from=planningSearch
refers to this

I am making notes as i go along and am awaiting two phone calls from our 2 ward councilors.
I also note there is no deadline given for comments or objections, just a decision date.
I will also be making an appointment with our planning dept. for clarification of certain aspects and more background information that can be used for any comments or objections.
I feel there is a lot the public need to know that is not mentioned in the application.

There is an adopted local plan that shows the site as being within this local plan area,  with point 4 showing the site being within the pale green  countryside area.
http://www.southeastlincslocalplan.org/adopted-plan/

This morning I met another neighbour who has lived here as long as us , 44 years and she is horrified at the thought!
I appreciate you will have lots of other things to occupy your time and I provide the above information to keep you informed of what I an up to at the moment.
However, any comments are always appreciated.
Thanks,
Rob

[CambridgeWorks]

Been doing some calculations, but my results seem way too far out on tonnage of feedstock required!
I can't see where I have gone wrong though. Unless the application statement is far too optimistic?

The process of anaerobic digestion.
Using 250m3 as average volume biogas from 1 ton of waste input. It is said it can be between 20M3 and 800M3 per ton.
However, 200-300M3 is the most common statement I have seen for 1 ton.

"Each cubic meter of biogas contains the equivalent of 6 kWh of heat energy. ;
6x 250 = 1500KWh for 1 ton waste"
The same volume of biogas converted to electrical power yields 2 kWh per M3
2x 250 = 500KWh
(Sources of estimates, google)

Planning design and access statement:
"In terms of gas yield the AD plant would be expected to generate around 70GWh of biomethane
to be produced from the plant and injected into the grid per year."

In Mwh of biogas, that is 70,000/1.5 = 46,667 tons per annum for the average m3 biogas production that I used, 250m3.
Then, there is also the 8GWh electricity production at approx 2KWh per m3
2 x 250 = 500 KWh / ton. 8000000 / 500 = 16000 tons per annum
That is 62,667 tons total per annum.

Seems ridiculously incorrect calculations of mine, but I am unable to see my error(s)!

My head hurts!!
Rob