1. Examples of implementing manure processing technology at the farm level in the Baltic Sea Region Erik Sindhöj 1 *, Anni Alitalo 2, Pellervo Kässi 2, Ilkka Sipilä 2, Kalvi Tamm 3, Lena Rodhe 1 1 JTI – Uppsala Sweden, 2 MTT – Agrifood Research Finland, 3 Estonian Research Institute of Agriculture *erik.sindhoj@jti.se Slurry cooling Motives for use: energy recovery and reduced ammonia emissions Pellon Reference Sindhöj E., Rodhe L., (Editors). 2013. Examples of Implementing Manure Processing Technology at Farm Level. Report 412, Agriculture & Industry. JTI- Swedish Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Engineering, Uppsala, Sweden Drum composting Motives for use: received tipping fees for horse manure, income from composted products ECSAB Slurry acidification Motives for use: ammonia abatement demanded by authorities Biocover SyreN Nutrient concentration PROTOTYPES Motives for use: reduced volume to store and spread, create a fertilizer product more similar to mineral fertilizers Pellon Biosampo and schematic process flow Processing technologyType of farm (country)Processing capacity Costs* (€ m -3 yr - 1 ) Incomes and savings not included Nutrient concentration – PrototypeDairy farm (SE)Target capacity 15000 m 3 yr -1 4.92 Less costs for storage, transport and spreading; possible fertiliser sale Nutrient concentration – PrototypePig farm (FI)Target capacity 6000 m 3 yr -1 3.81 Nutrient concentration - Reverse osmosisPig farm (NL), 1050 sows10 000 m 3 yr -1 6.49Less costs for exporting manure, sold liquid fertiliser Acidification - In housingPig farm (DK), produces 6500 finishers yr -1 Max capacity NA, farm generates 3250 m 3 yr -1 6.68Saved N; S fertilisation unnecessary Acidification - In storageDairy farm (EE)Max capacity NA, farm generates 14 000 m 3 yr -1 0.13S fertilisation unnecessary (Dosage only for S fertilisation) Acidification - During spreadingFictive pig farm (DK), 3800 places, typical for DKMax capacity NA, farm generates 6000 m 3 yr -1 1.04Saved N; S fertilisation unnecessary Composting - DrumBeef cattle (SE), deep litter manureMax capacity 18 500 m 3 yr -1 5.55Income from tipping fees, sold commercial soil and fertiliser products Composting - Drum Pig and beef cattle (SE), 640 sows with 5500 places for finishers, and 150 nursing cows Max capacity 18 500 m 3 yr -1 3.96 Reduced volumes to store and spread and sold commercial soil and fertiliser products Mechanical separation - Screw pressPig farm (FI), 600 sows, 2300 finishers yr -1 Max capacity 25 m 3 hr -1 pig slurry, generates 1700 m 3 yr -1 2.11Saved logistic costs, better allocation of nutrients on farm Mechanical separation - CentrifugeDairy farm with biogas (SE), 450 milking cowsApprox. 20 000 m 3 digestate yr -1 1.62Less costs for liquid manure handling (but costs for solids) Slurry cooling - Heat pumpsPig farm (FI), 1000 fattening pig placesMax capacity NA, cools 1200 of 2000 m 3 yr -1 2.99Saved N and energy Mechanical separation Motives for use: reduced volume of slurry to store and spread, odor reduction, alternative use of solid fraction *costs include investment, maintenance and operational costs. Annuity method was used for investment costs with 10 yrs depreciation and 5% APR (interest). Table: Processing technology, type of farm, processing capacity and cost of processing.