San Francisco pilot plan to save the earth from global climate change.

[NNadir]

If you were worried about global climate change, worry no more.

The problem has been addressed through a very simple solution:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060221/ap_on_sc/dog_waste_power

I don't know why anyone didn't think of it earlier.

I think I'll go out and buy a Hummer.

[crispini]

1. Heh, that sounds like a good idea.

Good for them. SF's always doing new and innovative stuff. If all of our cities were like them, we'd be a lot further along on the road towards sustainability.

[Lindacooks]

Gee, so you mean my houseful of cats may take me off the grid?

That would be cool!

[Boomer]

2. Where can I get one?

"Within the next few months, Norcal Waste, a garbage hauling company that collects San Francisco's trash, will begin a pilot program under which it will use biodegradable bags and dog-waste carts to pick up droppings at a popular dog park.

The droppings will be tossed into a contraption called a methane digester, which is basically a tank in which bacteria feed on feces for weeks to create methane gas.

The methane could then be piped directly to a gas stove, heater, turbine or anything else powered by natural gas. It can also be used to generate electricity."

Hey, with my four dogs who seem to poop much more than they actually eat, I could generate enough natural gas to heat my entire house. At last, these pups would contribute in a meaningful, practical way, since I haven't persuaded them to wash dishes or fold laundry yet.

[Canuckistanian]

3. We need to hound our elected officials about this!

We were just barking up the wrong tree with solar and wind...

[NNadir]

6. I think we need to keep you on a tighter leash.

These kind of puns give one paws to reflect, but also can set the fur to flying.

But, I'm not going to dog you with any of this. I'm not going to give you any shit. Thanks for giving us the poop on how you feel about it. Your remarks were a howl. There's no more tail to tell.

[KamaAina]

4. Hmmm... maybe D.C. could follow suit.

using all the bull droppings collected in the vicinity of the White House, Congress, Supreme Court, etc., they could easily displace Texas as the country's energy capital!

[jwirr]

5. Using garbage/animal wastes is not new. China has used

forms of pig doo doo for energy, I also heard that South Africa has waste plants that us waste to create energy and in this country I think Boston burns it's waste for energy. It is not just doo doo but all their garbage.

[NNadir]

7. Waste burning is a big part of the renewable industry.

My impression is that it is in fact, the second largest form of "renewable" energy in the world, 2 or 3 exajoules worth, right after hydroelectric.

Wind power can be expected to challenge that leadership though.

I wonder how many people have contemplated how much fuel a garbage truck loaded with dog shit will involve, though.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Maybe, but dog shit in parks has to be disposed of anyway

because it's a health hazard. I don't know about San Francisco, but my local parks have bins at entrances especially for dog crap (though I suspect they also have plastic bags/gloves in them, used to pick it up with), and fines for people who don't clean up after their dog. So those bins have to be emptied into something. I wouldn't expect it to make much of a dent in our carbon dioxide output, though.

[jpak]

9. Another pathetic attempt to demean renewables

The vast majority of US sewage treatment plants employ aerobic digestion technologies that consume large quantities of electricity.

The are also thousands of large scale cattle, pork and poultry farms that produce mass quantities of manure. Sewage lagoons on these farms are a nuisance and threaten local waters.

Employing anaerobiic digesters and biogas-fueled generators at US sewage treatment plants could significantly reduce energy demand: directly by generating heat and/or power, or indirectly by increasing the efficiency of downstream aerobic digesters (by reducing their size and numbers).

Farm site anaerobic digesters and electrical generation would reduce the environmental impact of sewage lagoons, enhance farm incomes and provide heat and power to local communities.

Criticism of these programs is just plain wrong.

http://www.ccst.us/ccst/pubs/pier/library/ftp/Renew/Full%20Version%20Tech%20Review/Biomass/BEC/anaerobic.html

http://www.forester.net/de_0511_fuel.html

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:t5th6VmVWfQJ:crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/biomass/biogas/BIOGASMK.pdf+biogas+anaerobic+digesters+sewage+MW&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3&ie=UTF-8

http://www.cheshirerenewables.org.uk/anaerobic.htm

http://www.portlandgeneral.com/community_and_env/environment/biogas.asp?bhcp=1

and plenty more sites on the web...

[NNadir]

11. I simply note that it is dog shit to pretend that dog shit will solve

our global warming problem. The cow that the dog eats eats a lot of grain.

We may argue about ethanol, on which I am agnostic, but I think it's pretty clear, especially when you truck the shit around San Francisco traffic, that the dog shit is an energy loser.

As a health problem, there may be some advantage. However the separation of the dog shit and the dedication of a special truck, the pumping of water from the Hetch Hetchy to operate the digester, and so on, suggests that this is not not a global climate change winner.

It doesn't matter in any case. Combined ethanol and dog shit don't add up to an exajoule in the US.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/landfillgas/landfillgas.html

Nobody is protesting renewables. No one is trying to stop them, but it falls to me to point out repeatedly, with reference to data that they are hardly enough.

They will not be capable of replacing fossil fuels in the lifetimes of anyone reading this page.

[hunter]

10. With such precise controls of inputs, incineration might be better.

After "digestion" and energy production, there is still waste to be disposed of. The waste from this digestion process is probably not the sort of stuff you'd want to put on vegtable gardens as fertilizer.

High temperature gasification of dog poop and other organic wastes as fuel for combined cycle power plants might be more efficient than digestion and produce less solid waste.

Waste incineration in the United States is traditionally opposed because we can't trust the input stream to be free of things that produce toxins in the output stream --such as heavy metals and dioxins.

So long as you are carefully sorting the input waste stream, toxins are not such a problem.

Sadly, biowaste-to-energy projects in California have a somewhat spotty record. Biowaste-to-energy plants have a history of polluting, mostly because of poor operating practices.