Paul Ciszek <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
>
>In article <A5pf2JA9A6UHFwk1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>Oz <Oz@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>Paul Ciszek <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
>>>
>>>Thermal depolymerization and thermochemical conversion are faster and
>>>more total, and more likely to be profitable in first world countries.
>>
>>Improbable as a feedstock given the very variable and impure nature of
>>manures. Almost anything else would be better.
>
>"Impure"? Thermal depolymerization works on wood chips, turkey guys,
>old tires, AND manure. The trouble is, they made a big commitment to
>the turkey-guts based operation, since their supplier wanted to get rid
>of them, but after a while there were competing demands for turkey guts
>and they had to start bidding against others.
Doesn't sound very economic to me. More of a disposal.
>My understanding was that
>manure was also wanted elsewhere, but it sounds like there are places
>where they should be able to get it for free.
Unlikely given the rise in fertiliser prices.
>
--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
|
