Recycling your house?

At home, my wife and I are in the process of replacing our current 160 year old farm house. Before the historic preservationists start beating down my door, take note the difference between historic and simply old. This house has a bad foundation, drafty windows, limited functional plumbing, and horribly obsolete wiring. It has served my family well for the past 5 generations, but it’s time has passed.

A friend of mine called me up one afternoon in September of last year, noting he had heard through the grape vine of a house that may be available soon. Being on a limited budget we jumped at the opportunity and made arrangements to see the house. Well long story short, we settled on the house and lined up the contractors, and we will soon have a 2 story house coming down our driveway.

I see this as the ultimate in resource conservation. The house we will be moving was built around the early 1900s, and is in great structural shape. Homes of this vintage are made of materials unavailable to the building market today. The framing lumber is largely well cured old growth lumber, and has been well maintained through the years. In my opinion it would be a shame to landfill or burn such a rare resource. With our replacement house secured, the next question became - What to do with the old house?

In our county zoning regulations allow for only one home per 20 acre parcel, so we have to remove the old house within one year of bringing in the replacement. With a bit of web searching I came across The Green Institute. After a week of phone and email tag I finally made contact with a representative from their “Deconstruction Service”. He described their services, and it sounded like a good fit for what we had in mind. The general idea being that we donate the building materials in our old house to them and in return we receive a tax deduction for the value of the lumber and building supplies they are able to salvage. They then sell that lumber to cover their expenses for the deconstruction service. There are a few more details, but that is the general process.

I know there are many old vacant barns and farm houses in the Three Rivers RC&D area collapsing from neglect. I would like to encourage any property owners in a similar situation to consider using any one of the building savage companies in Minnesota. It seems in many cases this is a good option to eliminate demolition costs while saving massive quantities of building material from the land fill. Check back later as I’ll be posting updates here and here as the process of house recycling unfolds…

It’s been a busy but exciting week here at Three Rivers RC&D. After returning from the North Central RC&D conference in Rochester, MN I immediately got back to preparing a proposal for the Farmers Market Promotion Program. If we receive funding, this project will develop a variety of educational programs that will benefit Farmer’s Markets through out the Three Rivers RC&D area. There will also be a component aimed at recruiting and developing new farmers for the area markets.
Three Rivers RC&D is very interested in developing programs and educating the public about the environmental and economic benefits of Local Foods and Sustainable Agriculture. We will also be involved with the development of the Friends of the Mankato Farmer’s Market organization, which we hope will be a valuable asset to the Greater Mankato area local foods movement.

Recently we were notified that we have received $75,000 in funding from the Conservation Innovation Grant program for “The Three Rivers Economic Conservation Project”. This project will fund projects that demonstrate economically and environmentally compatible agriculture practices in the Three Rivers 9 county area, as well as conducting a consumer education campaign. This concept of using sustainable agriculture as a rural economic development tool is central to our current project Productive Conservation on Working Lands. Funding for this program is expected to be available in October of this year, so check back for more details…

The idea behind the economic conservation concept is that we should encourage and promote profitable practices that conserve our soil and water resources rather than simply paying farmers to take land out of production. With uncertain Federal support for conservation programs it is more important now than ever to make conservation a profitable agricultural practice.

The organization Greenhorns was recently brought to my attention by one of my local foods and sustainable ag co-conspirators Ryan Ihrke. This group is highlighting young farmers who are developing viable and vibrant businesses and organizations based on ecologically sound farming practices. The majority of farmers profiled are currently working in urban California, but they are looking for nominations across the nation for farmers that fit this profile. It is very encouraging to see my generation stepping up as the torch bearers for sustainable agriculture, a field commonly written off as sovereign territory of multi-national agri-business.

Spring is on it’s way here in Minnesota, with the temperatures finally reaching into the 50s. This winter has been full of planning and scheming, and hopefully we will see the fruits of our work ripen during this growing season. We expect to see several hundred acres of perennial crops established this spring with the assistance of funds from PCWL, as well as developing a land management plan for the upcoming organic garden at the Putting Green in New Ulm.

Emerging Biomass Markets in Minnesota

I was in Fairmont, MN yesterday for a meeting hosted by Rural Advantage on the emerging biomass markets in Minnesota. This meeting was focused on technologies currently in use as well as emerging technologies. While some of the presentations were heavy on the chemistry behind the process, it was very interesting to get a good introduction to the process that converts biomass to transportation fuels.

Roger Ruan from the University of Minnesota Biorefining Center gave a presentation on the basic technology behind the gasification and pyrolysis technologies. Both have great potential for adding value to under utilized biomass. In addition, both processes produce by-products that can be used as fertilizer on the fields where the biomass was taken from. This closed loop model is especially important as prices for fertilizer have increased substantially in recent years. It also addresses some concerns about the sustainability of harvesting large amounts of biomass from areas that could be considered ecologically fragile.

Due to current and likely future economic conditions in agriculture, fields dedicated to biomass production are likely to be in areas unproductive for traditional row crop production. These areas may include, but not limited to highly erodible hillsides, low lying poorly drained areas, and areas with soils too thin to support the nutrient requirements of traditional agriculture. Sustainability guidelines for biomass production need to be established and adopted on a widespread basis in order to assure the continued productivity of our lands. We need to focus on developing this sector of agriculture in an sustainable manner from the beginning in order to avoid costly remediation in the future.

This potential for decentralized energy production in rural areas bodes well for the economic future of rural Minnesota. The difficulty of transporting bulky biomass long distances moves the economics of this type of energy production model toward smaller scale plants. Thinking of energy production on these terms requires a complete revision of our concept of energy production that has been dominant since the invention of the automobile.

A Lighter Shade of Green: Changing Views of Biofuels

Bio Fuels have been getting a bit of bad press as of late, in case you hadn't noticed. Recent research released from the Journal Science shows substantial carbon losses when lands are converted to biofuel production. These carbon losses are so large that the carbon savings from producing biofuels on these lands will take in some cases hundreds of years to make up the initial losses caused by clearing forests of tilling peat lands in order to plant biofuel crops.

While this is somewhat intuitive to anyone with a few ecology 101 credits, the obvious may be lost on the general public and policy makers. While these findings may come as an unwelcome criticism of the biofuel boom, an objective and critical analysis of this industry is essential. We need to develop a sustainable foundation now for the energy sector of coming decades.

Likewise it is foolish to paint the entire biofuel industry as being equal to corn ethanol and soy based biodiesel, as much of the media tends to. The biofuel industry in reality is a diverse mix of technologies and feedstocks. The sustainability of our future energy production depends on policy makers being able to see beyond the short term political gains they receive by blindly supporting some ill-conceived subsidies.

We need the ability to look beyond our own field borders to see what effects our actions(or inactions) are having on the rest of the world. We have for the most part been unprepared and unwilling to consider what effects the run up on commodity prices has had on food supplies, land costs and land use practices thousands of miles away. "Most prior studies have found that substituting biofuel for gasoline will reduce greenhouse gases because biofuel sequester carbon through the growth of the feedstock. These analyses have failed to count the carbon emissions that occur as farmers worldwide respond to higher prices and convert forest and grassland to new cropland to replace the grain (or cropland) diverted to biofuel. Using a worldwide agricultural model to estimate emissions from land use change, we found that corn-based ethanol, instead of producing a 20% savings, nearly doubles greenhouse emissions over 30 years and increases greenhouse gases for 167 years. Biofuels from switchgrass, if grown on U.S. corn lands, increase emissions by 50%. This result raises concerns about large biofuel mandates and highlights the value of using waste products. " (T. Searchinger et al.)

While this study will be scrutinized and disputed, the questions raised here are valid and need to be discussed. We need to know if the energy technologies we are investing millions of our tax dollars in are providing the benefits claimed. Regardless of which crop associations or political lobbyists are tied to a particular technology we need to objectively examine the application and support of these technologies.

Developing Local Foods

While at the 2008 Midwest Value Added Agriculture Conference and Wisconsin Local Food Summit, it came to my attention how woefully behind the times most of Minnesota is in the re-development of a strong locally produced food system. I say re-development because none of this is new or cutting edge. We are simply returning to food production patterns similar to those that would be familiar to my grandparents. As transportation fuels continue to factor more and more into the price of food, the produce shipped from opposite sides of the world will become less and less competitive with locally produced foods. It is this gap in the food supply we intend to fill.

Organizations such as Growing Power, and Grow Urban have brought the profitability and educational experience of urban agriculture to several cities throughout the Midwest. Their efforts have re-connected urban residents with their food supply, teaching an appreciation for the work involved in producing fresh and nutrient dense foods.

Greenleaf Market is connecting Farmers with institutional purchasers such as grocery stores and Restaurants in their area, and REAP Food Group is educating, conducting research on local food production as well as doing public policy advocacy on sustainable food systems. These are just a few of the organizations I became acquainted with last week, which brings me to my point- What is Minnesota doing in this area? While there are many quality organizations in Minnesota doing this work, the over all public awareness seems to be tragically lacking especially in the out state regions outside of the Twin Cities Metro area. We hope to remedy this situation soon, if you are interested in helping, please Contact us.

Rep. Peterson questions viability of cellulosic ethanol

A January 15 article from Reuters reports comments of our Minnesota democratic representative Collin Peterson regarding his opinions on the viability of cellulosic ethanol. Peterson is quoted in the piece as saying"I really think the more I look at this whole cellulosic issue, there is a lot bigger problem to overcome here than people realize in terms of the feedstocks. We have a lot of work to do in that regard," he said. "I'm not sure cellulosic ethanol will ever get off the ground."
What a nice vote of confidence from our elected representative who happens to be the head of the house ag committee.

Thankfully the bio-energy industry hasn't bet all of it's chips on cellulosic ethanol. There are currently several biomass to energy technologies being scaled up to meet the increasing demand for renewable domestic energy (see previous posts). While not all of them involve production of transportation fuel, they all have the potential to replace limited reserves of fossil fuels. On the issue of cellulosic ethanol viability, let's just say opinions of those involved directly with cellulosic ethanol contrast starkly with those of representative Peterson...

The cellulosic ethanol industry is making steady progress toward commercialization despite the comments of some detractors. In separate piece, Reuters writer Karl Plume reported on Monday that, “The first commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol plants should come on line by late 2009 or early 2010, and the industry remains poised to meet a U.S. government goal to increase biofuels use five-fold by 2022, the head of a leading energy crop company said on Monday.
"‘We should see the first commercial-scale plants coming on line in late-2009, early-2010,’ said Richard Hamilton, President and CEO of California-based Ceres, speaking at the Reuters Global Agriculture and Biofuels Summit."Farm Policy

Cellulosic Ethanol Biofuel Rockstar?

According to a new study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, University of Nebraska,

“The results of this study
demonstrate that switchgrass grown and managed as a biomass
energy crop produces _500% more renewable energy than
energy consumed in its production”

JUST AS I SUSPECTED.

As the bioenergy industry evolves it seems research is being released almost weekly demonstrating how properly managed bioenergy production can have substantial benefits to the economy and environment. As an example the fast pyrolysis process I discussed previously yields a bio oil and a high carbon soil amendment that could benefit farmed-out low carbon soils substantially. The plasma gassification process can utilize nearly any carbon source to produce a synthetic gas which can be burned to produce electricity or heat. It seems cellulosic ethanol is the silicone enhanced bleach blond of the Bio energy sector, grabbing all of the publicity(and research $$$), while her less glamorous sisters (gasification, fast pyrolysis ect.) languish out of the limelight.

At least we seem to be seeing long overdue progress toward a sustainable energy future.

Looking past Cellulosic Ethanol

In addition to the mountains of money being poured into the commercalization of cellulosic ethanol, there has been a parallel line of research examining the process of converting biomass into synthetic gas, and then into liquid fuel than could potentially be used for transportation fuel.
Biomass magazine has an article here on recent technology advances in this area. there is also an article here about the biomass gasification facility at the University of Minnesota, Morris.

This just happens to be the facility where some of the PCWL field demonstration work will be conducted. PCWL cooperators with the U of M will be studying the energy production potential of CRP native grass mixes and several other native biomass sources. By using gasification technology it is hoped we can develop a local and sustainable source of transportation fuel. From my understanding of the technology it appears to have the potential to utilize more of the carbon content of the biomass, thus yielding more energy per ton of biomass harvested.

In April Minneapolis will be hosting the Biomass 08' conference and trade show. This conference will discuss a wide range of issues involving the emerging biomass energy industry.

Cellulosic ethanol has even more competition as the premier biomass to energy conversion technology. In a October 2007 article Biomass magazine examines the fast pyrolysis process, where biomass is heated to drive out volatile oils and compounds to produce bio-oil which can be used as a heating oil. The by product from this process is essentially a form of charcoal, which has a variety of uses. The byproduct, referred to as char can be used for many things including a soil amendment to sequester carbon while improving the nutrient holding capacity of soil, as well as industrial uses for activated charcoal such as waste water treatment plants.

I guess the lesson for today's post is that the future of biomass energy does not rest solely on corn and cellulose derived ethanol as some would have you believe. There are millions of dollars being invested in new truly energy clean energy technologies, and from the way it looks our country's energy portfolio will look drastically different in 20 years regardless of whether or not a renewable energy portfolio mandate was included in the 2007 energy bill. It seems highly likely biomass energy is here to stay for the foreseeable future, but the question is which technologies will make up the mix that will end our dependence on fossil fuels.

New Cellulosic Ethanol Plants in the Works

Development of industrial-scale cellulosic ethanol production continues to make progress. In a 12/31/07 article USA Today told of several cellulosic ethanol plants in the planning phase across the nation. These facilities will utilize a wide variety of feed stock sources including corn cobs, wood chips, sugar cane stalks, and wheat straw.

We have recently received an increase in inquiries about the Productive Conservation on Working Lands program. This in part due to an article about PCWL on page 2 of the December 20, 2007 issue of Agri-News. This article highlighted activities of PCWL and was very helpful in getting the word out about PCWL to landowners and farmers in Southern Minnesota. We will be reviewing proposals and crop establishment applications at the PCWL Technical committee meeting on 1/23/08. If you would like to discuss a project idea please contact me at our office 507-345-7418.

Renewable Energy Recieves Federal Support

With mixed feelings, the environmental community celebrates the signing of the Energy bill by President Bush. This new legislation addresses the long neglected fuel efficiency standards for automobiles, and provides "$6.5 billion in energy research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) funding the bill appropriates for the next decade, including $1 billion for renewable energy programs and $2 billion for carbon capture and sequestration RD&D, both spread over the next 5 years."

There is some concern as to what effect the doubling of corn based ethanol production as mandated in this legislation will have on the environment and agricultural markets. The new energy bill does however provide significant support for second generation bio-fuels. Another bone stuck in the craw of renewable energy advocates was the failure to reduce tax breaks for oil and gas companies while ending tax breaks that support for solar and wind energy projects. When all is said and done, it seems this new energy bill is equal parts status-quo and progress.