Co-op Development Action
Poultry industry explores
ecological options to save energy
By Donna Uptagraff,
Cooperation Works!
ike many agricultural
businesses, the poultry
industry is experiencing
tough times. Surveys of
poultry growers in
southern Missouri, northwest Arkansas
and northeast Oklahoma indicate that
propane costs and environmental issues
are top concerns. Rising production
costs are making it difficult for growers
to make a living. Soaring propane prices
have led to increased interest in
bioenergy systems for heating poultry
houses.
Recognizing poultry producers’
interest in lowering fossil fuel
consumption while also decreasing fuel
costs, Winrock International’s Arkansas
Rural Enterprise Center engaged Jim
Wimberly of BioEnergy Systems LLC
to perform a review of biomass furnaces
for heating poultry houses in the
northwest Arkansas region. Biomass
furnaces burn renewable products, such
as wood, corn or litter pellets in order
to create heat. Funding for the study
was provided by a Cooperative
Development Grant from USDA Rural
Development.
Fuel costs are the primary expense
for poultry growers, but changing a
broiler house’s heating system involves
costs as well. The initial assessment
found that typical poultry houses using
propane gas for heating require a
savings of approximately $12,300 per
year for a bioenergy system to achieve
break-even economic performance.
Fuel costs are not the only reason for
poultry farmers to switch to bioenergy
systems. Growers report a variety of
reasons for interest in the systems,
including a preference for using a
renewable fuel.
Additionally, air emissions from
biomass furnace systems are far below
regulated levels, and numerous
environmental and economic benefits
are associated with the dry heat nature
of biomass-fired furnaces.
Study weighs efficiency of
five biomass fuels
The Winrock study evaluated five
types of bioenergy systems. These
furnaces use a variety of fuel sources,
including: cordwood, corn, wood pellet,
raw litter, and pelletized raw litter.
Each system has its own particular
traits, and is in a different state of
development.
A cordwood-fired furnace, for
example, requires manual fuel loading
and ash removal. Such furnaces have
been commercially available for many
years and fuel is readily available. A
corn-fired furnace system, on the other
hand, is available with automated fuel
storage, handling and in-feed, but
requires manual ash removal.
These furnace systems are
commercially available, and more than
30 units have been installed at poultry
farms in the region during the past two
heating seasons. Recent fluctuations in
corn prices raise some questions about
the economic sustainability of this
model.
Wood pellet-fired furnace systems
use a wood-based fuel with automated
fuel storage, handling and in-feed, with
manual ash removal. Several such units
have been demonstrated in the past.
Most of the commercially available
corn-fired furnace systems can be
modified to use readily available wood
pellets as well.
Litter-fired furnace systems are still
in development, but were evaluated
because of many positive features.
Litter-fired furnaces would turn waste
products into fuel and produce heat
with an extremely low-cost fuel source.
While a raw litter-fired furnace system
was evaluated due to farmer interest, no
such units are commercially available
despite numerous efforts and
investments during the past 25 years.
Likewise, pelletized litter-fired
furnace systems are not commercially
available, but it is expected that some of
the commercially available corn-fired
furnace systems could be modified to
use litter-derived pellets. Wimberly
notes that the rate of ash production
would be significantly higher with
litter-derived pellets than with corn or
wood pellets.
Primary conclusions
After extensive examination of capital
investment costs and operating costs of
these five systems, the analyses indicate
that:
- Cordwood systems are economically
feasible but labor-intensive.
- Corn-fired systems are only feasible if
cull corn or on-farm-produced corn
can be obtained well below current
market prices.
- Wood pellet-fired systems are
feasible, provided that assumed
system efficiencies and service life are
achieved.
- Raw litter-fired systems would be very
feasible if such systems can be
designed and fabricated to meet all of
the fundamental criteria set forth in
the report.
- Pelletized litter-fired systems are not
feasible under the assumed
conditions.
For more information regarding the
review, please contact Winrock
International at www.winrock.org. To
receive an electronic copy of the review,
contact Marsha Burkhalter at
mburkhalter@winrock.org.
