Well - I'd like to commend you for your persistence - sometimes when people dogmatically insist on something, no matter how wrong, it does end up influencing those reading.

But hopefully your point has been made now.

Also, after crap has gone through a digester the sludge that remains is pretty mineral rich. In some cases it makes a good fertilizer (although you have to watch the salt level as you do with manure) on its own or is easy to process into a good fertilizer.

On the contrary, I have much to say. Please stop your personal attacks in saying "You have nothing to say." I have not ignored ALL of the other biogas projects, as you say. I was a professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire (UNH) until January 2008, and I am well informed about the use of natural gas from a not-so-local land fill, and I commented so on this post today. Even in this case I have doubts about what was accomplished. A pipe line was constructed from Rochester, NH to Durham, NH. That is laying some 20 miles of pipe. The natural gas, oil, and coal used to make 20 miles of pipe and transport it many miles from where it was made is significant, and the diesel used in digging and the gasoline in transportation is significant. Add to that all of the people who were employed in making the pipe, transporting it, making the equipment that dug deep trenches and channeled the pipe under the Cocheco River -- all of those employees who make a salary and will spend it and thus use more oil. The companies where the stuff is manufactured use oil and natural gas to heat factories and offices, and they all use electricity. Imagine how many hundreds of people are involved in the companies that make pipe and dig and move land -- land moving trucks, pick up trucks, back loaders, back hoes, etc. Think of all of the people commuting to all of these jobs. Think of all of the administrative and clerical personnel in all of these companies, and all of the profits that will go to stockholders. And the salaries and profits will go on car or air travel vacations, trips to the mall or whatever. The digging, welding, architectural firms, etc. And all of the time spent on this means time is not spent on other projects that could save energy. When I was chair of the Energy Policy Committee at UNH, the head of the energy office and I estimated that we could save a million dollars per year just by implementing a program to get students and faculty to shut windows in classrooms at the end of night classes. It is common to walk by big classroom buildings with most of the windows open ALL NIGHT LONG when it is 10 degrees outside -- just pouring out the heat from #6 fuel oil into the air. The administration ignored our plans, they probably were not sexy enough and they would have to work at it on a regular basis. The million dollars a year in 1985 is probably 5 million today. That is a lot of #6 oil over 22 years ... that is a lot of oil. So now they have a natural gas project that is very sexy (and their careers will be advanced), but will it save much energy, I doubt it. No one knows how many years the land fill will generate gas, I doubt many years. They could save a lot more energy by educating students, faculty and administrators about the need to close windows, but that wouldn't be sexy. Good grief!

It is best to quit fooling around with trying to control nature. We've can't win that battle. Most of these techno-fixes are wasting energy, not conserving it. The problem is the continued quest to use more energy from fossil fuels (most farm waste gets its energy originally from fertilizer/natural gas). Quit using a lot of energy in making pipe and equipment and quit wasting energy on farm waste and instead put it into the ground where it will do some good, but it isn't very sexy.