- What is the total antibiotic impact; what happens to all antibiotics administered through feed or direct injection (or any other method) regarding their presence in animal waste?
There will be no antibiotics administered through the feed and no non-therapeutic use of antibiotics applied in any manner. We recognize that those are standard practices throughout the industry, but Bion's facilities will not use them. Any antibiotics used for sick cattle will be administered under the supervision of a licensed veterinarian and consistent with label and other requirements. In addition, no animals will be harvested until the antibiotics are fully metabolized and no tissue residue remains.
- How are you preventing antibiotic contamination of soil and groundwater?
According to cattle experts at both Cornell University and Texas A&M, as well as internationally known and respected cattle consultant Dr. Keith DeHaan, this is a non-issue, as contamination is not possible given antibiotics will only be used as appropriate to sick animals under the supervision of a trained veterinarian.
- How do you dispose of dead or sick animals?
They will be picked up by a rendering company.
- How do you guarantee that lagoons will not overflow during heavy rains or snow melt?
There will be no lagoons storing manure as with traditional livestock practices. Manure will be biologically treated daily with Bion's patented waste treatment system, and remaining liquids will be polished, a natural cleansing process, by passing through constructed wetlands designed by a licensed professional engineer. Design of all system components will meet all local, state and federal guidelines and rules and will take into account local weather patterns and history. The combination of treatment and polishing in the wetland will result in storage of effluent prior to application to farm fields, containing nutrients reduced to a fraction of levels routinely applied to fields throughout the region, and with pathogens reduced by an order of a million to one. The packing plant has not been sited, but will not use a lagoon for treatment of waste. That waste will also be treated by Bion technology.
- How will you guarantee that the transport of solid waste from cattle areas to the ethanol facility will never leak through tailgates or other means?
The material to be transported from the cattle facilities to the ethanol plant will be stabilized, coarse solids, essentially cellulose, no longer manure. Employment and training of conscientious and skilled managers and routine maintenance of equipment and transport vehicles will assure a standard of safety far in excess of requirements or practices for ongoing and historic trucking of manure from livestock operations to farm fields throughout upstate New York.
- How will you guarantee that odor releases along the route travelled by solids-bearing trucks will not occur?
Again, the material to be moved from the cattle facilities to the ethanol plant is stabilized, separated cellulosic solids, a product derived from the technology platform at the livestock facility. The odor from this treated cellulosic material, a small fraction of the original waste stream, is low to non-detectable. Employment of skilled management techniques and normal diligence in both routine maintenance and ongoing operations, will further greatly limit the potential for any odor issues.
- How do you plan to control traffic into and out of the slaughter house/packing facility? Answer with specifics regarding Harris Rd., Bankrupt Road, County Rt. 6, NY Rt. 264, and Phoenix Industrial Park.
There has been no site established for the beef processing facility. Regardless of its location, however, it will be quite small by industry standards, and its truck traffic will be surprising light --currently estimated at no more than 20 total trucks a day.
- Estimates of odor are "soft"; 60% mitigation, if possible, leaves 40%. This is a significant amount, given the size of the planned operation, so how do you plan to eliminate it past your boundaries?
We don't know the source of the mitigation numbers quoted in the question, but would point out that the issue of odor is an environmental concern that has received a focused assessment by a world-class air emissions scientist, Dr. Philip Hopke, Director of Clarkson University's Center for the Environment, on behalf of the St. Lawrence County Board of Legislators. That study is available in full on Bion's project website, and we would urge everyone to read it to understand the extent to which the question of odor has already been addressed.
Dr. Hopke's study constructed and applied a high standard for the avoidance of nuisance odor from Bion's cattle facilities, and it concluded that Bion's finishing facilities can meet those high standards, given the proven performance of its waste treatment process along with additional appropriate odor mitigating measures. Bion has pledged to develop the project in a manner that is consistent with those standards. According to the report: "Based on our estimates of odor emissions, it appears that a facility can be constructed with a less than 3% probability of nuisance odors..".
- Will you post a significant bond (on the order of several hundred million dollars, minimum) to address cleanup of your sites in the event of accidents or failure/closure of the project? How much?
Oswego, like every community, has a legitimate need to protect the public interest. The threshold question, however, is just what constitutes "the public interest."
If the Oswego community believes it is in the public interest to foster sustainable economic activity-both agricultural and industrial-creating long-term, high quality jobs, and generating markets for the existing agricultural community, while meeting stringent environmental standards and producing renewable energy (to replace fossil fuels), then the integrated livestock/renewable energy project proposed by Bion makes sense. If on the other hand, one is opposed to large-scale, sustainable food and renewable energy production with its associated economic activity and jobs, despite an ability to meet community environmental standards, then one will not believe that the proposed project is in the public interest.
This is the basic question facing the Oswego community.
Bion supports the implementation of common-sense rules based in fact and science, and every business in the community, including Bion, needs to live by these rules. However, the application of these standards needs to move beyond simplistic or conceptual biases based in simple assumptions such as big vs. small or good and bad, and honestly look at the actual risk of impacts. There needs to be a willingness to look at what activities meet community environmental standards and are actually "sustainable." Inquiry into such matters will likely produce surprising answers that support the proposed facilities.
Having said that, any requirement for bonding a livestock facility would be unprecedented for a beef feedlot anywhere in the U.S. Rather than proposing to require bonding of Bion's facility, which will deploy verified livestock waste treatment technology, we believe it is appropriate to establish environmental performance standards through the normal process of a rigorous, public regulatory review, consistent with those applied to every other economic activity.
Consideration of bonding for this or any project raises a number of questions that would need to be addressed before understanding how it could possibly be implemented:
- Would the requirement for bonding apply to all livestock feeding operations? What would be the bonding criteria? Obviously it could not be based on herd size alone, since the environmental impacts vary significantly based upon species, methods of operation and the type of activity, i.e. a finishing facility versus a cow calf operation.
- Would environmental loadings and potential impacts be consistent with existing permitted operations?
- How would the bonding requirement be established? By individual impact or overall herd permit, since the herd size would vary?
- How would this bonding requirement be applied to other non-livestock business enterprises in Oswego County?
- Would existing operations (livestock or otherwise) be exempted or grandfathered?
- Would it apply only to new business activity?
- Would tax-exempt organizations be subject to such bonding?
- In light of the financial crisis, what would the criteria be to determine an acceptable insurer? AAA ratings from the ratings agencies?
The potential for environmental risk from Bion's projected 14,000-head beef cattle modules will be less than that of a 100-milker dairy with regard to the potential impact from nutrients to ground and surface waters, etc. Does bonding start at the equivalent impacts from 500 cows? From 100 milk cows?
To seek bonding from a project implementing effective, comprehensive waste treatment technology without making an attempt to understand the capability of that treatment technology or without extending the same requirement to all other activities generating comparable or far greater potential for environmental risk is in violation of the fundamental principles of fairness and public policy -- the clear requirement that enterprises be treated in an even-handed manner based on rational standards that are equitably applied to all comparable economic activities based on science and reality.
Or does the proposal for bonding not need to address these issues since it would only apply to this and any similar livestock project? Is the proposal for bonding simply a discriminatory mechanism meant to impose one's own beliefs on a community, when the existing rigorous and public regulatory review might determine that the project actually does meet existing and accepted community standards for environmental risk?
Bion follows the rules everywhere we do business. That's why our demonstration in Texas (subject to strict third party peer-review) was such a success. That's why one of the leading dairy farmers in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, is installing our technology as a permanent solution to airborne and land-applied environmental impacts from his dairy herd, a portion of which is impacting the Chesapeake Bay. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection conservatively estimates that based upon Bion's Texas demonstration installation, the Pennsylvania installation will result in sufficient reduction to nitrogen loadings to the Chesapeake Bay by certify 110 lbs per cow/year of nitrogen reduction credits. Based upon the cost to taxpayers to mitigate this nitrogen loading to the Chesapeake Bay downstream (blended projected municipal and storm water treatment cost of $40 per lbs / per year) the Bion installation is projected to save taxpayers $4,400 per cow/per year.
Bion believes that economic sustainability cannot be achieved without environmental sustainability. The net effect of Bion's business model is to increase net family farm income, by providing viable and fair markets to the local farm community that will not depend on fad markets and fickle consumer tastes. This will be especially true for small livestock producers, who can now look at stable alternative markets for their farm's crops, rather than being forced to raise livestock to create their own market for them.
- Additionally, will the bond be enough to cover all residents of affected areas regarding their being provided pure water forever (which is about as long as contaminated aquifers will need to clean themselves)? How much money do you estimate that is and how have you calculated it?
The issue of bonding is addressed above. One can either provide specifics for a bonding proposal and answer the questions raised, or one can continue to use fear to promote an agenda. Our experience is that people know the goods when they see the goods, and we are proposing a green jobs opportunity that will be permitted and subject to enforcement by the regulatory authorities. That is what government is empowered to do-adopt environmental standards that safeguard the community, and have the enforcement power to insure that they are adhered to.
- Also, will the bond cover property devaluation of individuals' homes resulting from this project? How have you estimated this cost?
Bion believes that property devaluation is most commonly the direct consequence of poor economic conditions, lack of economic development, serious underemployment, and regional stagnation from underutilization of available resources. We believe increased economic activity that meets community environmental standards, especially when associated with direct and indirect employment and the establishment of long-term, stable markets for agricultural production from existing underutilized regional farm assets, will result in an overall increase to property values throughout the community.
- Are you planning to pursue a PILOT agreement or pay taxes on an ongoing basis, based on prevailing tax rates? Why?
The issue of creating jobs in rural America and upstate New York has been a focus of federal and state programs for decades. Bion is proposing a clean green project that will add to the existing agricultural economy in Oswego County, and as such will apply for available support from any local, state and federal programs for which it qualifies. Bion will seek assistance programs that will enhance the financial value of the project, and therefore its long-term benefits to the community. The proposed project is not a charity, and its ability to compete in the marketplace against established players who have all fully participated in existing public programs to support economic development requires that we do so. The ability to compensate local employees and contribute to the costs of state government depend upon its remaining profitable.
- Who will you hire to work at non-professional level jobs? What actions will you take to guarantee that no illegal immigrants are hired? (This is a widespread practice in the meatpacking industry, which is why it is being asked.)
The use of illegal immigrants is regrettably a widespread practice across many industries, but is especially so at livestock operations as well as beef processing plants. Bion fully expects to fill its positions as individual skill sets match job requirements from within the local and regional workforce, presently experiencing a very high rate of unemployment.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has programs and tools that employers can use (i.e. E-Merge) to check the legal documents and status of prospective workers. Bion will work closely with ICE to ensure that all workers employed by project activities are legal. Bion has also stated on numerous occasions that all full-time positions will carry a benefit package including health benefits.
- If you do not hire illegal -and cheap-labor, how do you plan to be competitive with those who do?
We do not believe that to be competitive one must utilize cheap illegal labor! It is exactly that kind of thinking that creates a justification for that activity in some peoples' minds. This is a year-round economic activity that requires a full-time dedicated work force. This project automates each activity to the extent possible, and that reduces the need for unskilled labor and increases the need for skilled and trained individuals. Even job functions that may seem unskilled will require a more highly skilled and dedicated employee than traditional competitors.
Competitive labor rates have been taken into account in all financial projections. Bion expects that adequate labor will be available at fair, competitive wages. Further, we anticipate that the advantages of new, state-of-the-art facilities, integrated and located in the context of the overall proposed project, will improve productivity in ways that will help to offset increased compensation paid to a more skilled work force.
- The plan to mitigate odor by enclosing cattle in covered barns -- 2-acres each, if I recall what I read -- is specious. Without ventilation, the animals will overheat and the work environment for humans will be awful; when ventilated the ventillation ari must travel outside the shed. Where is the odor mitigation? Are you planning to use charcoal filters to clean all ventilation air?
The buildings will be designed for optimum "natural" ventilation. Similar facilities exist throughout the U.S., and are comfortable (not too hot or cold) during all seasons. This is one reason that cattle grow more rapidly and efficiently in this type of sheltered housing. Bion's facilities will make it possible to collect waste for treatment several times per day. That practice is not used at other existing, successful animal production facilities and is an important factor in mitigating odor while promoting healthful conditions for the cattle. There will be no need to filter the air.
- What percentage of your gross revenues will be reinvested in/donated to the local economy? (This is in addition to taxes and includes purchase of supplies, cultural and quality-of-life activities, as well as such enterprises as local food pantries.) How much is that in dollars per year?
Bion looks forward to being a fully participating and contributing corporate partner with the community for many years to come.
- An environmentally sustainable cattle facility sounds intriguing, but how would it work?
A: Bion's proposed sustainable cattle facility for Oswego County in upstate New York will employ a patented and demonstrated comprehensive waste treatment technology that separates livestock waste into its parts, uses some as fuel, while turning the vast majority of its nutrients into either benign N2 gas (the major constituent of the air we breathe) or into a non-soluble form of nitrogen and phosphorus that is significantly less subject to leaching from farm fields to both surface and ground water than the manure being treated.
It also reduces odor and air emissions, including ammonia (which quickly falls out of the air and pollutes water and soil), hydrogen sulfide, Volatile Organic Compounds, and methane, a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming.
This waste treatment system has been proven on a commercial dairy in Texas and is now about to be installed on a major dairy in Pennsylvania's Lancaster County.
- Q: There is so much talk about large-scale animal feedlots being bad for the environment. Why would this not also be true for the facility in Oswego County?
A: As described above, advances in environmental technology make it possible to treat livestock waste while producing renewable energy, essentially transforming a pollutant into a benefit. This is only economically feasible, however, if done on a large enough scale. The use of Bion's proven waste treatment technology turns on its head everything we thought we knew about farm pollution: small farms actually can't afford adequate waste treatment, whereas larger centralized facilities can find it economical to invest in the new technology that not only neutralizes the pollution but actually puts it to good use.
- Q: This project is supposed to create 300 to 600 local jobs. How does the community know that these jobs will not be filled by migrant workers or illegal aliens, or that this employment will not come at the cost of other local jobs at the region's small independent farms?
Project economic activity --both in construction and operation-- will benefit the region's economy while creating a large number of non-transferable, skilled and semi-skilled jobs for members of the community. Bion's projection for 600 permanent, direct jobs (full project build out) with a total annual compensation of $21 million and with a substantial number of associated indirect jobs generated, has been concluded through independent economic assessments. The skills required for the vast majority of these jobs do not lend themselves to an alien labor pool, illegal or not. Rather Bion anticipates that they will be filled by individuals from the existing skilled labor force in place within the region's agricultural and industrial economy. To be clear, this enterprise will require that all employees be legal and that health insurance will be provided so that employees can be fully contributing members of the local community. The resulting job opportunities will serve to reverse the region's current high rate of unemployment.
Regarding the question of a possible negative impact on other local jobs at the region's existing farms, it is important to recognize that the Oswego Cattle Facility's beef production will be competing in what is really a national and international market. Just about every national meat packer ships into the same market with more than 50 million people. Meanwhile, the marketplace is full of examples in which innovative endeavors (such as the sustainable finishing facility in Oswego) establish a market for uncommon product attributes sought and valued by the consumer (environmentally sustainable beef) that results in opening up previously non-existent opportunities for many smaller producers. At the same time, Bion's project will be responsible for creating a long-term local/regional market for feeder stock and other agricultural inputs to the great advantage and profitability of many local and regional farm operations.
- Q: How do we know this facility will comply with environmental laws?
The resolution recently passed by the Town of Schroeppel expresses their intent to work with Bion Environmental Technologies to develop the facility subject to the successful completion of rigorous environmental review by the New York Department of Environmental Conservation and other agencies, emphasizing protection of water and other environmental resources. As the Schroeppel resolution says: "[D]evelopment of the Bion project shall be subject to all necessary due diligence including adherence to all pertinent federal, state, and local laws, rules, and regulations including those related to land use control and planning and environmental protection."
- Q: How can something be "sustainable" if it requires fossil fuel for shipping and energy, and uses corn as animal feed and ethanol production?
A: This facility will improve greatly on existing methods of supplying Americans with the steaks and cheeseburgers they love, by dramatically lowering the environmental footprint of conventional agriculture - both small-scale and large-scale- in which most pollution and livestock waste currently escapes untreated. As much as possible, corn for the Oswego facility will be sourced from upstate New York farmers, supporting the local economy. It is realistic to expect, however, that the vast majority of corn will be shipped in by boat from the Midwest, offering greater efficiency and lowering our carbon footprint compared to other shipping modes. The environmentally certified beef and ethanol that the facility will produce will be consumed in relatively close by markets around the Northeast rather than having to be shipped from the Midwest, a further energy savings. Cellulose in the waste stream will be separated out and used as fuel to offset the traditional use of fossil fuels in distilling ethanol. That further reduces the overall carbon footprint.
A lifecycle assessment of Bion's sustainable cattle facility in Oswego, with its regional production of meat produced relatively close to its markets (as opposed to refrigerated shipments of boxed beef from processing facilities in the Midwest) will show an overall net reduction in energy use as compared to existing operations and document the production of greenhouse gas "carbon credits" (another environmental benefit of the Oswego facility).
Source: What the concept of sustainability desperately needs is a working definition that can be rigorously applied. A recent paper entitled "Demystifying the Environmental Sustainability of Food Production" (http://wsu.academia.edu/documents/0046/7264/2009_Cornell_Nutrition_Conference_Capper_et_al.pdf 
) published by scientists at Washington State University, Elanco Animal Health and Cornell University points out that "all food production has an impact" and therefore "it is essential to use a standardized assessment tool" when measuring environmental impact, one that reflects impact per functional unit of food, i.e. units of environmental impact per pound of meat or gallon of milk, "recognizing that in the end, the purpose of agricultural activity is to produce food for consumption and it must meet the volume needs of the marketplace."
Applying this standard to agricultural practices that are typically assumed to be "sustainable" reveals that despite inputs being relatively low for the traditional farm scenario, the environmental impacts of traditional farms (including organic) are exceedingly high-particularly when measured on a per unit of food production basis. Productivity turns out to be an important component of both environmental and economic sustainability. Bion's Oswego approach to raising cattle for the marketplace will prove to have a significantly lower environmental impact per unit of food delivered than other production approaches, whether they appear to be more sustainable or not.
- Q: Isn't it better to graze cattle on grass pastures?
A: That may be a good way to feed some cattle, but it doesn't address the wastes that all cattle produce in large quantities, or the demands of feeding America's 300 million people. "Sustainability" may conjure up a picture of pastoral tranquility --a small number of dairy or beef cattle quietly grazing in a pasture with a red barn in the background. Unfortunately, there are two problems with this picture. The first is that it isn't capable of actually feeding large numbers of people at a price they can afford. Being economically viable is an essential part of being sustainable. Second, despite their benign appearance, the reality of cattle and dairy cows in pasture is that environmental impacts from each animal are significantly greater than that of an animal housed in a treatment system like Bion planned sustainable cattle facility in Oswego.
Source: The American Society of Agricultural Engineers (ASAE), considered to be the definitive source for information on production livestock manure characteristics, volume and content, published a document entitled "Manure Production and Characteristics" in March 2005. According to ASAE data, a lactating dairy cow will void 0.99 lb of nitrogen and 0.17 lb per day of phosphorus. On that basis, every dairy cow-whether in a barn or on pasture-will void about 360 lb of nitrogen and about 60 lb of phosphorus per year. For the cow on pasture, that entire load is released to the environment, with more than 50% of that nitrogen lost to air in the form of ammonia and then redeposited as soluble nitrogen compounds into the downwind environment. According to ASAE, a finished steer will void about 15 lb per day of solids including 0.42 lb per day of nitrogen and 0.097 lb per day of phosphorus (over 100 lb per year of nitrogen and 25 lb per year of phosphorus per head) for cattle on feed! For the animal on pasture, these releases are directly voided into the environment. Despite a superficial appearance of sustainability, the resulting pollution is far more expensive to control.
- Q: Don't large amounts of cattle require more antibiotics, which are bad for people when they get into our food and water?
A: Actually, by implementing a waste treatment technology that involves the collection of manure several times a day and providing animals with housing with more sanitary conditions, the Oswego Cattle Facility will eliminate the need for non-therapeutic use of antibiotics by dramatically reducing the spread of disease. This new option will be good news for everyone who eats meat.
- Q: Locally sourced food is hot right now. Will the Oswego Cattle Facility's products qualify, since they'll be marketed within a 300-mile radius of the facility, and will that create unfair competition for independent local farmers?
A: Upstate New York production of beef for market in New York and other Northeastern population centers can legitimately be described as local or regional production, particularly as the alternative is Midwest sources that presently supply the vast majority of the beef for the Northeast and therefore represent the real competitor for market share within the region. Beef products from the Oswego facility may well become available in upstate New York, but that is not certain.
- Q: Wasn't this project supposed to be built in St. Lawrence County before the financial crisis, and now that credit markets are loosening up shouldn't it be built there instead?
A: Obtaining $200 million in capital is always an issue of timing and market, and Bion has made a commitment to Oswego. The good news is that the project has survived a period when many significant financial institutions have gone out of business, which demonstrates its value.
- Q: Will local, state, or federal assistance allocated to the Oswego County facility on the basis of its environmental sustainability reduce funding available to independent farmers?
A: Bion's sustainable cattle facility in Oswego will not qualify for most economic programs that existing agricultural producers access, as they have been expressly created for small producers.
- Q: Has this technology been proven on such a large scale?
A: Each of the barns in the proposed new facility will generate about as much cattle manure as the operation in Texas at which Bion Environmental Technologies proved this technology. A 1,200-milk cow operation produces the equivalent waste of a cattle finishing operation for 4,000 beef cattle. The Oswego project finishing operation will be comprised of several separate facilities consisting of a series of barns each with a similar size waste stream for treatment as the commercial dairy in Texas. The cattle won't be under one roof in one place and the waste loads will be relatively close to those already successfully treated by the technology.
Meanwhile, Bion has consistently recommended that Oswego community further confirm its patented biological waste treatment process based upon rigorous demonstration of performance at its 1,200-milker Kreider Farms installation in Lancaster, PA. Performance of the installation will be independently monitored by a team of scientists and regulatory officials including representatives from both Cornell University and the local community serving to provide additional scientifically based environmental assessments for livestock waste being treated by a Bion waste treatment system.
- Q: The Oswego facility will use a closed-loop process in which corn byproducts from the ethanol production process get reused as cattle feed. Is that safe? Wouldn't grass-fed cattle be more healthy and desirable?
A: Today 95+% of all beef in the U.S. market is "grain-fed," with approximately half using distiller grains. Almost all of the exported beef is grain-fed.
Actually, a recent study conducted by scientists at Texas A&M has shown specific heart health benefits associated with consumption of grain fed beef that do not exist for grass fed beef. This study notwithstanding, there is really no compelling scientific evidence to definitively state that either grass fed or grain fed cattle produce a healthier beef product.
In regard to a potential relationship between E. coli and the use of distiller grains in the cattle ration, while there are indeed some studies that indicate a higher incidence of E. coli associated with the use of distiller grains, the larger body of rigorous studies have either not found such a relationship or directly contradict that position, concluding that there is no relationship between the incidence of E. coli and distiller grains.
The reality is that E. coli is a ubiquitous pathogen in the food supply and yes, it certainly can be found in some beef cattle-regardless of their feed. This isn't anything new and has been addressed at meat processing and packing facilities that routinely monitor for these potential effects, as they have instituted FDA procedures and safe food handling protocols to address any negative health effects related to these and other pathogens. These programs and protocols will certainly be a critical part of standard operating procedures for anyone processing beef from Bion's sustainable cattle facility in Oswego County.
Aside from the reality that grass-fed beef has a higher negative environmental impact on a per unit of food basis as discussed earlier, the less than one-twentieth of the domestic market filled by "grass-fed" beef represents a classic niche market, and a relatively high-priced one at that. That demand can be expected to continue, and New York's small-scale independent producers can be expected to do well in supplying it.
However, it is inconceivable that the requirements of the marketplace could be met through large-scale build out of grass-fed cattle facilities and the price point would be unaffordable to most consumers -and certainly not if these operations had to comprehensively treat their waste as the Oswego facility will do to avoid significant impacts to the environment.
-
Q: In 1999, the Illinois EPA raised concerns over the odor associated with a hog operation. What were the implications of this occurrence?
A: Bion Environmental Technologies installed a first-generation waste treatment system on a sow farm in Illinois in the late 1990's. By agreement, the farm owners assumed responsibility to maintain and operate the waste treatment system in accordance with specifications and protocols provided by Bion. The farm owners failed to do so, resulting in odor emanating from the hog farm. When the Illinois EPA brought suit against the farm and Bion, we made a business decision to cooperate with the Illinois EPA and paid a nominal fine without a determination of guilt.
Bion's experience in Illinois was a primary reason for our decision to cease licensing our systems and technology to farmers unless Bion would have the ability to exercise control of system operations. As a consequence, Bion ceased licensing of its first generation systems and focused its resources on the development of a next generation waste treatment system and its integration into a technology platform capable of generating renewable energy from the livestock waste stream being treated.
As a result, Bion has developed a technology platform capable of treating the wastes from large scale facilities and generating the cash flow required to support the use of professional staff to monitor, maintain and operate Bion's biological waste treatment systems. This will be the case in the proposed Oswego project.
According to a study based on a recent generation Bion system conducted by Dr. Philip Hopke, Director of Clarkson University's Center for the Environment, the odor impact of one Bion module with 14,000 beef cattle will be minimal—roughly equivalent to that of an average 400-milker dairy that does not spread manure. When correctly sited and professionally operated, Bion’s systems successfully address the concern for odors related to livestock operations.
Home
Project Overview
Bion Website
Read Project Overview
Post Questions & Comments