Covering Open slurry tank

Freejin

Hi All

I have an open slurry tank , approx 18 feet wide and 80 feet long It has a spine wall in the middle. I know all tanks will have to be covered by 2030, but even in the short term am looking to get this covered to help boost storage. I currently don't have a need to have a shed over it as have adequate housing elsewhere on the farm. Are there any options to cover it without a roof?

Say my name

Freejin wrote: »

Hi All

I have an open slurry tank , approx 18 feet wide and 80 feet long It has a spine wall in the middle. I know all tanks will have to be covered by 2030, but even in the short term am looking to get this covered to help boost storage. I currently don't have a need to have a shed over it as have adequate housing elsewhere on the farm. Are there any options to cover it without a roof?

You can get solid concrete slats/slabs I presume?
I'm saying that just because I put in a precast tank with a solid cover on it that tidyed up a yard.

Be a shame though not to go with slats and have the roof housing option there for future.

JohnChadwick

Would having slats and no roof mean it'd still fill with rainwater though?

timple23

How are lads going to cover overground stores? Some sort of tarp?

Dakota Dan

JohnChadwick wrote: »

Would having slats and no roof mean it'd still fill with rainwater though?

Put cladding on top of the slats.

Dakota Dan

timple23 wrote: »

How are lads going to cover overground stores? Some sort of tarp?

I priced cladding for an open tank back in 2014, 40’x60’ tank, €15k and tff gd at was just the cladding I’d have to put up frame work at my own expense. You’d build a decent slatted tank for that including slats. Will existing open tanks have to be covered or is it just newly built tanks?

Ford4life

So open lagoons should be avoided so pretty much if you are putting in extra storage, how would you cover say a 60x60 tank? Would you just have to roof it?

JohnChadwick

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Put cladding on top of the slats.

Like a roof then

Jb1989

JohnChadwick wrote: »

Like a roof then

Taraplin cover with sandbags around it over the slats when not required.

mengele

What is the thinking behind making it law to have them covered? Surely a bit of water is no harm going into them once you have enough storage?

richie123

mengele wrote: »

What is the thinking behind making it law to have them covered? Surely a bit of water is no harm going into them once you have enough

More time and diesel burned to agitate slurry when all tanks are covered.maddness I think.
The emissions s saved covering tanks will be more than offset by emissions caused by the extra time and diesel burned to agitate slurry not to mind drawing water.

White Clover

richie123 wrote: »

mengele wrote: »

What is the thinking behind making it law to have them covered? Surely a bit of water is no harm going into them once you have enough

More time and diesel burned to agitate slurry when all tanks are covered.maddness I think.
The emissions s saved covering tanks will be more than offset by emissions caused by the extra time and diesel burned to agitate slurry not to mind drawing water.

Same thing with dribble bars and trailing shoes. Extra hp required to pull the tank equates to more diesel being burned to do the same job.

148multi

mengele wrote: »

What is the thinking behind making it law to have them covered? Surely a bit of water is no harm going into them once you have enough storage?

Reducing soiled water, don't forget in an open tank you need storage for rain water plus freeboard.

richie123

148multi wrote: »

Reducing soiled water, don't forget in an open tank you need storage for rain water plus freeboard.

Yes not so much a bad thing though.
On larger dairy farms that have the space a lagoon sized to take rain water into account is a super investment.
5 times less cost with minimal agitation and making better use of unbilical systems which are the fastest way to spread a lot of slurry.
Which then absorbs into the ground better due to its watery content especially in dryer years.
Covering tanks is not the answer.more storage is.

_Brian

Wonder will there be grant aid available to cover these ?

Dakota Dan

JohnChadwick wrote: »

Like a roof then

Without the expense of a shed, secondhand cladding would be cheaper.

148multi

richie123 wrote: »

Yes not so much a bad thing though.
On larger dairy farms that have the space a lagoon sized to take rain water into account is a super investment.
5 times less cost with minimal agitation and making better use of unbilical systems which are the fastest way to spread a lot of slurry.
Which then absorbs into the ground better due to its watery content especially in dryer years.
Covering tanks is not the answer.more storage is.

Not for or against watery slurry, it definitely gets better absorbed by soil and crop quicker and better.
There's a brilliant farmer beside me, uses watery slurry, but whenever he drops a plough you might see 5 gulls.

Bass Reeves

TBH lagoons were another cheap option that have backfired. Along with uncovered cubicles they were the darlings of those advocating the NZ model in Ireland.

Why cover lagoons and external tanks. Our rainfall is increasing and varies more every year. Lagoons are more of an issue than open or overground tanks as area at top is much larger. A lagoon storage can take as much rainwater as slurry depending on slope and depth. Rainfall also varies depending on area of the country from about 800mm to over two meters.

When you factor this into account along with rising rainfall amounts there is enough reasons to look for external tanks and especially lagoons to be covered.

Dakota Dan

Bass Reeves wrote: »

TBH lagoons were another cheap option that have backfired. Along with uncovered cubicles they were the darlings of those advocating the NZ model in Ireland.

Why cover lagoons and external tanks. Our rainfall is increasing and varies more every year. Lagoons are more of an issue than open or overground tanks as area at top is much larger. A lagoon storage can take as much rainwater as slurry depending on slope and depth. Rainfall also varies depending on area of the country from about 800mm to over two meters.

When you factor this into account along with rising rainfall amounts there is enough reasons to look for external tanks and especially lagoons to be covered.

How would you go about covering a 1m gallon lagoon? There is some sort of floating cover but I doubt it would keep all rain water out if the level of slurry is below the top of the tank.





















/

Bass Reeves

Dakota Dan wrote: »

How would you go about covering a 1m gallon lagoon? There is some sort of floating cover but I doubt it would keep all rain water out if the level of slurry is below the top of the tank.

/

It shouldn't have been put in originally. But lads could not be told. No cheapest option was the answer. I remember 6+ years ago debating this and outside cubicles on this forum. I and others made the point that these would all have to be covered However lads were of the opinion that these were the way to go to cost per cow down and if you had to cover in 15+ years time you be in a better place financially to do it then. In reality the lad with that size lagoon will either have to go with a new covered concrete or overground steel tank.

It was the same with woodchip pads but Greenfields advocated it and anybody saying different was wrong. WTF do you think Greenfields was closed down by Glanbia over a year ago. The chickens had come home to roost.

The mantra was develop out of cashflow. Well lads will be developing out of cashflow for another few years because of that.

It's exactly the same argument going on with the quality of calf now, with stocking on milking platforms. Read yesterday's FI with regard to SFP changes coming down the line. Lads do not want to hear about anything that will be a negative down the road

richie123

148multi wrote: »

Not for or against watery slurry, it definitely gets better absorbed by soil and crop quicker and better.
There's a brilliant farmer beside me, uses watery slurry, but whenever he drops a plough you might see 5 gulls.

And you think that has nothing to do with a continuous tillage system or the 6 bags of fertiliser used year after year or pesticides sprayed maybe 4 or 5 runs year after year ??

richie123

Bass Reeves wrote: »

It shouldn't have been put in originally. But lads could not be told. No cheapest option was the answer. I remember 6+ years ago debating this and outside cubicles on this forum. I and others made the point that these would all have to be covered However lads were of the opinion that these were the way to go to cost per cow down and if you had to cover in 15+ years time you be in a better place financially to do it then. In reality the lad with that size lagoon will either have to go with a new covered concrete or overground steel tank.

It was the same with woodchip pads but Greenfields advocated it and anybody saying different was wrong. WTF do you think Greenfields was closed down by Glanbia over a year ago. The chickens had come home to roost.

The mantra was develop out of cashflow. Well lads will be developing out of cashflow for another few years because of that.

It's exactly the same argument going on with the quality of calf now, with stocking on milking platforms. Read yesterday's FI with regard to SFP changes coming down the line. Lads do not want to hear about anything that will be a negative down the road

Will you explain your reasoning behind covering slurry stores ?

Bass Reeves

richie123 wrote: »

Will you explain your reasoning behind covering slurry stores ?

It not my reasoning Richie. It the department's reasoning. Rainfall is too variable in Ireland. Most regulations are one fit all. First day there was no accessment done on sites regarding rainfall. This would be a minimum EIA now. Because of this and with increasing rainfall pollution risk is higher. Alot of dairy farmers are letting dairy washings and maybe covered yard washings into these tanks.

Because if this there is too many variables. You only have to look around you in general dairy farmers are first out in spring getting slurry spreads and last out in Autumn emptying tanks especially those with uncovered tanks. Why do you think many invest in tankers because of so called contractor issues. By forcing dairy farmers with plenty of money from the white gold to do this you change an issue with many variables into one with fixed variable's.

I am not really buying the diesel savings on agitation either. These large lagoons would take some agitating, many are impossible to empty completely so so also reduces capacity. You are also maybe carrying 20-30,% extra loads out to spread not to mind autum emptying of what is virtually dirty water

Roofing and these and out door cubicles was always on the cards lads just ignored the signs

Grueller

Will collecting yards need to be covered so if they are slatted?

Bass Reeves

Grueller wrote: »

Will collecting yards need to be covered so if they are slatted?

There was a move in the last eighteen months to class runoff collecting yards as slurry. I am not sure where this ended up. But I imagine that over times that you will not be able to spread during the closed period.

GrasstoMilk

Bass Reeves wrote: »

It shouldn't have been put in originally. But lads could not be told. No cheapest option was the answer. I remember 6+ years ago debating this and outside cubicles on this forum. I and others made the point that these would all have to be covered However lads were of the opinion that these were the way to go to cost per cow down and if you had to cover in 15+ years time you be in a better place financially to do it then. In reality the lad with that size lagoon will either have to go with a new covered concrete or overground steel tank.

It was the same with woodchip pads but Greenfields advocated it and anybody saying different was wrong. WTF do you think Greenfields was closed down by Glanbia over a year ago. The chickens had come home to roost.

The mantra was develop out of cashflow. Well lads will be developing out of cashflow for another few years because of that.

It's exactly the same argument going on with the quality of calf now, with stocking on milking platforms. Read yesterday's FI with regard to SFP changes coming down the line. Lads do not want to hear about anything that will be a negative down the road

How do you eat an elephant bass?

We're currently roofing our topless cubicles here, and I know plenty you are going too to
Not many farms I know that could afford to build every single little thing they needed day one
We've been doing our job over 3 years, if I was to try pay for it all the one year it still wouldn't be done

So am I to stay with the poor set up I had costing me production and cow comfort?

I was happy with the outdoor cubicles and we're really only roofing them for storage reasons

I've no issues with on going cap ex, and I'm one of the many doing it, I can't see why you do abd why you've such a bee in your bonnet these days about dairy

On greenfields, that project would never have gotten off the ground if they spent the 200k on the roof,
It was a valuable project with lessons learned both sides

Did you have your farm set up the way you have it now the first year you started?
I'd doubt it

Mooooo

Parlour washings are determined by the level of DM in it. Generally if the same area is being used for buffer feeding etc it'll be put down as slurry regardless.

Bass Reeves

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

How do you eat an elephant bass?

We're currently roofing our topless cubicles here, and I know plenty you are going too to
Not many farms I know that could afford to build every single little thing they needed day one
We've been doing our job over 3 years, if I was to try pay for it all the one year it still wouldn't be done

So am I to stay with the poor set up I had costing me production and cow comfort?

I was happy with the outdoor cubicles and we're really only roofing them for storage reasons

I've no issues with on going cap ex, and I'm one of the many doing it, I can't see why you do abd why you've such a bee in your bonnet these days about dairy

On greenfields, that project would never have gotten off the ground if they spent the 200k on the roof,
It was a valuable project with lessons learned both sides

Did you have your farm set up the way you have it now the first year you started?
I'd doubt it

I agree to an extent with you GtM, however some lads model was based entirely on never developing the system any further.

I do not have a vee in my bonnet about dairy but I see a lot of lads being lead down the path without any longer term look at regulation that is definitely coming down the line. For some what may seem viable now may be unviable in 15-20years time

I worked in a technology area l my life and change of systems and processes was constant. The pace actually got faster as time went on change never stopped.

Farming is facing that change and milk production more than any other sector. However many in the sector have there head in the sand . Maybe I am wrong maybe nothing will change however the indications are that change will be rapid and will cost a lot over the next 10years.

It a pincer movement between carbon and environmental regulations as well as other issues that will add cost to the system. There is one thing we can be sure of that cost will not be reflected in milk prices

Base price

_Brian wrote: »

Wonder will there be grant aid available to cover these ?

I would think so considering they were originally required to have planning permission in order to gain grant approval which at the time never mentioned covering. Put it this, our 350k gallon lagoon ain't going to be covered unless we receive a grant to do so.

Mooooo

Once something becomes a legal requirement I don't think grants can be given. For example grants for LESS are no longer applicable to those in derogation as it is a requirement to now use LESS if in dero

richie123

Bass Reeves wrote: »

It not my reasoning Richie. It the department's reasoning. Rainfall is too variable in Ireland. Most regulations are one fit all. First day there was no accessment done on sites regarding rainfall. This would be a minimum EIA now. Because of this and with increasing rainfall pollution risk is higher. Alot of dairy farmers are letting dairy washings and maybe covered yard washings into these tanks.

Because if this there is too many variables. You only have to look around you in general dairy farmers are first out in spring getting slurry spreads and last out in Autumn emptying tanks especially those with uncovered tanks. Why do you think many invest in tankers because of so called contractor issues. By forcing dairy farmers with plenty of money from the white gold to do this you change an issue with many variables into one with fixed variable's.

I am not really buying the diesel savings on agitation either. These large lagoons would take some agitating, many are impossible to empty completely so so also reduces capacity. You are also maybe carrying 20-30,% extra loads out to spread not to mind autum emptying of what is virtually dirty water

Roofing and these and out door cubicles was always on the cards lads just ignored the signs

In fairness l can't disagree with u there on those points.

K.G.

Back in 07/ 08 we flirted with pad/lagoon but decide to go under ground concrete tank with a cubicle house on top.we also added some topless cubicles in 2017.one of the main reasons for going under house tank was all our silage comes from outside blocks and we weren't signing up for drawing rainwater around the country.the last few weeks have really proved to us what we already knew that when it rains heavy the tanks fly up so the roof is going on the cubicles this year.it was always in the plan and rails are there so it was always just paying as we go.with a fairly large tank in divisions we find we can just mix enough for a day or 2 spreading and then pump the dairy washings tank as the summer goes on so we never have much problem agitating .at this stage we.are happy with what we have think its as future proof as you can get and the house gives the option of winter molking if it becomes a viable option.the roof is cheap when you consider the animal and rain water storage savings
One of the hidden issues is lagoons are relying on umblical spreading to make them stack up.the downside is this can lead to fertility loading on the home block and nutrients not being recycled onto the ground it came from.also they kind need a big bang approach with slurry spreading which increases risk.bottom line we just get too much rain to be storing and spreading it needlessly

_Brian

Base price wrote: »

I would think so considering they were originally required to have planning permission in order to gain grant approval which at the time never mentioned covering. Put it this, our 350k gallon lagoon ain't going to be covered unless we receive a grant to do so.

Same for our open pit. It’s been thee 45 years without being covered. If they want it covered they can pay for the roof so.

Gillespy

They can pay for the whole roof. Keep hearing how cheap money is to borrow. Chickens are only coming home to roost because they're not being stopped. Let me guess, new science? Grave concern for the enviroment? No not that, these people hate you and everything you do on your farm every day. Spend best part of €100k on more storage, a big roof and a trailing shoe slurry tanker for the privilege of doing it all again in ten years time in order to comply with whatever they think of next.

Ban the building of new open slurry stores if you want, leave the rest alone if they're compiling and get a new hobby.

Base price

_Brian wrote: »

Same for our open pit. It’s been thee 45 years without being covered. If they want it covered they can pay for the roof so.

Stand corrected, but AFAIK there can't be retrospective planning legislation.

Bass Reeves

Gillespy wrote: »

They can pay for the whole roof. Keep hearing how cheap money is to borrow. Chickens are only coming home to roost because they're not being stopped. Let me guess, new science? Grave concern for the enviroment? No not that, these people hate you and everything you do on your farm every day. Spend best part of €100k on more storage, a big roof and a trailing shoe slurry tanker for the privilege of doing it all again in ten years time in order to comply with whatever they think of next.

Ban the building of new open slurry stores if you want, leave the rest alone if they're compiling and get a new hobby.

Base price wrote: »

Stand corrected, but AFAIK there can't be retrospective planning legislation.

Planning is for the unit the first day, regulation decided the use of the unit. Any commercial premises can and is regulated. The regulation has been put in place. All uncovered slurry stores whether tanks or lagoons have to be covered by 2030. That is it. As it is regulation they do not have to grant assist. However some may get around this if the tank is not used to hold stock already. Those with lagoons may opt to build a slatted unit in the lagoon opening.

However there are two catches. First if there is adequate housing for numbers already on the platform then grant assistance or planning may be refused. The other catch is TAMS are for limited amounts in each scheme. Larger projects will struggle under TAMS rules and any grant is limited to 32k maximum in present scheme next replacement scheme whatever name it will have will be similar. As well it will limit larger farmers capacity to get grant aid for other projects.

Regulation is exactly that. Every business area is regulated. If by 2030 your store is not covered both the council and EPA in the case of dairy farmers who are in derogation will be onto to you. Your will fail your Board via inspection whether it is beef or milk. You will have limited or no outlet for your products. You may be bought screaming and kicking to do it but do it you will have to.

_Brian

Was on a farm recently that had a 5% penalty applied after cross compliance inspection.

Tell ya lads. There seems to be an awful lot I’d be worrying about that makes no difference at all only to my own pride in a half nice workspace.

We will sit tight on the open tank. Don’t need more slatted space or shed space in general. If we’re pushed to it I’d think of backfilling 2/3 of it and cover the end, back filled section could just store stacked bales of silage.

timple23

Is the purpose of these new regulations to stop rainfall going into tanks or are they related to emissions?

If they are related to rainfall, it seems pointless if farmers have water/runoff from yards going into their tanks.

Wildsurfer

I think the problem with open tanks is methane emissions due to wind disturbance of surface of slurry. Slatted tanks that presently have no roof wont need to be covered

JohnChadwick

If a farmer decides to cover the open tank with slats and a shed - will he need planning permission?

alps

Floating covers are a very simple and cost effective solution here. They are common place in effluent plants and AD plants. Rainwater can be kept off the cover by a sump pump or left on the cover for long periods where evaporation removes something like 2/3s of what falls on it.

Evaporation rates are high as well from uncovered lagoons where a crust is not allowed to develop.

richie123

alps wrote: »

Floating covers are a very simple and cost effective solution here. They are common place in effluent plants and AD plants. Rainwater can be kept off the cover by a sump pump or left on the cover for long periods where evaporation removes something like 2/3s of what falls on it.

Evaporation rates are high as well from uncovered lagoons where a crust is not allowed to develop.

Never even thought of that solution is there anywhere you of using that system ?

alps

richie123 wrote: »

Never even thought of that solution is there anywhere you of using that system ?

AD plant in Timoleague has them. The effluent from the plant has come through a pasturiser before going tonthe lagoon, so it would have a certain amount of heat, which would help with the evaporation.

I've seen one on a slurry lagoon on an organic dairy farm in the UK..

richie123

alps wrote: »

AD plant in Timoleague has them. The effluent from the plant has come through a pasturiser before going tonthe lagoon, so it would have a certain amount of heat, which would help with the evaporation.

I've seen one on a slurry lagoon on an organic dairy farm in the UK..

I'm guessing its based around the same principle as a swimming pool cover ?
Drawback is its cost would probably be as much as putting up a shed over the lagoon?

alps

richie123 wrote: »

I'm guessing its based around the same principle as a swimming pool cover ?
Drawback is its cost would probably be as much as putting up a shed over the lagoon?

It's not

And it wouldn't..

😉

Donald Trump

Waste of time worrying about covering a slurry tower when feeding and collecting yards are uncovered.


Surely health and safety issues with gases as well for when you go to take off the cover?

richie123

Donald Trump wrote: »

Waste of time worrying about covering a slurry tower when feeding and collecting yards are uncovered.


Surely health and safety issues with gases as well for when you go to take off the cover?

Well I think its a given feeding and collecting will have to be covered no matter what.