An energy and greenhouse gas comparison of centralised biogas production with road haulage of pig slurry, and decentralised biogas production with biogas transportation in a low-pressure pipe network

Abstract For bioenergy installations producing heat, the minimum required GHG savings will be 85% from 2026. This is significant and a considerable challenge for biogas systems. This paper investigates use of biogas from pig farms at a nearby milk processing facility, a large energy user. The paper examines minimisation of greenhouse gas (GHG) associated with plant layout and in particular in transporting slurry by road to a large centralised anaerobic digestion (CAD) facility or transporting biogas by low pressure pipe from decentralised anaerobic digestion (DAD) at the pig farms. In detail four scenarios were assessed: “CAD1” road transport of slurry to a CAD located at the biogas end user (milk processing facility); “CAD2” transport of biogas by pipeline from an optimally located CAD located a distance from the biogas end user; “DAD1” DAD with biogas transportation in a biogas pipe network; and “DAD2” DAD with biogas transportation via a biogas pipe network of minimum length to reduce cost. Scenario CAD2 (transporting biogas by pipe from optimally located CAD) reduced CO2eq emissions associated with the road haulage of pig slurry by 51% compared to CAD1 (transporting slurry by road to a CAD at the milk processing facility) and 7% overall. Scenario DAD1 (distributed biogas production in DAD and transportation of the biogas by pipe) was shown to be the best scenario with CO2eq emissions reduction of 19% compared to Scenario CAD1 (road transport of slurry with CAD at the biogas user). Scenario DAD2 (distributed biogas production in DAD while minimising length of the biogas network) reduced CO2eq emissions by 18% relative to scenario CAD1, reduced the network length by 34% compared to scenario DAD1 but increasing total CO2eq emissions by 1% compared to Scenario DAD1.

[1]  David M. Wall,et al.  Assessment of the impact of incentives and of scale on the build order and location of biomethane facilities and the feedstock they utilise , 2016 .

[2]  Horst A. Eiselt,et al.  Location analysis: A synthesis and survey , 2005, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[3]  Arthur Wellinger,et al.  The biogas handbook , 2013 .

[4]  Jerry D. Murphy,et al.  A biofuel strategy for Ireland with an emphasis on production of biomethane and minimization of land-take , 2010 .

[5]  M. Gerardi.  The Microbiology of Anaerobic Digesters , 2003 .

[6]  Luc-Normand Tellier,et al.  The Weber Problem: Solution and Interpretation* , 2010 .

[7]  David M. Wall,et al.  Quantification and location of a renewable gas industry based on digestion of wastes in Ireland , 2016 .

[8]  Sita Bhaskaran,et al.  Optimal Design of Gas Pipeline Networks , 1979 .

[9]  Steve Dagnall.  UK strategy for centralised anaerobic digestion , 1995 .

[10]  Serena Righi,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of management systems for sewage sludge and food waste: centralized and decentralized approaches , 2013 .

[11]  Richard L. Ottinger,et al.  Compendium of Sustainable Energy Laws: Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 Establishing a Scheme for Greenhouse Gas Emission Allowance Trading Within the Community and Amending Council Directive 96/61/EC , 2005 .

[12]  J. Murphy,et al.  How much of the target for biofuels can be met by biodiesel generated from residues in Ireland , 2010 .

[13]  I. Angelidaki,et al.  Codigestion of manure and organic wastes in centralized biogas plants , 2003, Applied biochemistry and biotechnology.

[14]  M. Berglund,et al.  Assessment of energy performance in the life-cycle of biogas production , 2006 .

[15]  Hans Skov-Petersen,et al.  Towards a sustainable capacity expansion of the Danish biogas sector. , 2015 .

[16]  G. Kiely,et al.  How can we improve biomethane production per unit of feedstock in biogas plants , 2011 .

[17]  J. Bekkering,et al.  Biogas infrastructures from farm to regional scale, prospects of biogas transport grids , 2016 .

[18]  Jon Hill,et al.  Resource mapping and analysis of farm livestock manures—assessing the opportunities for biomass-to-energy schemes , 2000 .

[19]  Reamonn Fealy,et al.  Modelling the Gross Cost of Transporting Pig Slurry to Tillage Spread Lands in a Post Transition Arrangement within the Nitrates Directive. , 2012 .

[20]  D. Bacovsky,et al.  Biograce-II - Harmonised Greenhouse Gas Calculations for Electricity, Heating and Cooling from Biomass , 2014 .

[21]  Carlos Pinho,et al.  Considerations About Equations for Steady State Flow in Natural Gas , 2007 .

[22]  J. D. Browne,et al.  Assessing the total theoretical, and financially viable, resource of biomethane for injection to a natural gas network in a region , 2017 .

[23]  Javad Mahmoudimehr,et al.  Optimal design of a natural gas transmission network layout , 2013 .

[24]  H. Pollak,et al.  Steiner Minimal Trees , 1968 .

[25]  Jin Mi Triolo,et al.  Anaerobic digestion of pig manure fibres from commercial pig slurry separation units , 2014 .

[26]  M. Birkin,et al.  Spatial competition for biogas production using insights from retail location models. , 2014 .

[27]  Sérgio Fernando Mayerle,et al.  Designing optimal supply chains for anaerobic bio-digestion/energy generation complexes with distributed small farm feedstock sourcing , 2016 .

[28]  Halit Üster,et al.  Optimization for Design and Operation of Natural Gas Transmission Networks , 2014 .

[29]  J. Bekkering,et al.  Operational modeling of a sustainable gas supply chain , 2010 .

[30]  J. Murphy,et al.  The potential for biomethane from grass and slurry to satisfy renewable energy targets. , 2013, Bioresource technology.

[31]  Sihuang Xie,et al.  Evaluation Of Biogas Production From Anaerobic Digestion Of Pig Manure And Grass Silage , 2012 .

[32]  Antonius Broekhuis,et al.  When does decentralized production of biogas and centralized upgrading and injection into the natural gas grid make sense , 2014 .