Power-to-gas technologies are considered to be part of the future energy sys- tem, but their viability and applicability need to be assessed. Therefore, models for the viability of farm-scale bio-power-to-methane supply chains to produce green gas were analysed in terms of levelised cost of energy, energy efficiency and saving of greenhouse gas emission. In bio-power-to-methane, hydrogen from electrolysis driven by surplus renewable electricity and carbon dioxide from biogas are converted to methane by microbes in an ex situ trickle-bed reactor. Such bio-methanation could replace the current upgrading of biogas to green gas with membrane technology. Four scenarios were compared: a refer- ence scenario without bio-methanation (A), bio-methanation (B), bio-methanation combined with membrane upgrading (C) and the latter with use of renewable energy only (all-green; D). The reference scenario (A) has the lowest costs for green gas production, but the bio-methanation scenarios (B-D) have higher energy efficiencies and environmental benefits. The higher costs of the bio-methanation scenarios are largely due to electrolysis, whereas the environmental benefits are due to the use of renewable electricity. Only the all- green scenario (D) meets the 2026 EU goal of 80% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, but it would require a CO2 price of 200 € t−1 to achieve the levelised cost of energy of 65 €ct Nm−3 of the reference scenario. Inclusion of the intermittency of renewable energy in the scenarios substantially increases the costs. Further greening of the bio-methanation supply chain and how intermittency is best taken into account need further investigation.
DOCUMENT
The energy efficiency and sustainability of an anaerobic green gas production pathway was evaluated, taking into account five biomass feedstocks, optimization of the green gas production pathway, replacement of current waste management pathways by mitigation, and transport of the feedstocks. Sustainability is expressed by three main factors: efficiency in (Process) Energy Returned On Invested (P)EROI, carbon footprint in Global Warming Potential GWP(100), and environmental impact in EcoPoints. The green gas production pathway operates on a mass fraction of 50% feedstock with 50% manure. The sustainability of the analyzed feedstocks differs substantially, favoring biomass waste flows over, the specially cultivated energy crop, maize. The use of optimization, in the shape of internal energy production, green gas powered trucks, and mitigation can significantly improve the sustainability for all feedstocks, but favors waste materials. Results indicate a possible improvement from an average (P)EROI for all feedstocks of 2.3 up to an average of 7.0 GJ/GJ. The carbon footprint can potentially be reduced from an average of 40 down to 18 kgCO2eq/GJ. The environmental impact can potentially be reduced from an average of 5.6 down to 1.8 Pt/GJ. Internal energy production proved to be the most effective optimization. However, the use of optimization aforementioned will result in les green gas injected into the gas grid as it is partially consumed internally. Overall, the feedstock straw was the most energy efficient, where the feedstock harvest remains proved to be the most environmentally sustainable. Furthermore, transport distances of all feedstocks should not exceed 150 km or emissions and environmental impacts will surpass those of natural gas, used as a reference. Using green gas as a fuel can increase the acceptable transportation range to over 300 km. Within the context aforementioned and from an energy efficiency and sustainable point of view, the anaerobic digestion process should be utilized for processing locally available waste feedstocks with the added advantage of producing energy, which should first be used internally for powering the green gas production process.
DOCUMENT
In Europe, green hydrogen and biogas/green gas are considered important renewable energy carriers, besides renewable electricity and heat. Still, incentives proceed slowly, and the feasibility of local green gas is questioned. A supply chain of decentralised green hydrogen production from locally generated electricity (PV or wind) and decentralised green gas production from locally collected biomass and biological power-to-methane technology was analysed and compared to a green hydrogen scenario. We developed a novel method for assessing local options. Meeting the heating demand of households was constrained by the current EU law (RED II) to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 80% relative to fossil (natural) gas. Levelised cost of energy (LCOE) analyses at 80% GHG emission savings indicate that locally produced green gas (LCOE = 24.0 €ct kWh−1) is more attractive for individual citizens than locally produced green hydrogen (LCOE = 43.5 €ct kWh−1). In case higher GHG emission savings are desired, both LCOEs go up. Data indicate an apparent mismatch between heat demand in winter and PV electricity generation in summer. Besides, at the current state of technology, local onshore wind turbines have less GHG emissions than PV panels. Wind turbines may therefore have advantages over PV fields despite the various concerns in society. Our study confirms that biomass availability in a dedicated region is a challenge.
DOCUMENT
