Deutsches BiomasseForschungsZentrumGerman Biomass Research Centre

Deutsches BiomasseForschungsZentrum gemeinnützige GmbH, Torgauer Str. 116, D-04347 Leipzig, www.dbfz.de

Technology and innovation trends in the biogas sector

Biogas Dialogue – Policy Framework and Innovation Trends in the Baltic Sea Region

Policy workshop of the SPIN project

Thursday, 2nd December 2010, Berlin,

Federal Press Office (Bundespresseamt)

Jan Postel

Content

The German Biomass Research Centre

State of Biogas production and use in Germany connected withreliability and efficiency

Problematic issues of R&D - How to explore the potentials mostefficient?

Challenges for the future and expectations

Example 1: Upgrading of biogas

Example 2: Energy efficiency

Example 3: Pre-treatment of organic waste and other substrates

German Biomass ResearchCentre (DBFZ)

4

DBFZStructure and organisation

Researchcouncil

BMELVSupervisory board

(BMELV, BMU, BMVBS, BMBF,

SMUL)

DBFZ founded in 2008 as a non-profit company owned by the German FederalMinistry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMELV)

2009: 134 employees, 149 projects

Application oriented technical, economic and environmental R&D activities

Consultancies for private/public institutions

Policy assessment for federal ministries

Feasibility studies for bioenergy plants

State of Biogas production anduse in Germany connectedwith reliability and efficiency

6

Biogasproduction and use inGermany

6

Expected for 2010:5,700 plants; 2,130 MWel

Substrate

7

Biowaste

n=420

Maissilage

78%

Getreide-

GPS

6%

Getreidekorn

4%

Grassilage

11%

sonstiges

1%

Maize

Others Gras silage

Grain whole plant silage

Grain

Substrate input (mass-related)in biogas plants (operator survey 2009)

Input of energy crops (mass-related)in biogas plants (operator survey 2009)

n=420

Bioabfall

10%

industrielle

und landw.

Reststoffe

6%

Exkremente

43%

NawaRo

41%

Industrial and Agricultural residues

Excrements

Energy crops

Biowaste

Questions: Energy crops or not? What is a reliable mix?

Fermentation technology

8

n=437

86%

14%

Nassfermentation

Trockenfermentation

Question: Static, Plug flow or fully mixed fermenters?? Which one is more efficient and reliable?

Wet fermentation

High solids fermentation

Environmental behaviour: Closed oropen storage tanks for residues

9

n=453

44%

5%7%

44%

offen

offen und geschlossen

keine Angaben

geschlossen

OpenOpen and closed No informationClosed gastight

Question: Connection to efficiency and reliability?

Weiland et. al. (2008): about 50 % of new German biogas plants donot invest into measurement and control equipment.

Process Control – State of the Art

Installed electrical capacity kWel

Shar

e of

inve

stm

ent c

osts

for

mea

srur

emen

t a

nd c

ontr

ol e

quip

men

t in

%

Weiland et. al. (2008): Biology: 5th main reason for disturbances

Process Control –Reasons for disturbances of

operation

Relative frequency Working efforts

Wor

king

effo

rts

hou

rs p

er w

eek

Rel

ativ

e fr

eque

ncy

of d

istu

rban

ces

in %

Was

te in

put

tech

nolo

gies

Mec

hani

cal

Pret

reat

men

t

Sepa

ratio

n of

impu

ritie

s

Hyg

ieni

satio

n

Bio

logi

cal

Proc

ess

Pum

ps

Solid

sub

stra

te

Feed

ing

Stirr

ing

Clo

ggin

gs

Gas

pur

ifica

tion

CH

P un

it

Con

trol

eq

uipm

ent

Gas

loss

es

Oth

ers

Efficiency –CHP - Reliability experiences

12

Cumulated annual standstill of CHP units in 60 German biogas plants [d/a]

-> Availability between 75 and 95 %!

Weiland et. al. (2008)

Efficiency –Own electricity demand

13

n=297

0

10

20

30

40

50

10 100 1.000 10.000

installierte Leistung [kWel]

Eig

enstr

om

bedarf

[%

]

Installed electrical capacity [kWel]

Ow

n el

ectri

city

dem

and

[% o

f pro

duct

ion]

Efficiency –Heat use of decentralised plants

14

n=166

0

20

40

60

80

100

! 50 51 - 150 151 - 500 501 – 1.000 > 1.000

installierte elektr. Anlagenleistung [kWel]

An

teil B

iog

asa

nla

ge

n m

it e

nts

pre

ch

en

de

n

Wä

rme

nu

tzu

ng

sg

rad

[%

]

Biogasanlagen Wärmenutzungsgrad !50% [%] Biogasanlagen Wärmenutzungsgrad >50% [%]

• Upgradring or decental production of electricity?

Sha

re o

f pla

nts

with

giv

en h

eat

utliz

atio

n sh

are

[%]

Installed electrical capacity [kWel]

Average heat utilization share < 50 % Average heat utilization share > 50 %

Problematic issues of R&D -How to explore the potentials

most efficient?

logistics

Substrates

sto-rage

short storage substrate

Electricity

Substratemixture

fermenter

gas storage

gas utilization

Storage of residues

Emissions atuse of residues

Emissions,losses

effizienttechnologies

HeatBiomethane

Biomass supply andlosses criticised

utilizationof wastes

Black boxmicrobiology,

additives

Knowledgedemand at operators

and investors

inefficienttechnologies and

system integration

Research for more efficient andenvironmentally friendly potential

excavation

Expectations for the futuredevelopment (2020)

Expectations for the futuredevelopment (2020)

Average plant size: no relevant changes for decentral plants; slightincrease towards 1,000 m³/h biomethane for injection plants

Substrate feed: increased pre-treatment for increased degradationspeed

Decreased maize silage shares; increase in gras silage, sugar beet,etc.

Fermentation technology: better adapted to substrates but no realchanges

Biogas yields: increase approximately 10 %

Own heat and electricity demand: slight decrease

Electrical efficiencies: + 2% for CHP units; no commercial differenttechnologies

Full load hours: increase from 8,000 to 8,300 h/a

Methane losses biogas plant: reduction to < 1.5 %

Example 1:Upgrading of biogas

Injection of biogas into the gas grid

substrates

return ofdigestate

biogas plant

sale and trade

electricity

heat

fuelGas grid

possibility of a multiple and more efficient usage of biogas costs, efficiency and methane losses for upgrading and injection have to be considered

Source: dena

Biogas upgradation and feed in

21

• Mainly 4 technologies• Very good and stable

experiences after somelearning…

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010*

An

lag

en

zah

l [-

]

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

Au

fbere

itu

ng

skap

azit

ät

Bio

meth

an

[N

m_/h

]

Schätzung Zubau 2.HJ

Anlagenzahl

Aufbereitungskapazität [Nm_/h]

• 41 running plants withabout 25,000 m³/hbiomethane

• Largest: 5,300 m³/hbiomethane

Steps of upgrading biogas

Removal of solid and liquidcomponents / drying of the gas

Desulphurization Enrichment of methane and

separation of CO2 Removal of other components,

like siloxane and ammonia

Upgrading technologies

Water scrubbing: Solubility of CO2 against different pressure stages; practicalapplication

Pressure swing adsorption: Adsorption on molecular sieve or charcoal at highpressure; practical application

Amine scrubbing: Dilution of CO2 in scrubbing solution, desorption of scrubbingsolution at high temperatures; practical application

Membrane technology: Different permeability of different components, first pilotplants

Cryogenic gas separation: Cooling to the evaporating temperature of CO2;research to be done

Goals in terms of R&D on upgradingtechnologies

Reduction of specific energy consumption→ 0,25 kWhel to 0,18 kWhel

Reduction of methane losses (e.g. oxidation or post-combustion)→ less then 0,2 %

Optimization of availability (redundancy and service)→ 8.200 to 8.500 FLH

Reduction of investment costs→ reduction about 20 %

Example 2:

Energy efficiency

Heat use of decentralised plants

26

n=166

0

20

40

60

80

100

! 50 51 - 150 151 - 500 501 – 1.000 > 1.000

installierte elektr. Anlagenleistung [kWel]

An

teil B

iog

asa

nla

ge

n m

it e

nts

pre

ch

en

de

n

Wä

rme

nu

tzu

ng

sg

rad

[%

]

Biogasanlagen Wärmenutzungsgrad !50% [%] Biogasanlagen Wärmenutzungsgrad >50% [%]

• Upgradring or decental production of electricity?

Sha

re o

f pla

nts

with

giv

en h

eat

utliz

atio

n sh

are

[%]

Installed electrical capacity [kWel]

Average heat utilization share < 50 % Average heat utilization share > 50 %

100 % SubstrateChemical Energy Heat Supply; 80.5 % of T.E.

Thermal Energy

C.E. in Biogas

T.E. in Biogas 20.9 % of T.E.

T.E. in Residue 79.1 % of T.E.

C.E. in Residue 27.8 %

Gas potential in Residue 5.1 %

Fermentation

CHP

Microbiological heat release

Methane losses

Methane not used

Conversion losses

Plant heat demand

Additional usable heatOwn electricity demand

Heat used (housing)Electricity sold

If not stated otherwisenumbers show the share ofthe C.E. in the input

C.E. Chemical EnergyT.E. Thermal Energy

Analysisof Efficiency of

electricity productionfrom Biogas

A German Example

Examples for the efficient use ofproduced energy

Bio energy commune like Jühnde or Radiborwith a combination of biogas plant and woodchip heating station

Feasibility study of a local gas distributionsystems with 2 biogas plants in Burkersdorf(done by DBI/Freiberg)

Construction of local biogas distibutionsystems to provide 2 local heat systems inTheuma

Quelle: Erler, DBI 2010Quelle: Hommel, 2010

Example 3:

Pre-treatment of organicmatter

Pre-treatment of organic matter –Goal

Increasing biogas yield by cell disruption and enlargement ofsurface (lignin und cellulose containing substrates)

Acceleration of degradation and therewith a more efficientuse of the biogas plant (all substrates in common)

Avoiding of layers of floating or/and sinking matters andtherewith the decreasing of energy effort for mixing andpumping (all substrates in common)

Securing of the digestion process by improvement of qualityof input material (e.g. sugar beets or bio waste)

Physical methods (numerously available, but scope of application should beconsidered)

• Disintegration by crushing or milling• thermal treatment by hot water, steam or hydrolysis with heat and

pressure (combination of different methods)• Radiation by microwave or ultra sound

Chemical methods• use of acids or bases (as far as possible without any importance, because

of high demand of acids/bases and the impact of the methanogenesis)

biological methods (microorganisms and enzymes)• as an additive for ensilage to minimize losses• hydrolytic bacteria for disintegration of substrates containing

lignocellulose• characterization of biocenosis, Identification of leading organisms and

expression of “key genes”

Pre-treatment of organic matter -Disintegration - methods

Thank you for your attention!

Dipl.-Ing. Jan PostelDepartment Biochemical Conversion

jan.postel@dbfz.deDeutsches BiomasseForschungsZentrum

German Biomass Research CentreTorgauer Straße 116

04347 Leipzig, Germanywww.dbfz.de

Tel./Fax. +49 341 – 2434 – 112 / – 133

Problematic issues of R&D

substratespre-

storage electricity

substrate-mixture

fermenter

gas storage

energy-recovery

digestate-storage

heatbiomethane

storage

logistic criticism on biomass-supply, lossesuse of

organicwaste

Use of catch crops and agricultural waste material Optimization of cultivation and supply Definition of aspects of sustainability Optimization of biomass logistic Low-loss conservation and storage methods

Problematic issues of R&D

substratespre-

storage electricity

substrate-mixture

fermenter

gas storage

energy-recovery

digestate-storage

heatbiomethane

storage

Disintegration of substrates (e.g. enzymes or mechanically) Concepts for a separated use of solid and liquid phases Fermentation of solids (e.g. straw) and special substrates

(e.g. sugar beet) Intelligent / automatic control of the process

inefficienttechnologies

Problematic issues of R&D

substratespre-

storage electricity

substrate-mixture

fermenter

gas storage

energy-recovery

digestate-storage

heatbiomethane

storage

Diagnostic tools for process control Improve methane yield by process optimization Microbial indicators for process stability Exploit novel feedstocks

Black boxmicrobiology

Problematic issues of R&D

substratespre-

storage electricity

substrate-mixture

fermenter

gas storage

energy-recovery

digestate-storage

heatbiomethane

storage

New methods and optimization of gas drying anddesulphurization

Upgrading technologies Optimization of CHP-efficiency Reduction of emissions Integration of Energy from biomass into the energy system

efficienttechnologies andenergy-recovery

Problematic issues of R&D

substratespre-

storage electricity

substrate-mixture

fermenter

gas storage

energy-recovery

digestate-storage

heatbiomethane

storage

Correlation between ammonia and Green-house gasemissions and leaching of nutrients

Methods for the separation and preparation of digestate Thermal usage of digestate

environmentalimpacts on

digestate usage