The current Nordic biogas and biofertilizer potential: An inventory of established feedstock and current technology

Axel Lindfors, Roozbeh Feiz
{"title":"The current Nordic biogas and biofertilizer potential: An inventory of established feedstock and current technology","authors":"Axel Lindfors, Roozbeh Feiz","doi":"10.3384/9789180752558","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Biogas solutions in the Nordics is undergoing rapid developments and the demand for biogas is ever increasing because of the Russian war on Ukraine and the transition to fossil free industry and transportation. Furthermore, with the introduction of several multi-national companies into the biogas sector in the Nordics and with more and more biomethane being traded across national borders, it becomes increasingly important to view biogas solutions in the Nordics as a whole and to go beyond the confines of each individual nation. Since the transition and the current energy crisis require a quick response, understanding what could be done with current technologies and established substrates is important to guide decision-making in the short-term. This study aims to do just that by presenting the current biogas potential for the Nordics, including Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. The potential was estimated for eight categories: food waste, manure, food industry waste, sludge from wastewater treatment, landscaping waste, straw, agricultural residues, and crops with negligible indirect land use effects (such as ley crops and intermediary crops). Two categories were excluded due to a lack of appropriate estimation procedures and time to develop such procedures, and these were marine substrates and forest industry waste. Furthermore, several categories are somewhat incomplete due to lack of data on the availability of substrates and their biogas characteristics. These include, for example, crops grown on Ecological focus areas, excess ley silage, damaged crops, and certain types of food industries. The specifics of each category is further detailed in Section 2 of the report. In the report, the biogas potential includes the biomethane potential, the nutrient potential, and the carbon dioxide production potential, capturing all outputs of a biogas plant. The results of the potential study show that the current biomethane potential for the Nordics is about 39 TWh (140 PJ) per year when considering the included biomass categories in the short-term perspective. In relation to current production, realizing this potential would mean a roughly fourfold increase in yearly production, meaning that a significant unexploited potential remains. On the nutrient side, the biogas system in the Nordics would, given the realization of the estimated potential, be of roughly the same size as current mineral fertilizer use (about 75 percent for nitrogen and 160 percent for phosphorous). While this represents the management of a significant portion of nutrients used in agriculture, the potential to replace or reduce mineral fertilizer use through biogas expansion remains unexplored in this study since a significant portion of nutrients come from biomass that is already used as fertilizer (e.g., manure). Finally, on the carbon dioxide side, about 4.2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide would be produced, which could be either captured and stored or captured and utilized, thereby further increasing the positive environmental effects associated with biogas solutions. In conclusion, there remains a large unexploited biogas potential in the Nordics, even when only considering current technologies and established feedstock that could be realized in the short-term (the theoretical potential is much larger since many substrate categories are excluded and the potential is limited to established technologies). Such a realization would bring large increases to biomethane production but would also mean that a significant amount of nutrients would be recirculated through the biogas system. This means that the biogas system has a key role to play in increasing both the food and energy security in the Nordic countries, in addition to its many positive environmental effects.","PeriodicalId":415782,"journal":{"name":"Biogas Research Center (BRC) Report","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biogas Research Center (BRC) Report","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3384/9789180752558","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Biogas solutions in the Nordics is undergoing rapid developments and the demand for biogas is ever increasing because of the Russian war on Ukraine and the transition to fossil free industry and transportation. Furthermore, with the introduction of several multi-national companies into the biogas sector in the Nordics and with more and more biomethane being traded across national borders, it becomes increasingly important to view biogas solutions in the Nordics as a whole and to go beyond the confines of each individual nation. Since the transition and the current energy crisis require a quick response, understanding what could be done with current technologies and established substrates is important to guide decision-making in the short-term. This study aims to do just that by presenting the current biogas potential for the Nordics, including Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. The potential was estimated for eight categories: food waste, manure, food industry waste, sludge from wastewater treatment, landscaping waste, straw, agricultural residues, and crops with negligible indirect land use effects (such as ley crops and intermediary crops). Two categories were excluded due to a lack of appropriate estimation procedures and time to develop such procedures, and these were marine substrates and forest industry waste. Furthermore, several categories are somewhat incomplete due to lack of data on the availability of substrates and their biogas characteristics. These include, for example, crops grown on Ecological focus areas, excess ley silage, damaged crops, and certain types of food industries. The specifics of each category is further detailed in Section 2 of the report. In the report, the biogas potential includes the biomethane potential, the nutrient potential, and the carbon dioxide production potential, capturing all outputs of a biogas plant. The results of the potential study show that the current biomethane potential for the Nordics is about 39 TWh (140 PJ) per year when considering the included biomass categories in the short-term perspective. In relation to current production, realizing this potential would mean a roughly fourfold increase in yearly production, meaning that a significant unexploited potential remains. On the nutrient side, the biogas system in the Nordics would, given the realization of the estimated potential, be of roughly the same size as current mineral fertilizer use (about 75 percent for nitrogen and 160 percent for phosphorous). While this represents the management of a significant portion of nutrients used in agriculture, the potential to replace or reduce mineral fertilizer use through biogas expansion remains unexplored in this study since a significant portion of nutrients come from biomass that is already used as fertilizer (e.g., manure). Finally, on the carbon dioxide side, about 4.2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide would be produced, which could be either captured and stored or captured and utilized, thereby further increasing the positive environmental effects associated with biogas solutions. In conclusion, there remains a large unexploited biogas potential in the Nordics, even when only considering current technologies and established feedstock that could be realized in the short-term (the theoretical potential is much larger since many substrate categories are excluded and the potential is limited to established technologies). Such a realization would bring large increases to biomethane production but would also mean that a significant amount of nutrients would be recirculated through the biogas system. This means that the biogas system has a key role to play in increasing both the food and energy security in the Nordic countries, in addition to its many positive environmental effects.
目前北欧沼气和生物肥料的潜力:已建立的原料和当前技术的清单
北欧的沼气解决方案正在迅速发展,由于俄罗斯对乌克兰的战争以及向无化石燃料工业和运输的过渡,对沼气的需求不断增加。此外,随着几家跨国公司进入北欧的沼气行业,以及越来越多的生物甲烷跨境交易,将北欧的沼气解决方案视为一个整体,超越每个国家的界限变得越来越重要。由于转型和当前的能源危机需要快速反应,因此了解当前技术和现有基础可以做些什么,对于指导短期决策非常重要。这项研究旨在通过介绍北欧国家目前的沼气潜力来实现这一目标,包括丹麦、芬兰、冰岛、挪威和瑞典。估计了8类作物的潜力:食物垃圾、粪便、食品工业废物、废水处理产生的污泥、园林绿化废物、秸秆、农业残留物和间接土地利用效应可忽略不计的作物(如ley作物和中间作物)。由于缺乏适当的估计程序和制定这种程序的时间,有两类被排除在外,它们是海洋基材和森林工业废物。此外,由于缺乏关于底物的可用性及其沼气特性的数据,有几个类别有些不完整。这些问题包括,例如,种植在生态重点地区的作物,过量的青贮饲料,受损的作物,以及某些类型的食品工业。报告第2节进一步详细说明了每一类别的具体情况。在该报告中,沼气潜力包括生物甲烷潜力、营养潜力和二氧化碳生产潜力,涵盖了沼气厂的所有产出。潜力研究的结果表明,考虑到短期内包括的生物质类别,北欧目前的生物甲烷潜力约为每年39太瓦时(140 PJ)。与目前的产量相比,实现这一潜力将意味着年产量增加大约四倍,这意味着仍有很大的未开发潜力。在营养方面,考虑到实现估计的潜力,北欧的沼气系统将与目前的矿物肥料使用规模大致相同(约75%为氮,160%为磷)。虽然这代表了对农业中使用的很大一部分营养物质的管理,但由于很大一部分营养物质来自已经用作肥料的生物质(例如粪肥),因此本研究尚未探索通过沼气扩张来取代或减少矿物肥料使用的潜力。最后,在二氧化碳方面,将产生大约420万吨二氧化碳,这些二氧化碳既可以被捕获和储存,也可以被捕获和利用,从而进一步增加与沼气解决方案有关的积极环境影响。总之,即使只考虑到目前的技术和短期内可以实现的既定原料,北欧仍有很大的未开发的沼气潜力(理论上的潜力要大得多,因为许多底物类别被排除在外,潜力仅限于既定的技术)。这种实现将大大增加生物甲烷的产量,但也意味着大量的营养物质将通过沼气系统再循环。这意味着沼气系统除了具有许多积极的环境影响外,还可以在提高北欧国家的粮食和能源安全方面发挥关键作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信