As Kurt Hjort-Gregersen has noted, “farmers gain considerable economic advantages from improved nutrient utilisation and cost savings when they participate in centralised biogas plants.” Such an approach to bio-energy ranks very favorably in terms of overall environmental impact; it is in the middle of the pack in terms of cost, efficiency, import dependency, fuel price sensitivity and proved reserves.
Bio-gas, a.k.a., renewable natural gas, is a versatile energy source. Anaerobic digestion is a way to process manure that can reduce odor and water quality issues.
In commenting upon a post / Gristmill commentary by the amazingdrx, I expressed appreciation for the idea of upgraded biogas stored on the farm, “assuming that the motorized equipment has been converted to run on natural gas and can run on the eventual product from the anaerobic digestion.” OTOH, I expressed concern about fuel handling safety.
I remember seeing a news clip from the 1950s. A fly-over from a major catastrophe in Texas. A number of train cars of methane blowing up. In other words, who would want to live next to a bomb?
Speaking of farmers becoming energy generators in addition to commodity producers, I had a similar response to a fine, bio-gas summation by the Big Gav. For instance, he provided excellent substantiation to my previous observation that co-digestion to produce biogas, followed by conditioning and storage of the bio-methane, could be combined with non-fuel sources for a more reliable supply of clean electric power. I did expressed consternation about an unreserved endorsement of LFG (Land Fill Gas).
“Powering transport using liquid petroleum gas, compressed natural gas or fuel produced by gas-to-liquids processes are options that have received varying amounts of attention in recent years as the oil price climbs ever higher. While shifting dependence from one fossil fuel to another doesn’t make a great deal of sense when you take peak oil and gas into account, there is a renewable option for producing gas – biogas.”
Another concern is with Big Gav enthusiasm for bio-methane transportation. “Biogas,” relates the Big Gav, “is much cleaner and more efficient than biofuels for use in transport. BG provides the following examples of biogas use in Europe:
- Austrian drivers can fill up their CNG cars using biogas made from grass.
- Denmark has more than 50 biogas plants in operation.
- The Netherlands is generating biogas from sewage treatment plants and feeding it into the gas grid and to fuel cars.
- Sweden is producing biogas from wastewater treatment plants and and using it to generate power and to fuel buses and trains.
- Germany is producing biogas from maize and using it in combined-heat-and-power plants (the French have developed a giant maize variety specifically for biogas production).
I have expressed such reservation in the past. For instance, an ideal choice, previously envisioned by frequent (and knowledgeable) GCC commentator Rafael Seidl was a Fiat 500 with a turbocharged parallel twin engine running on CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) and a cone ring CVT. Instead, I had suggested a turbocharged parallel twin engine capable of using biodiesel.
The BIOGASMAX project addresses the urban challenges of air and water pollution, as well as waste management. The objective of the project is to introduce “a virtuous cycle in which biogas is produced from various types of urban waste.”
Four (LMCU) (Lille Metropolitan Community Authorities) refuse trucks and 100 buses will be operating on biomethane by the beginning of 2008, with BioGazMax assisting with evaluations using experience gained on similar projects in Stockholm. A total of 70 bio-methane fuelled LMCU refuse trucks are expected to be operational by 2013.
Actually, more to my my liking would be a multi-fuel capable REEV (Range Extended Electric Vehicle). Such hybrid propulsion could seem counter-intuitive, i.e., because of multiple conversion and transmission losses, it would appear inefficient to use the bio-gas for electric power generation then to use the electricity in transportation with electric drive. It is, even with the advantages of co-generation in the electric power generation and the relative efficiency of electric drive, when compared to ICE (Internal Combustion Engines).
Thus, even for a Frank Axiom kind of blog (Big Electric, Little ICE) like this one, the associated cost with such a switch in infrastructure is daunting despite well-established electric and natural gas grids. Yet there is an overriding logic to such advocacy. I am advocating that we forgo the established ICE or “well to wheels” paradigm for a “sun to wheels” paradigm. Especially in Europe, where there is strong growth in solar and wind power, there is greater ecological, economic, and social advantage to the infusion of such bio-energy into the ubiquitous electric power network rather than the natural gas pipeline. The lower in carbon dioxide emissions your electric power is, the better.
Nevertheless, I do share in the enthusiasm for this form of bio-energy. Bio-gas can be produced in a decentralized manner, obtained in a straightforward way from a large variety of biomass resources (organic waste, manure, dedicated energy crops), plus it is highly efficient – yielding more than twice as much energy per hectare of energy crops than ethanol from similar crops.
5 Comments
Nice follow up.
I share your enthusiasm for electric transport powered by sun and wind – thats the large scale solution to our problems.
For me, biogas for transportation is more of a niche solution – one well suited to rural or third world areas where electrification may be a long time away, or they just need longer to switch completely away from BAU.
I’m always fond of distributed solutions though, so I’m kind of enthused about twinning small biodigesters with small cogeneration facilities on individual properties. Between that and solar panels people could look at being almost independent from the grids (gas and power).
Yes, the amazingdrx is stranger than Doctor Strange, even so, I must agree with him when he posts that “the cleanest backup fuel for the grid is biogas… easily stored and distributed, on already existing gas pipelines.”
Speaking of gas turbines in buses…
“Who was”
I was.
But, in any case, ABG reporter Xavier Navarro informs that the city of San Diego has its first natural gas hybrid bus in operation.
“San Diego’s Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) has announced the launch of a bus which not only features a hybrid powertrain, but also uses natural gas as fuel.”
In “Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet”, Michael T. Klare warns his readers that, “to meet soaring energy demand, we would need a massive influx of alternative fuels.”
Another author on the subject, Joseph “Hell and High Water” Romm disagrees
While I have been a fan of Klare’s writing on security, he… just doesn’t understand how electric cars (mostly in other countries) and plug-in hybrids (in this country) together with renewable energy like wind and concentrated solar thermal power, will avert much of the medium- and long-term pain from peak oil — though it won’t avert either the short-term pain or climate catastrophe if we don’t aggressively deploy those technologies starting now.
But, does Romm’s blandishments detract from the truth-telling by Klare about undue influence by special interests, and is that his intent?
Gail the Actuary has an excellent post in The Oil Drum about how unconventional gas production is growing rapidly in the United States.
2 Trackbacks
[...] Big Gav perceives that biogas for transportation “is well suited to rural or third world areas, where [...]
[...] The projected production capacity is up to 13,000 gallons per day of LNG. The report mentions that plant capacity would be sufficient to fuel 300 refuse trucks, so this may be another instance of converting LFG to be used as an alternative transportation fuel. (Serendipity again, GCC, I just finished suggesting the need to test heavy-duty, short haul transport that utilizes Big Electric serial hybrid propulsion with generator sets running on a combination of Natural Gas an….) [...]