[Raymond]

Both RNG and CHP systems have their merits and can complement each other in providing sustainable energy solutions for remote areas. The decision to adopt one over the other I believe should be based on a thorough assessment of local resources, energy needs, infrastructure, and economic considerations. In many cases, a hybrid approach utilizing both technologies may offer the most resilient and efficient energy solution.

[Natalia Bourenane]

You are right Raymond. Here in North America, another important factors to take into account is the funding or government financial support that drives the choice of biogas use.

[Natalia Bourenane]

@Hydron_Energy and @hydron_saeid and @Hydron , with your small scale RNG solution, what do you think? Will remote areas be something that will develop soon or we are still far away?

[Saeid Tajbakhsh]

I completely agree that RNG is becoming a more compelling and accessible option for remote and rural areas.

We have seen this need in our work, particularly in settings where traditional infrastructure is limited or unavailable. To address this, we’ve developed mobile upgrading systems that can be transported directly to sites like farms, landfills, and wastewater treatment facilities. These units allow operations to become more energy autonomous, reduce emissions, and turn local waste streams into valuable energy—all without requiring permanent infrastructure.

From our experience, solutions like this are making RNG a viable and scalable path forward, even in the most challenging locations.

[Hatem]

That’s a great question Ryan—and one I’ve been reflecting on as well.
With the growing availability of small and micro-scale upgrading technologies, combined with innovations like RNG-powered farm equipment, I believe RNG is becoming increasingly feasible in remote areas. These advancements lower the barriers to entry for decentralized energy production, which is particularly important where traditional infrastructure is limited or costly to extend.

In fact, I’ve had the opportunity to work on several projects in remote regions where being energy autonomous wasn’t just a preference—it was a necessity for the residents. In those settings, RNG played a key role in supporting local resilience. It allowed communities to make use of on-site organic waste, reduce their reliance on diesel or other fossil fuels, and stabilize their energy supply in a more sustainable way.

While CHP systems certainly have their advantages, especially in larger, centralized installations, RNG offers a flexible and scalable alternative. It’s especially promising for farms and smaller communities looking to close local loops and align with environmental goals. As the technology matures and the economics continue to improve, I do see RNG becoming not just a viable option, but a compelling one in many remote and rural contexts.
Thanks 🙂

[Nikolas]

To add to this conversation, RNG is versatile and can be used as CNG to fuel trucks, as well as injected in a pipeline. Depending on the size of the project, it might (or not) be economically feasible and profitable to transport it to an injection site or sell it as transportation fuel. If the project size is too small, the nearest pipeline is too far and there is nowhere to sell the gas, a CHP would be more straightforward solution

[Graham]

Nice topic of discussion. For me, in instances where a small scale upgrader was the feasible alternative, we have often found that other project related costs hindered progress. If for example the interconnect costs are not proportional, then on smaller flows, we have a project that in its totally may not pencil out even though the upgrading technology is proven, robust and cost effective. When to can hub and spoke a few small sites together you may be able change the math!