Nikolas
Forum Replies Created
In a future where RNG is the byproduct of a ‘waste treatment operation’ (i.e. treating the manure, the organics, the food waste, the agri byproducts), and environmental regulations have become strict enough to demand a reduction on CO2 emissions from operations and management of organic waste, RNG pricing and incentives would stop being the focus of the conversation. At that point in time, government (financial) support of RNG would not be the driving factor.
On our industry’s point of view, it is reliability. If the compressor fails, the whole plant shuts down. We need compressors who can handle the reality of a biogas upgrading project, the fluctuating gas flows, potential intermittent operation due to inefficient gas flow etc. Having a reliable compressor can make an upgrading project dependable.
Besides having to deal with different gas quality standards from the many different utilities managing the pipelines across the US, the major challenge for RNG injection is the pipeline infrastructure. Even the most perfect project can be non-viable if the pipeline is not close enough for injection or cannot accept the volume you are producing (i.e. summer months). Transporting the gas is feasible but it eats up on your revenue and lowers the CI score.
For the RNG sector, regulations assisting with the development of RNG projects (i.e. tax incentives) as well as with gas offtake (i.e. LCFS, RINs), together with a push for environmental regulations on different fronts (CO2 emissions, organic bans from landfills etc) would help create a need for RNG in the market, make it cheaper to develop and install a biogas upgrading system and more profitable to sell that RNG.
The technology is here and ready to be a game changer. We just need the rules to start supporting the game.
Speaking from the biogas upgrading side, common issues are:
- Gas quality not up to spec post treatment (due to unexpected contaminants, mostly)
- Not enough flow coming out of the digester, which forces the compressors to operate intermittently
On the upgrading system side, running a membrane upgrading system, you would need to check different things on a daily basis, monthly basis and on a preset x,xxx hour basis. In short :<div>
Biogas side:
- Biogas flow as expected
Analyzers:
- Gas quality within specs post treatment
- Gas quality within specs pre-upgrading membranes
System:
- Alarms
- Indicator values within specs
Compressors:
- Daily: Oil levels, gauges
- Monthly: Connections, leak test, fins, pressure values
- Preset hours: Based on manufacturer instructions / Maintenance
Pre-injection
- Gas flow indicators
- Gas quality indicators
The daily checking of a membrane biogas upgrading system does not take more than 1 hour and can be done by following a checklist. For systems like DMT’s, there is 24/7 monitoring services. If you have a farm or a facility with no ‘specialized personnel’, a membrane system is an ‘easy’ system to operate.
Send a message if you need to discuss further.
</div>
Although someone hacking your biogas upgrading plant might sound like a scenario out of a movie, it is now reality that cyber attacks can happen to any system using an internet connection. DMT has hired professional computer engineers with experience in cyber security to ensure our remote controlled systems are protected against malicious hacking attempts.
The article Ryan mentions is worth reading, and our team would be happy to discuss with anyone concerned about their upgrading system’s safety. Feel free to connect with me and send a PM.
The driving factor for the capturing and selling of CO2 in biogas plants is the demand. Until 3-4 years ago, there was no real demand for biogenic CO2. Around the COVID era and after, the CO2 production got disrupted and markets started looking elsewhere. Capturing and producing liquified CO2 from a membrane upgrading system is easy and the equipment can be installed at the same time or later on.
The numbers might seem small at the moment but interest is growing and many new projects are considering CO2 as a revenue source. It would actually turn otherwise non economically feasible projects into successful ones.
The demand is there, from sequestration to greenhouses, food and beverage. All we need is time, for the word to get out to existing upgrading plants and for developers / engineers to start including CO2 capture at the conception point of the project, in order to secure funding for the CapEx.
Biogas upgrading technologies evolve constantly, from blowers, to compressors, to membranes and analyzers, the industry has made huge leaps over the past decade. RNG is now cheaper to produce, with less slippage and easier control. The following was posted on Monday by the Biogas Community team and shows how specific technologies, like membranes and PSA are growing fast.
I will agree with the above, in that RNG is showing to be the fuel of choice for biogas projects, with many old CHP projects switching to RNG, which offers more return on investment. However, as you all point out, there are countries where pipeline infrastructure is limited so electricity is the only option for the time being. LNG is another option, for projects close to ports and with the right conditions, but that is a different topic.
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
As stated in the other replies, upgrading costs depend on key parameters, such as the gas flow, the concentration of contaminants to clean your biogas (H2S, VOCs, Siloxanes) and the technology you choose (ie. membrane upgrading, amines, PSA). The size of the project would naturally also impact CapEx and OpEx. Depending on the project, gas cleanup and upgrading could cost anything from $1M – $15M, so the answer here is ‘it depends on your project’.
Are you debating between producing electricity vs RNG?
It is definitely there, as food or beverage companies would need to overcome the public pushback on the idea that your drink was made with CO2 gas coming from i.e. a WWTP plant operation. The public would have to be comfortable with this concept before more companies start using bio-CO2 in their operations.
You are most welcome Natalia.
DMT provides operations support and remote, 24/7, monitoring. If any of those indicators is off, our team will communicate with the local operator and guide him through it. For major issues, our team will travel to the project location and work with the operator to resolve any issue.
The difference has to do with the project conditions – For example a 110 scfm project with 100ppmv H2S injecting in the grid would have a CapEx closer to $1.5M. A 1,000 scfm with 600ppm H2S and VOCs would be closer to >$8M.
As for electricty vs RNG, the CapEx might be lower to produce electricity but the incentives are not as strong. Renewable electricity can come from other sources (i.e. solar, wind), which lowers the selling price. RNG can be injected in the grid and used as fuel, and has strong incentives, which makes RNG projects more desirable, in my view.