Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Nov 3;16(1):165.
doi: 10.1186/s13068-023-02412-1.

Energy performance of compressed biomethane gas production from co-digestion of Salix and dairy manure: factoring differences between Salix varieties

Saurav Kalita  1 , Jonas A Ohlsson  2 , Hanna Karlsson Potter  3 , Åke Nordberg  3 , Mats Sandgren  2 , Per-Anders Hansson  3
Affiliations

Energy performance of compressed biomethane gas production from co-digestion of Salix and dairy manure: factoring differences between Salix varieties

Saurav Kalita et al. Biotechnol Biofuels Bioprod. .

Abstract

Biogas from anaerobic digestion is a versatile energy carrier that can be upgraded to compressed biomethane gas (CBG) as a renewable and sustainable alternative to natural gas. Organic residues and energy crops are predicted to be major sources of bioenergy production in the future. Pre-treatment can reduce the recalcitrance of lignocellulosic energy crops such as Salix to anaerobic digestion, making it a potential biogas feedstock. This lignocellulosic material can be co-digested with animal manure, which has the complementary effect of increasing volumetric biogas yield. Salix varieties exhibit variations in yield, composition and biomethane potential values, which can have a significant effect on the overall biogas production system. This study assessed the impact of Salix varietal differences on the overall mass and energy balance of a co-digestion system using steam pre-treated Salix biomass and dairy manure (DaM) to produce CBG as the final product. Six commercial Salix varieties cultivated under unfertilised and fertilised conditions were compared. Energy and mass flows along this total process chain, comprising Salix cultivation, steam pre-treatment, biogas production and biogas upgrading to CBG, were evaluated. Two scenarios were considered: a base scenario without heat recovery and a scenario with heat recovery. The results showed that Salix variety had a significant effect on energy output-input ratio (R), with R values in the base scenario of 1.57-1.88 and in the heat recovery scenario of 2.36-2.94. In both scenarios, unfertilised var. Tordis was the best energy performer, while the fertilised var. Jorr was the worst. Based on this energy performance, Salix could be a feasible feedstock for co-digestion with DaM, although its R value was at the lower end of the range reported previously for energy crops.

Keywords: Biogas; Biomethane; Energy analysis; Energy balance; Lignocellulosic biomass; Salix; Short-rotation coppice willow; Systems perspective.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
System boundaries of the compressed biomethane gas (CBG) production system analysed in this study
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Illustration of the Salix cultivation system analysed
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Schematic representation of transport of manure and digestate and field application of digestate
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Simplified process flow diagram of stages modelled in Aspen Plus in this study
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Representation of heat exchanges assumed in the heat recovery (HRE) scenario
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Average energy demand (diesel, electricity, heating and cooling) of the different processes in the compressed biomethane gas (CBG) production chain for the different Salix varieties and dairy manure (DaM) co-digestion feedstocks
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. ‘bp Statistical Review of World Energy 2022’, BP p.l.c., London, 71, 2022. [Online]. https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-revi...
    1. Core Writing Team, Pachauri RK, Mayer L, Eds. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC, 2015. [Online]. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/
    1. Shukla PR et al. Eds., ‘Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’, in Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2022.
    1. Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, Data-Driven EnviroLab, NewClimate Institute, and Oxford Net Zero, ‘Tracking Net Zero Progress’, Net Zero Climate. https://netzeroclimate.org/innovation-for-net-zero/progress-tracking/. Accessed 06 Jan 2023.
    1. IEA, ‘Net Zero by 2050’, IEA, Paris, 2021. https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050. Accessed 06 Jan 2023.

LinkOut - more resources