Centralized or decentralized? How to exploit Sweden’s agricultural biomethane potential

Abstract

The agricultural sector holds great potential for contributing to European biomethane production, but how to best exploit it is still not clear. This study compares three technical solutions for producing liquefied biomethane from manure in Sweden: centralized biogas production and liquefaction, decentralized biogas production and centralized liquefaction, and decentralized biogas production and liquefaction. Technical and practical aspects of the three configurations are assessed through interviews with professionals, and the economic performance is compared through life cycle cost analysis. Depending on the conditions, the most cost-efficient alternative is either a gas pipeline from decentralized biogas production to a centralized liquefaction, or fully centralized production. The economic benefit of centralization increases with the number of farms involved but decreases with the biogas capacity of the system and the transport distance. The pipeline solution provides simple logistics and operation, although concession for pipe laying can be challenging. Moreover, a partly or fully centralized setup improves the delivery security of the system and reduces downtime. However, decentralized biomethane production can be an option for remote farms where centralization is not possible. For existing biogas plants, small-scale liquefaction or a pipeline to centralized liquefaction can be options for developing more biomethane production.