For municipalities biogas becomes an interesting development path. What are opportunities and barriers for this actor in the further development of biogas systems?
Biogas is definitely an interesting development path for municipalities, especially because they are already dealing with collection systems issues e.g. waste collection system and because they can make/oblige people to change their behaviour. However, I would also mention(I am not sure this blog is international or Sweden focused - let's say it's international) that some (French) minucipalities face inefficiencies in their operating methods which is a real problem when it comes to make money and operate plants the same way a profitable company would do.
A list of some other concerns for municipalities with biogas:
-- expense (estimated investment cost in Kristianstad is about 10-12 million € so far, twice that number in other sources) -- lack of public support and participation -- negative perceptions of the developer -- odor (which apparently can be scientifically measured!) -- visual impact of the plant -- handling of organic waste that cannot be digested -- noise and traffic associated -- complexity with multiple owners -- NIMBY attitudes -- can be in opposition to home composting -- lack of opportunity for citizens to have influence the planning process -- can be perceived as having a negative impact on the local physical environment -- best used for densely populated areas, however, pellets are an alternative -- demand for gas could exceed demand
But there are a lot of opportunities too! -- Lessens dependence on fossil fuels -- Contributes to national aims -- Diversified (more secure?) energy supply -- Alternatives to large scale incineration -- Make use of separately collected waste -- Reduced energy expenses -- Reduced GHG emissions from renewable power generation (around 75-200%, because it means avoiding the release of methane from manure) and enhanced waste management -- Greener image -- Increased rural community infrastructure investment? -- The possibility for farmers to use digested material as fertilizer -- Promote diffusion and further refinement of biogas technology -- Develop new lines of business -- Provide examples to other municipalities -- Possible rural job creation and increased municipal tax revenue
The lists above were compiled based on data from the following sources (and good reading for case studies of municipalities in Sweden and Europe)
Heiskanen, E., 2006. Case 7 + 8: Västeras Biogas Plant and Lund Biogas Plant. In Create Acceptance: Historical and recent attitude of stakeholders. [url]: www.esteem-tool.eu/fileadmin/esteem-tool/docs/CASE_7_en_8_def.pdf
Khan, J., 2004. Siting conflicts in renewable energy projects: A biogas case study. [url] http://www.miljo.lth.se/svenska/internt/publikationer_internt/pdf-filer/Artikel%201%20(Jamils%20avhandlin).pdf
Khan, J. 2004. The Importance of Local Context in the Planning of Environmental Projects: Examples from Two Biogas Cases. [url]: http://www.miljo.lth.se/svenska/internt/publikationer_internt/pdf-filer/Artikel%204%20(Jamils%20avhandling).pdf
PROFACTOR GmbH., 2008. Biogas Accepted: Technological and non- technological demands in the different regions and case environments [url] http://www.biogasaccepted.eu/fileadmin/pdf/Deliverable_3_2.pdf
Biogas is definitely an interesting development path for municipalities, especially because they are already dealing with collection systems issues e.g. waste collection system and because they can make/oblige people to change their behaviour. However, I would also mention(I am not sure this blog is international or Sweden focused - let's say it's international) that some (French) minucipalities face inefficiencies in their operating methods which is a real problem when it comes to make money and operate plants the same way a profitable company would do.
SvaraRaderaA list of some other concerns for municipalities with biogas:
SvaraRadera-- expense (estimated investment cost in Kristianstad is about 10-12 million € so far, twice that number in other sources)
-- lack of public support and participation
-- negative perceptions of the developer
-- odor (which apparently can be scientifically measured!)
-- visual impact of the plant
-- handling of organic waste that cannot be digested
-- noise and traffic associated
-- complexity with multiple owners
-- NIMBY attitudes
-- can be in opposition to home composting
-- lack of opportunity for citizens to have influence the planning process
-- can be perceived as having a negative impact on the local physical environment
-- best used for densely populated areas, however, pellets are an alternative
-- demand for gas could exceed demand
But there are a lot of opportunities too!
SvaraRadera-- Lessens dependence on fossil fuels
-- Contributes to national aims
-- Diversified (more secure?) energy supply
-- Alternatives to large scale incineration
-- Make use of separately collected waste
-- Reduced energy expenses
-- Reduced GHG emissions from renewable power generation (around 75-200%, because it means avoiding the release of methane from manure) and enhanced waste management
-- Greener image
-- Increased rural community infrastructure investment?
-- The possibility for farmers to use digested material as fertilizer
-- Promote diffusion and further refinement of biogas technology
-- Develop new lines of business
-- Provide examples to other municipalities
-- Possible rural job creation and increased municipal tax revenue
The lists above were compiled based on data from the following sources (and good reading for case studies of municipalities in Sweden and Europe)
SvaraRaderaHeiskanen, E., 2006. Case 7 + 8: Västeras Biogas Plant and Lund Biogas Plant. In Create Acceptance: Historical and recent attitude of stakeholders. [url]: www.esteem-tool.eu/fileadmin/esteem-tool/docs/CASE_7_en_8_def.pdf
Khan, J., 2004. Siting conflicts in renewable energy projects: A biogas case study. [url]
http://www.miljo.lth.se/svenska/internt/publikationer_internt/pdf-filer/Artikel%201%20(Jamils%20avhandlin).pdf
Khan, J. 2004. The Importance of Local Context in the Planning of Environmental Projects: Examples from Two Biogas Cases. [url]: http://www.miljo.lth.se/svenska/internt/publikationer_internt/pdf-filer/Artikel%204%20(Jamils%20avhandling).pdf
PROFACTOR GmbH., 2008. Biogas Accepted: Technological and non- technological demands in the different regions and case environments [url]
http://www.biogasaccepted.eu/fileadmin/pdf/Deliverable_3_2.pdf