Journal
ENERGY SUSTAINABILITY AND SOCIETY
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -Publisher
SPRINGEROPEN
DOI: 10.1186/s13705-018-0163-2
Keywords
Aquatic biomass; Aquatic macrophytes; Biogas; Cost; Value chain; Economic viability
Funding
- German Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection
- Energy and Climate Funds (EKF) [22402014]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Background: Landscape maintenance in Germany today requires regular and extensive de-weeding of waterways, mostly to ensure water runoff and provide flood protection. The costs for this maintenance are high, and the harvested biomass goes to waste. Methods: We evaluated the economic feasibility of using water plant biomass as a substrate in biogas generation. We set up a plausible supply chain, used it to calculate the costs of using aquatic water biomass as a seasonal feedstock to generate biogas, and compared it against maize silage, a standard biogas substrate. We also calculated the costs of using the aquatic biomass mixed with straw silage. Results: Although subject to estimation errors, our results do show that it is economically feasible to use water plants as a seasonal feedstock in a biogas plant, even in markets where their disposal yields only moderate gate fees. Ensiling water plants with straw, however, incurs the added high price of straw and thus only yields a positive financial result if gate fees for water plant disposal are very high. Conclusions: Water plant biomass need not remain an unwelcome by-product of de-weeding waterways. The funds for its costly disposal can be redirected to the biomass supply chain and support the profitable use of aquatic biomass as a seasonal feedstock in biogas plants. However, the legal status of material from de-weeding needs to be clarified before biogas operators can act. Further development of technology for harvesting aquatic biomass is also called for.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available