Anaerobic Digestion in Germany. Jan Liebetrau

Transcription

1 Anaerobic Digestion in Germany Jan Liebetrau Workshop Tokyo,

2 Outline Introduction of DBFZ Biogas a short introduction of technology for agricultural residues and solid wastes Germany state of technology Development of the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) and lessons learnt 2

3 DBFZ Development, Mission, Structure Development: Founded on 28 th February 2008 in Berlin as gemeinnützige GmbH Sole shareholder: Federal Republic of Germany, represented by the Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) By the end of 2013: constant expansion of headcount and infrastructure Mission: The key scientific mission of the DBFZ is to provide wide-ranging support for the efficient integration of biomass as a valuable resource for sustainable energy supply based on applied scientific research. Structure: About 220 employees until 12/2013 in the administration and the four research departments. General Management: Prof. Dr. mont. Michael Nelles (scientific) Daniel Mayer (administrative) Fig.: DBFZ 3

4 Research focus areas and structure The four research focus areas Sustainability / Sustainability assessment Innovative energy sources Demand driven technologies and master concepts for the supply of energy Monitoring 4

5 Department of biochemical conversion Characterisation and development of anaerobic processes Substrate characterisation Disintegration Additives Process Development Biochemical Conversion System optimisation Prozess monitoring and simulation System optimisation and integration Emission measurements and Status Economic viability of biogas /biomethane Monitoring / Biogas / Biomethane plant data bank Policy advisory Understanding the microbiological process Process optimisation Process regulation and simulation Flexibilisation Biogas technology Efficiency analysis Technical assessment Conceptualisation Consultancy and evaluation Supportive assiatance to demonstration plants Mikrobiology of anaerobic systems (MicAS) Composition and activities of microbial communities- process comprehension Monitoring tools and microbial early warning system Lignocellulosic Substrates Pretreatment and bio-augmentation

6 No posttreatment of digestate 6

7 Solid feeder /Infeed systems Fotos oben: Jan Liebetrau Fotos (unten v.l.n.r.): Agritechnic Heinrichs GmbH ( Planet Biogastechnik ( 7

8 Bio-waste fermentation: overview technologies Wet fermentation Substrate DM < 8-30% Continuous Type of fermentation Dry fermentation Substrate DM < 20-45% Non-continuous Dry fermentation Substrate DM < 30-45% (Percolation process) o A wide range fermentation types is available o Fermentation types are grouped according to (1) continuous or noncontinuous processes and (2) dry or wet fermentation DM digestate: 5-15% DM digestate: 20-30% DM digestate: 20-30% o The choice of process depends on the dry matter content Source changed from: BMU: Ökologisch sinnvolle Verwertung von Bioabfällen;

9 Continuous stirred-tank reactor (CSTR) o Wet fermentation with installed mixing device o Reliable and flexible technology o Reliable process biology o Exploitation of whole energy potential o Concept widely applied with numerous technologies and brands available: e.g. Ökobit, BTA, AAT, Strabag, AAB, Arrowbio, Entec, Envirotec, Envitec, Schubio, AMB Haase, Biostab, Preseco Foto: 9

10 Plug flow fermentation continuous operation Biogas Substrate Fermenter Digestate Mixer Solid Solid separation Sewage water o Continuous fermentation via vertical plug flow method for substrates with high TS content o Reliable and flexible technology o Exploitation of whole energy potential o Concept widely applied with numerous technologies/brands available: Axpo Kompogas, Archea, Dranco (vertikal), Strabag, Rückert Source: P. Weiland (2007) Technik von Biogasanlagen, FAL 10

11 Biomass in the German Energy System Percentage of final energy consumption generated from renewables in 2012 Total: PJ Source: Renewable energy in figures, BMU 2012 / Own presentation 11

12 Energy supply from biomass in Germany 2012 Biogenic liquid fuels; 0.3% Biofuels; 17.7% Biogas; 17.7% Sewage gas; 1.5% Landfill gas; 0.3% Biogenic share of waste; 6.9% Biogenic solid fuels; 55% total in 2012: billion kwh Source: Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (2013) 2009 UNIVERSITY OF ROSTOCK FAKULTY OF AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 12

13 Entwicklung des Biogasanlagenbestandes Ende 2013 ca Biogasanlagen rd MWel in Betrieb ohne Biogasaufbereitungs-, Deponie- und Klärgasanlagen 2012 Neubau ca Anlagen, Neu+Erweiterung 350 MW 2013 Neubau ca. 200 Anlagen, Neu+Erweiterung 200 MW DBFZ 5/

14 Repowering Existing plants have potential for improvement Reasons for reconstruction: Wrong design and construction High costs and efficiency requirement Increasing legal requirements (environment and safety) Flexibility of output Replacement of equipment Substrate changes 14

15 Optimierungen von Biogasanlagen 2011/2012 Häufigkeit der Umsetzung von Maßnahmen zur Anlagenerweiterung (Mehrfachnennungen möglich); (Betreiberbefragungen DBFZ für die Bezugsjahre 2011 und 2012 im Vergleich) Quelle: DBFZ,

16 Electricity from Biogas and Biomethan Abschätzung aus der installierten Leistung DBFZ 12/2013, Vorbereitung und Begleitung der Erstellung des Erfahrungsberichts 2014 gemäß 65 EEG 16

17 Upgrading technologies 8% 4% 3% 33% Aminwäsche Druckwasserwäsche Druckwechseladsorption Genosorb -Wäsche 26% Membrantrennverfahren k.a. 26% n= 133 Eingesetzte CO2-Abtrennungsverfahren, relative Einsatzhäufigkeit in % (DBFZ-Datenbank, Stand 2/2014) 17

18 Substrate input in biogas plants biogas plants 0.4% renewable Energy crops resources 41.4% biowaste 3.9% 54.3% manure industrial and agricultural residues n=814 Source: DBFZ Survey (2013) 2009 UNIVERSITY OF ROSTOCK FAKULTY OF AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 18

19 Biogas Generation from Biowaste in Germany about 130 plants generating biogas from organic waste digestion in operation (11/2013) input: exclusively or predominantly biowaste and green waste, organic waste and waste from the food industry 75 plants use municipal biowaste from separate waste collection Waste digestion plants in Germany according to state of operation and substrate input (DBFZ database, 11/2013) Source: DBFZ, Projekt Stromerzeugung aus Biomasse,

20 More recyclables than residues in 2010, Biowaste (2008): 8.4 Mill. t/a 2009 UNIVERSITY OF ROSTOCK FAKULTY OF AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 20

21 Bioabfallvergärung Substrateinsatz (massebezogen) Quelle: DBFZ, Betreiberbefragung von Bioabfallanlagen, 2009/

22 Biowaste: fertiliser and humus (Soil quality) Marketing options for quality-controlled compost UNIVERSITY OF ROSTOCK FAKULTY OF AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 22

23 Specific costs economy of scale Investment costs /Kwel Investment costs /Kwel Installed cap. KWel Source: (Faustzahlen) Source: DBFZ 23

24 Vergütung in Cent je kwh Costs EEG-2009 EEG-2012 EEG installierte Leistung der Anlage in kw Vergleich beispielhafter Vergütungen für Biogasanlagen nach EEG-2009, EEG-2012 und EEG-2014 (NawaRo/Gülle-Basis, inkl. Kapazitätsprämie für EEG-2014) Source: DBFZ Hintergrundpapier 2014

25 Biogas past and current situation 10 years ago Today Perspective for farmers, climate protection and option additional income 2 Mill ha of unused land, Limited land available, as 2 Mill ha of agricultural land are used for bioenergy production, increasing demand on land worldwide, public debate grows difficult All technologies have been promoted, development unclear Target of politics: increase of share of renewable energies Highly flexible energy production from wind and photovoltaic, steady production might not be needed, cost development differs Change of the energy system necessary Wind an photovoltaics shows decreasing costs, biogas not and there is limited potential for reduction of the costs Bioenergy as a flexible resource for heat, power, transportation Where to focus? Power, Biomethane, Biogas as fuel? Long term perspective? 25

26 Renewable Energy Source Act (EEG) (2000) Guaranteed priority access to the grid RES Guaranteed electricity feed in tariffs (FiT) for 20 years Degression of feed-in-tariffs for biogas plants 1% p.a., depends on starting year of operation of biogas plant Small plant sizes have higher specific investment costs than large ones -> Basic FiT according to different plant sizes ( 500 kwel; 5 MWel, >5 MWel) Difference costs between electricity from conventional and renewable resources paid by consumers, not by government (since 2009 regulated in AusglMechV 2009), difference costs amounted to ct/kwh in

27 1st amendment of the Renewable Energy Source Act (EEG) (2004) New regulations: Introduction of new plant size of 150 kwel to promote decentralized concepts Annual degression of FiT increased from 1% p.a. to 1.5% p.a. Introduction of several bonuses, difference between basic payments (plant size) and additional payments (bonus): Energy crop bonus (e.g. energy crops, manure), technology bonus (upgrading to biomethane since it is more expensive, dry fermentation) and CHP bonus (excess heat utilization in combination with defined options for heat utilization) Impacts: Increase of average total payments (basic tariff and bonuses) Average installed capacity of biogas plants increased considerably Plant number increased substantially 27

28 2nd amendment of the Renewable Energy Source Act (EEG) (2009) I New regulations: Increase of basic tariff for biogas plant 150 kwel and of some bonuses (energy crops, CHP/heat utilization), Decrease of basic tariff for biogas plants > 150 kwel Dry fermentation not considered innovative technology anymore (ambiguous definition of law regarding wet and dry fermentation) Bonus for the utilization of biowaste Additional bonus for the utilization of manure (mass limit: at least 30% of manure) Annual degression of FiT reduced from 1.5% p.a. to 1% p.a. Introduction of degression of bonus payments Progress report about development of EEG every four years as basis for amendments 28

29 2nd amendment of the Renewable Energy Source Act (EEG) (2009) II Impacts: Start of operation of new biogas plants increased from 350 in 2008 to 900 new biogas plants in 2009 Around 50 biogas plants with biogas upgrading to biomethane operating in December 2010 (biomethane plants benefit in general from cultivated biomass, CHP and technology bonus; FiT requirement: 100% excess heat utilization, emission and energy demand limits, covering heat demand with renewable energy Increase of average payments for biogas plants compared to

30 2nd amendment of the Renewable Energy Source Act (EEG) (2009) System too complex - costs for documentation and auditing of used substrates Manure bonus not so effective because of the mass limit of manure Coupling of manure and cultivated biomass (energy crops) further concentration of maize production in regions with intensive livestock farming and an excess of nutrients, Additional bonus of innovative concepts or technologies are not often used Alternative energy crops as feedstock cause in general more costs than maize silage Discussion about the maize production in Germany are to solve within specific agricultural regulations (based on regional needs) 30

31 Main aspects of the amendment - EEG-2012 Main aspects Cost reduction Further development of electricity from Renewables Cost-based remuneration Substrate specific tariffs Incentive to integrate biogas within the energy system Simplify the complex feed-in-tariffsystem in Germany (reduction of additional prices (bonus)) Efficiency / fix a minimum standard (e.g. waste heat utilization at least 60% or 60% of manure) to get the financial support 31

32 3nd amendment of the Renewable Energy Source Act (EEG) (2012) I New regulations and expected impact: Separate tariff for biogas plants using biowaste -> mobilization of organic waste and residues for new and existing plants Increase of tariff for biomethane plants> promotion of biomethane production Introduction of special category for small biogas plants using at least 80% manure Average decrease of tariffs of 10-15%, especially for small plants and increase of degression from 1 to 2% for basic tariff -> reduction of costs for biogas production for consumers 32

33 New Feed-in-Tariffs (EEG-2012) Installed capacity Biogas plants (excl. biowaste) Basic tariff Substrate tariff I Substrate tariff II 2 Feed-in-tariffs Biogas upgrading/ Biomethane bonus Biowaste biogas plants 1 [kw el ] [ ct/kw el ] , / Nm³/h: 3 1,000 Nm³/h: 2 1,400 Nm³/h: , Small manure plants Only for biogas plants using specific biowaste and post rotting process for solid fermentation residues. The stabilized fermentation residues have to be used materially (fertilizer). The tariff is only to be combined with the bonus for biomethane production. 2 Only for selected, environmental friendly substra tes according to definition 3 Special category for manure plants until 75 kw installed capacity, not to be combined with other tariffs. 4 Electricity from manure > 500 kw 6 ct/kwh 33

34 4te Amendment EEG August 2014 Installation of limit for bioenergy (max. 100 MWel/a) Abatment of tariffs Substrate related tariffs (ESK 1 und 2) Biogas upgrading Flexibilisation of existing plants (Installation limit 1350 MW) Integration of RES into the market is obligatory Plant registration Existing plants are limited to their operational data Manure based plants and waste plants have constant tariffs New plants wont be constructed Existing plants have no future perspective, if EEG period (20 years for each plant) is over 34

35 Conclusion German Renewable Energy Law Successfully increasing development of electricity from Renewables Framework changes continuously to adjust the market development with political aims Cost and substrate oriented renumeration Additional tariffs for support upgrading technologies, waste materials (e.g. manure, biowaste, straw) and waste heat utilization due to the positive ecological effects complex feed-in-tariff-system in Germany due to the fact of regulation in excess 35

36 Contact Jan Liebetrau DBFZ Deutsches Biomasseforschungszentrum gemeinnützige GmbH Torgauer Straße 116 D Leipzig Tel.: +49 (0)