+ All Categories
Home > Documents > FABbiogas BIOGAS PRODUCTION AND BIOGAS … production and biogas potentials from residues of the...

FABbiogas BIOGAS PRODUCTION AND BIOGAS … production and biogas potentials from residues of the...

Date post: 24-May-2018
Category:
Upload: doananh
View: 236 times
Download: 5 times
Share this document with a friend
22
BIOGAS PRODUCTION AND BIOGAS POTENTIALS FROM RESIDUES OF THE EUROPEAN FOOD AND BEVERAGE INDUSTRY IEE-Project FABbiogas: BIOGAS production from organic waste in the European Food And Beverage industry FABbiogas
Transcript

BIOGAS PRODUCTION AND BIOGAS POTENTIALS

FROM RESIDUES OF THE EUROPEAN FOOD AND

BEVERAGE INDUSTRY

IEE-Project FABbiogas: BIOGAS production from organic waste in

the European Food And Beverage industry

FABbiogas

Table of content 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1

2 Methodology ................................................................................................................... 3

3 Task 1 ............................................................................................................................ 3

3.1 Map showing national biogas plants using FAB industry waste and anaerobic

wastewater plants in the food and beverage industry ......................................................... 3

3.2 Basic characteristics of existing biogas plants and anaerobic wastewater plants .... 4

4 TASK 2 ..........................................................................................................................12

4.1 Maps showing national waste streams of different FAB industry branches .............12

4.2 Basic characteristics of waste streams ...................................................................15

5 TASK 3 ..........................................................................................................................18

5.1 Description of the barriers ......................................................................................18

5.1.1 For biogas plant operators...............................................................................18

5.1.2 For food and beverage producers ...................................................................18

6 References ....................................................................................................................20

1 /22

NATIONAL REPORT OF GERMANY

This report was written in the frame of the IEE project FABbiogas, which is supported by the

Intelligent Energy Europe Programme. The aim of this report is to give an overview of the

biogas market in Germany, to evaluate the potential of renewable energy sources from waste

in the food and beverage industry (FAB), including the identification of the production of

biogas from organic waste, and the untapped potential of organic waste in various industries

of food and beverages and to identify non-technological barriers that prevent development

and use of renewable energy potential.

1 Introduction

The Federal Republic of Germany is located in Central Europe, bordered by the Netherlands,

Belgium, Luxembourg and France to the west, Switzerland, Austria to the south and Poland

and the Czech Republic to the east and the North and Baltic Sea and Denmark to the north.

The total area of Germany is around 357,000 km2 with a population of over 80 million

people.

For administrative purposes Germany is divided into 16 federal states, 19 government

districts, and 295 administrative districts.

With the commission of the Renewable Energies Law (EEG) in 2000 the number of biogas

plants in Germany continually rose. Especially the amendment of the EEG in 2004 and the

new version in 2009 supported the expansion of biogas plants. In 2012 around 7.515 biogas

plants in Germany with an installed electrical power of 3.352 MW had been placed. For the

year 2013 7.720 and for 2014 a slightly higher number of 7900 biogas plants are predicted,

as the quantity of new installations per year clearly declines after 2011 (figure 1)

(Fachverband Biogas e. V. 2013).

2 /22

Figure 1: Development of the quantity of biogas plants and installed electrical power in Megawatt (MW) (Fachverband Biogas e. V. 2013).

Interviews with 652 operators in 2011/2012 brought out, that the major inputs are energy

crops with 49 % and animal manure and slurry with 43 %. Industrial and agricultural residues

only account for 1 % of the total input (in relation to mass) (DBFZ 2012). However the

number of waste biogas plants continually rises.

The current situation is estimated to be (economically) favorable for implementing new waste

biogas plants. The economic efficiency of individual biogas plants depends on the amount

and quality of the substrate and the utilization of the biogas and the digestate, as well as on

the legal framework conditions. Additionally favorable is the current still very moderate

interest rate and the feed-in tariff of EEG 2012 for biological waste. Dependent on the

specific gas yield and the size of the plant it is possible to generate net revenues ranging

between 30 and 45€ per ton of input material for electricity out of waste biogas. (Raussen

and Sprick 2012)

The advantages of waste biogas plants are the generation of renewable energy in a closed

loop (cascade utilization of waste and digestate) and the fact, that no agricultural area is

required for biogas production.

The possibility of using anaerobic wastewater plants offers another interesting perspective

for beverage and food industries to generate and utilize biogas in the own company. The

high demand for water and the high organic load of the wastewater with fat, oil or nitrogen or

phosphorous rich substances leads to high wastewater charges in public sewage plants. The

installation of own anaerobic wastewater plants offers the advantage to save high

wastewater charges on the one hand and on the other hand to produce and use biogas as a

3 /22

renewable energy source and generate heat or electricity for the beverage or food

manufacturing process.

2 Methodology

Because of the huge amount of biogas plants and food and beverage companies in Germany

the conduction of interviews with representative firms was considered inappropriate.

Additionally, the response rate for novel questioning of biogas operators is very low, because

of already existing, frequently distributed surveys. As there is a high interest in biogas in

Germany there already exist a lot of studies describing the situation of present biogas plants

as well as studies analyzing the remaining potential of substrates for biogas plants, such as

FAB wastes.

For all tasks an internet research was conducted and existing literature was examined.

3 Task 1

3.1 Map showing national biogas plants using FAB industry waste and

anaerobic wastewater plants in the food and beverage industry

Based on the literature and internet research we were able to identify 77 biogas plants, using

FAB residues as substrates and 17 anaerobic wastewater plants in the food and beverage

industry (Figure 2). The following reports were examined (the presented data from the

reports was complemented with internet research): Kern and Raussen (2011), Rettenberger,

et al. (2012), Witzenhausen-Institut (2008), STmUG (2013).

4 /22

Figure 2: Biogas Plants using FAB industry waste as (co-)substrates (red) and industrial biogas plants (orange) and anaerobic wastewater plants (blue) in the food and beverage industry

(Link to the map:https://mapsengine.google.com/map/edit?mid=zUa7GcnHdHSI.ke0xRUcXfTKA)

3.2 Basic characteristics of existing biogas plants and anaerobic

wastewater plants

In Germany we identified 77 biogas plants which use waste from the food and beverage

industry and 17 anaerobic wastewater treatment plants. As we used only literature and

internet research to gather information, the datasets in table 1 and 2 are not always

5 /22

complete. We assume that the research covers about 50-60 % of all relevant biogas

installations.

Most of the biogas plants are Co-Fermentation plants, which also use other substrates. Only

eight out of 77 biogas plants use 100 % bio waste from the food or beverage industry, with

inputs of substrate between 4.800 and 75.000 t/a. Three of these plants are industrial biogas

plants, including two potato processing companies and a slaughterhouse. There are six

biogas plants with an input of FAB waste of more than 50.000 t/a. The majority of the plants

thus use less than 10.000 t/a (Table 1).

Table 1: Biogas plants using FAB waste in Germany classified by federal state * Industrial biogas plants

Name

Installed

electrical

power [kW]

Substrate

capacity

[t/a]

Realized

capacity

[t/a]

Amount of

FAB waste

[t/a]

Baden-Wuerttemberg

BIGA Energie GmbH u.

CoKG not specified 18.000 not specified 9.000

Bioenergie Mayer GbR not specified not specified 5.000 2.500

Biogasanlage Geislingen 1.600 40.000 not specified not specified

Biogasanlage Kupferzell 450 not specified not specified 1

Remondis BKF GmbH 1.800 45.000 39.000 2.300

Vergäungsanlage Leonberg not specified 29.900 30.000 100

Bavaria

Fritz Preissler jun. 299 not specified not specified 1.400

Abfallwirtschaftszentrum

Rothmühle 360 17.300 not specified 2.500

Benc Bioenergiecentrum

KG 480 12.000 6.000 2.000

Bioabfallvergärungsanlag

e Schwabach 614 16.000 8.000 5.000

Biogasanlage Augsburg 2.000 55.000 50.000 not specified

Biogasanlage Hamlar 1.011 not specified 18.000 18.000

Biogasanlage Neunburg 340 not specified 15.000 15.000

Biomethananlage

Wolnzach

10.000 (total

power) not specified 75.000 75.000

Entsorgungs- und 690 not specified 20.900 400

6 /22

Verwertungs GmbH

Eggertshofen

ERC Landkreis Cham

GmbH 700 12.700 12.000 3.700

EVA - Energie- und

Verwertungsanlage 191 10.000 not specified 2.000

Johann Greimel

Biogasanlage 500 not specified 12.400 5.100

Name

Installed

electrical

power [kW]

Substrate

capacity

[t/a]

Realized

capacity

[t/a]

Amount of

FAB waste

[t/a]

Johann Kinzner

Biogasanlage 328 not specified not specified 510

Josef Heißenhuber

Biogasanlage 724 14.000 14.000 6.000

Ludwig Scheugenpflug 570 10.000 10.000 6.800

Martin Bachmayer 320 13.500 10.200 7.400

Michael Blei GmbH &

Co.KG 1.075 14.400 not specified 4.000

Öko-Power GmbH & Co.

Biogas KG 361 50.000 not specified 15.000

Brandenburg

Biogasanlage Alteno 1.200 85.000 not specified 16.600

Biogasanlage Gröden 1.600 not specified 110.000 82.300

Biogasanlage

Hennickendorf 610 not specified not specified 3.000

Biogasanlagen

Fürstenwalde 1.340 85.000 85.000 13.000

BioKraft Karstädt GmbH 1.202 75.000 75.000 52.000

Co-Vergärungsanlage

Brieske-Senftenberg 569 12.000 4.800 4.800

Hesse

Biogasanlage Bebra 825 18.000 not specified not specified

Biogas- und

Kompostierungsanlage

Cyriaxweimar

370 not specified 12.000 1.600

7 /22

Biogaspark Großenlüder not specified not specified not specified 8.100

Brensbach Biokraft

Brensbach GmbH&Co.KG not specified 70.055 11.500 1.500

Energor GmbH Gerd

Preußner 650 not specified 18.000 4.000

Flörsheim-

Wicker Biogasanlage not specified 45.000 45.000 700

Infraserv GmbH u. Co.

Höchst KG 5.100 940.000 330.000 52.800

Rhein-Main Biokompost

GmbH 680 33.000 33.000 800

Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania

Biogas Barth GmbH 866 73.000 not specified 3.400

Biogasanlage Neubukow 938 80.000 80.000 37.300

ReFood

GmbH Niederlassung

Malchin

2.042 76.500 50.000 3.500

Vietlübbe Biogas GmbH 230 18.250 18.250 14.900

Lower Saxony

Biogasanlage

Dannenberg 700 35.000 15.000 15.000

Biogasanlage Surwold 950 40.900 40.000 11.300

Biogasanlage Werlte 2.500 110.000 not specified 31.800

Biogasanlage Wittmund 2.500 145.000 not specified 108.900

Biorek-

Lathen Biogasanlage not specified 25.000 not specified 9.800

Name

Installed

electrical

power [kW]

Substrate

capacity

[t/a]

Realized

capacity

[t/a]

Amount of

FAB waste

[t/a]

Bollmer Umwelt GmbH 3.500 120.000 not specified 99.000

GEV Gehlenberger

Bioenergie GmbH & Co.

KG

not specified 73.000 not specified 21.900

Heinfelder Bioenergie

GmbH & Co. KG not specified 90.000 30.000 7.900

8 /22

Lutterhof Biogas 350 11.000 11.000 4.500

Oehmer Bio Energie

GmbH & Co. KG not specified 51.100 44.000 40.300

Rotenburger Rohstoff und

Energie GmbH & Co. KG 1.020 40.150 30.000 13.400

Vergärungsanlage

Bardowick 2.128 40.000 36.500 22.400

Vergärungsanlage

Watenbüttel not specified 20.000 20.000 500

Warmser Bioenergie

GmbH & Co. KG not specified 10.000 10.000 10.000

9 /22

Name

Installed

electrical

power [kW]

Substrate

capacity

[t/a]

Realized

capacity

[t/a]

Amount of

FAB waste

[t/a]

North Rhine-Westphalia

Biogasanlage Borchen 480 not specified 20.000 18.000

Brakel-Beller Bioenergie not specified 3.800 3.800 1.400

Faultürme der Kläranlage

Krefeld not specified 547.500 376.600 47.000

Holz GmbH & Co. KG not specified 7.900 not specified 1.300

Kompost- und

Vergärungsanlage Lemgo 938 66.000 not specified 60

Loick Bioenergie GmbH not specified not specified not specified 4.000

M & H Glitz-Ehringhausen

Biogas GmbH & Co. KG not specified 12.000 12.000 1.000

Neue Energie GmbH not specified not specified 8.000 2.000

Vergärungsanlage

Gescher 500 18.000 18.000 2.000

Rhineland-Palatinate

Schönberger Andreas 110 4.900 not specified 5.000

Saxony

Abfallbehandlungsanlage

Thallwitz 536 24.200 24.200 2.200

Biogasanlage Zobes 744 40.000 not specified not specified

Biogasanlagen

Weidensdorf 720 not specified 37.500 37.500

Co-Fermentationsanlage

Radeberg 760 60.000 56.000 5.000

LRZ Landhandels- und

Recycling-Zentrum GmbH 700 30.000 5.000 2.300

Saxony-Anhalt

Biogasanlage Möckern* 330 not specified 12.400 12.400

Biogas- und

Kompostierungsanlage

Weißenfels

856 30.000 24.000 1.200

Biogasanlage Schkopau not specified 110.000 60.000 16.100

SARIA ReFood GmbH 1.886 73.000 42.500 8.000

10 /22

Niederlassung Genthin

Schradenbiogas GmbH &

Co. KG not specified 40.200 not specified 6.700

Schleswig-Holstein

Vergärungsanlage Kiel 536 21.000 21.000 4.000

In figure 3 you can see the total amount of FAB waste used in the examined biogas plants for

each federal state. Lower Saxony has by far the highest input of FAB waste, followed by

Bavaria and Brandenburg. The remaining federal states use far fewer amounts of FAB waste

for biogas production. Bavaria is the federal state with most of the biogas plants followed by

Lower-Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia.

Figure 3: Amount of FAB waste and number of biogas plant classified by federal states

Additionally to the above named biogas plants 17 anaerobic wastewater treatment plants in

the food and beverage industry were identified. Twelve of these industrial plants are

integrated into breweries and one each in the beverage, chees, yeast and tea producing

industry. By far most of the wastewater plants are located in Bavaria. Table 2 gives more

detailed information on the characteristics of the different wastewater plants. The produced

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

450.0

1000 t

/a

Amount of FAB waste used

Number of biogas plants

11 /22

biogas is utilized in the own company to generate process heat and or electricity. The

breweries are thus able to cover around 10% to 20% of their total heat demand and the yeast

producing company can cover 72% of the total electricity demand.

Table 2 Characteristics of the anaerobic wastewater treatment plants in the German beverage and food industry

Name Industry Utilization of

the Biogas Energie production

Bavaria

Andreas Leikeim GmbH & Co

KG Brewery

Heating

boiler Not specified

Augustiner-Bräu Wagner KG Brewery Co-firing

facility

18% of the total heat

demand

Kulmbacher Brauerei Aktien-

Gesellschaft Brewery

Heating

boiler

10% of the total heat

demand

MB-Holding GmbH & Co. KG Tea production

CHP or

Heating

boiler

Not specified

Oettinger Brauerei GmbH Brewery Heating

boiler Not specified

Paulaner Brauerei & Co. KG Brewery Co-firing

facility

18% of the total heat

demand

Privatbrauerei Erdinger

Weißbräu Brewery CHP Not specified

Pyraser Landbrauerei GmbH

& Co. KG Brewery

Heating

boiler Not specified

Hesse

Licher Privatbrauerei Ihring

Melchior GmbH und Co. KG Brewery CHP 417 000 kWhel.

Lower-Saxony

Hefefabrik Leiber GmbH Yeast

production CHP

72% of the total

electricity demand

Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania

DMK Deutsches Milchkontor

GmbH

Käseproduktio

n CHP Not specified

North Rhine-Westphalia

12 /22

H. Borgmeier GmbH & Co.

KG

Slaughterhous

e Not specified Not specified

Valensina GmbH

Beverage

production Not specified Not specified

Rhineland-Palatinate

Bitburger Braugruppe GmbH Brewery

CHP or

Heating

boiler

2 300 000 kWhtherm.

1 900 000 kWhel.

Saarland

Karlsberg Brauerei GmbH Brewery CHP Not specified

Saxony-Anhalt

Hasseröder Brauerei GmbH Brewery CHP Not specified

Thuringia

Privatbrauerei Metzler GmbH

& Co. KG Brewery CHP Not specified

4 TASK 2

4.1 Maps showing national waste streams of different FAB industry

branches

In Germany it is not possible to publish data from any companies without a specific

permission. Because of the high competition among companies in the same branch many

firms do not want their data to be published. One possibility to avoid tracing back to a single

company is to gather aggregated data. The literature we examined for task 2 therefore only

provided data with aggregated values for the federal states of Germany (Gaida, et al. 2013).

Unfortunately it is not possible to show the boundaries of the federal states in Google Maps

(Link to the map:

https://mapsengine.google.com/map/edit?mid=zUa7GcnHdHSI.ke0xRUcXfTKA). With the

program Cadenza Professional an alternative map was created to show the waste production

in Germany for the different federal states more clearly (figure 5).

13 /22

Figure 4: National waste streams of the different FAB industry branches in each federal state (data based on Gaida et al. 2013)

To secure the data integrity of the participating industries in its survey, Gaida, et al. (2013)

aggregated the produced amount of waste for some of the federal states. In order to estimate

the production for each state, the amount was divided through the number of FAB industries

in these states and subsequently allocated to each single state. If there was no information of

Gaida, et al. (2013) on the dry matter content which was needed for calculations, data of

KTBL (2013) was used.

14 /22

The unit t/a refers to tons of fresh matter per year.

Meat & fish = slaughter, meat and fish processing; Fruit & vegetable = fruit and vegetable

processing; Fat & oil = production of vegetable and animal oils and fats; Dairy = milk

processing; Starch = starch (products) production and milling and hulling industry; Baking =

production of bakery products and pasta; Sugar & confectionary = production of sugar and

confectionary products; Distilleries and wine = distilleries, wineries and wine press houses;

Breweries and malt = production of brewery and malt products; Coffe & tea = processing of

coffee and tea and production of coffee substitutes; Other = production of condiments,

sauces, convenience food, and dietary and other foodstuffs

Gaida, et al. (2013) identified 1.894 German FAB companies and gathered information from

1.767 companies. Altogether they produced approximately 35 million tons of fresh waste,

which corresponds to more than 13 million tons of dry organic waste. In figure 5 one can see

that in most of the federal states the dominating waste producers are dairy, fat and oil, starch

and sugar and confectionary companies. In Saarland and Berlin starch production (including

cereal processing) is by far the main contributor to organic waste from FAB industries.

Figure 5 shows the number of FAB companies and the amount of produced waste for the

federal states. It is remarkable, that the four states Baden-Wuerttemberg, Bavaria, Lower

Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia hold by far the most FAB companies and produce the

biggest amount of organic waste.

15 /22

Figure 5: Amount of FAB waste and number of FAB companies classified by federal states

4.2 Basic characteristics of waste streams

Gaida, et al. (2013) not only analyzed the FAB waste production in Germany but also the

utilization of the different waste types. As the total waste in Germany is used in any possible

way and almost nothing remains unused (disposed), the authors defined a potential, which

could be redirected into higher-value utilization. This “redirectable” potential contains all

waste streams, which are currently disposed (external thermal or energetic utilization) or

exported. Table 2 summarizes the total FAB waste production, the number of companies in

the different FAB industry branches, the current utilization and the “redirectable” potential of

the different waste fractions in Germany. The biggest “redirectable” potential with 600.000 t/a

lies in the sugar and confectionary industry followed by distilleries and wine press houses

with 410.000 t/a and breweries and malt production with 330.000 t/a . In “Other” food

industries another amount of 160.000 t/a could be “redirected”. To “other” industries belong

the production of condiments, sauces, convenience food, and dietary and other foodstuffs.

The highest production of sugar and confectionary wastes is found in North Rhine-

Westphalia, Lower-Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt. The highest amount of distillery and wine

house waste accumulates in Rhineland-Palatinate, followed by Baden-Wuerttemberg and

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

Mio

. t/

a

total FAB waste

number of FAB companies

16 /22

Hesse. Breweries, malt production and “other” food waste is mostly produced in Bavaria and

North Rhine-Westphalia

Altogether a “redirectable” potential of 1,5 Mio. t/a is estimated for Germany. This represents

4 % of the total waste production of the German FAB industries. It was though not possible to

draw specific potentials for all waste types. The majority of the waste when producing fruit

and vegetables, fat and oil and dairy products or starch is used as feed. It might be possible,

that in future, the utilization of these waste types in biogas plants becomes more profitable.

However there remain still questions about the ecological aspects when feed has to be

substituted (for example through import).

More interesting is the possible utilization of the waste from the baking industry. There do not

yet exist well-established utilization paths and further investigation should be done to

uncover important potentials. During starch production the accumulated powder is currently

burned (Gaida, et al. 2013). This waste fraction could also be an advantageous substrate for

biogas plants.

Assuming an average methane production rate of 615 Nm3/t oDM for bio waste with a mean

organic dry matter (oDM) of 50 % of the total dry matter (DM), the yield of the total FAB

waste amount produced in Germany is more than 4.000 million standard m3 biogas, which

corresponds to around 2.500 million standard m3 methane. The yield of the “redirectable

potential” is estimated to be around 120 million standard m3 methane (KTBL 2013).

17 /22

Table 3: Current utilization and „redirectable“ potential of the different waste types (Gaida, et al. 2013)

Waste type Number of

companies

Production

[t/a]

Main current

utilization

„Redirectable“

potential [t/a]

Meat and fish

industry 454 1.620.000

Feed, fertilisation,

oleochemistry 0

Fruit and

vegetable

industry

94 890.000 Feed, biogas plant,

material use not specified

Fat and oil

production 41 6.900.000 Feed (100%) not specified

Dairy industry 119 11.800.000 Feed, biogas plant,

material use not specified

Starch production

and cereal

processing

85 4.910.000 Feed, material use not specified

Baking industry 410 600.000

No well-established

utilization, thermal

use

not specified

Sugar and

confectionary

industry

108 4.840.000 Feed, thermal use 600.000

Distilleries and

wine press

houses

65 600.000 Fertilisation, feed 410.000

Breweries and

malt production 187 2.430.000 Fertilisation, feed 330.000

Coffee and tea

processing 31 70.000

Biogas plants,

thermal use (intern) 5.000

Other 173 180.000 Feed, biotechnology 160.000

Total 1.767 34.840.000 1.510.000

Potential methane yield [Mio. Nm3] 120

18 /22

5 TASK 3

5.1 Description of the barriers

5.1.1 For biogas plant operators

The ongoing debate about the implementation of energy system transformation in Germany

leads to rapid changes in the legal framework and thus in the long-term predictable feed-in

tariffs of the EEG. Given the long planning time, the authorization and the construction of a

biogas plant of two to three years, these rapid changes are less conducive for the realization

of new biogas projects (Raussen and Sprick 2012).

The latest amendment of the EEG (EEG 2012) only offers the basic feed-in tariff for Co-

Fermentation plants with less than 90 % bio waste. An extra and about 2 to 8 ct/kWh higher

feed-in tariff is offered, if more than 90% bio waste is used.

Another important financial aspect is the price for the substrate. Some years ago, before and

at the beginning of the biogas boom, the industries had to pay fees in order to get the waste

treated in a biogas plant. Today the plant operators have to pay to get the waste. In recently

conducted survey 218 biogas operators in Bavaria were questioned about the economic

situation of their biogas plants. The most frequent stated reason for a bad economic situation

was the cost for the substrate (C.A.R.M.E.N. 2013).

Brohmann, Hennenberg and Hünecke (2008) sighted literature and questioned biogas

experts about non-technical barriers preventing the implementation of biogas production. The

most important barriers were acceptance problems with higher traffic volume, odor emissions

and noise and lack of knowledge.

5.1.2 For food and beverage producers

For the industry in particular economic aspects play an important role for the choice of the

waste utilization. For many waste types selling the residues, especially as feed, is the

economical best way. If the waste is being used internally, the utilization process must be

well-planned and often requires high storage costs in order to avoid a stop of the production.

In particular the storage of highly perishable goods is difficult and expensive (Gaida, et al.

2013).

The authorization of a biogas plant using bio waste is very complex and often leads to

problems. In Germany there exist a high number of different legislations and norms for

biogas plants which are to be considered. These legislations are constantly changing and are

19 /22

therefore not adjusted to each other very well. In addition, the implementation of the

legislations differs in the federal states, which for some states results in different

requirements. (Loibl 2004)

To find the best and most suitable solution for waste utilization it is necessary to conduct

case-by-case preliminary feasibility studies, which take all the operational, regional and

ecological characteristics into account (Gaida, et al. 2013).

20 /22

6 References

Brohmann, Bettina, Klaus Hennenberg, and Katja Hünecke. Materialband: K.

Hemmnisanalyse Biogasausbau. Ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung,

2008.

C.A.R.M.E.N. Konjunkturumfrage bei Biogasanlagenbetreibern in Bayern. Stand:

29.01.2013. C.A.R.M.E.N. e. V., 2013.

DBFZ. Monitoring zur Wirkung des Erneuerbare- Energien-Gesetz (EEG) auf die

Entwicklung der Stromerzeugung aus Biomasse. Endbericht zur EEG-Periode 2009

bis 2011. Deutsches Biomasseforschungszentrum (DBFZ) gGmbH, 2012.

Fachverband Biogas e. V. "Branchenzahlen - Prognose 2013 / 2014." 2013.

http://www.biogas.org/edcom/webfvb.nsf/id/DE_Branchenzahlen/$file/13-11-

11_Biogas%20Branchenzahlen_2013-2014.pdf (accessed 12 17, 2013).

Gaida, Bente, Ina Schüttmann, Holger Zorn, and Bernd Mahro. "Bestandsaufnahme zum

biogenen Reststoffpotential der deutschen Lebensmittel- und Biotechnik-Industrie."

Schlussbericht zum Forschungsvorhaben , 2013.

Kern, Michael, and Thomas Raussen. Biogas-Atlas 2011/12 - Anlagenhandbuch der

Vergärung biogener Abfälle in Deutschland. Witzenhausen, 2011.

KTBL. Wirtschaftlichkeitsrechner Biogas. Kuratorium für Technik und Bauwesen in der

Landwirtschaft e. V. 2013. http://daten.ktbl.de/biogas/startseite.do#anwendung

(Zugriff am 16. 12 2013).

Loibl, Helmut. "Genehmigungen und Genehmigungsprobleme bei Biogasanlagen." 2004.

http://www.paluka.de/fileadmin/paluka/pdf/biogasrenex.pdf (accessed 12 16, 2013).

Raussen, T., and W. Sprick. "6. Biomasseforum 2012. Kosten- und Erlösstruktur integrierter

Bioabfallvergärungs- und Kompostierungsanlagen." 2012.

Rettenberger, Gerhard, Stepanka Urban-Kiss, Rolf Schneider, Joachim Müsken, and Gerhard

Kruse. Erfassung des Anlagenbestands Bioabfallbehandlung - ''Handbuch.

Bioabfallbehandlung''. Umweltbundesamt, 2012.

STmUG. Energie-Atlas Bayern 2.0. Biogasanlagen. Bayerisches Staatsministerium für

Umwelt und Verbraucherschutz. 2013. http://geoportal.bayern.de/energieatlas-

karten/?2 (accessed 12 16, 2013).

Witzenhausen-Institut. Optimierung der biologischen Abfallbehandlung in Hessen.

Witzenhausen-Institut für Abfall, Umwelt und Energie GmbH, 2008.


Recommended