Quick user's guide: Each module will follow the format you see here. Each module is broken into a series of topics presented in a slide-set addressing that topic. Assessment questions are organized using the same set of topic headers. So, open the assessment document and fill in the answers as you go. While we can discuss issues or questions during our weekly tutorial, you are welcome to email me with any questions as you go: [email protected] is the best way to reach me.
Module 11: Economics of AD focuses on the economics of farm AD, although biomass (aka non-farm AD) is also discussed. Co-products are considered since they must be valued in order for farm AD to be economically viable. The bio-refinery model is considered as the best means of quantitating total costs and benefits of AD.
11.1 Capital, operating and maintenance costs
11.2 The market for AD products and co-products
11.3 Digital tools for AD analysis & decision making
11.4 Renewable energy pricing
11.5 Internalizing externalities?
11.1 Capital, operating and maintenance costs
11.2 The market for AD products and co-products
11.3 Digital tools for AD analysis & decision making
11.4 Renewable energy pricing
11.5 Internalizing externalities?
ASSESSMENT questions for Module 11: download, print, complete and return by email following the instructions at the top.
Economic feasibility analysis of VTCAD
At Vermont Tech, we conducted a feasibility study for the VTCAD project that included a simple spreadsheet analysis (2013) . The spreadsheet allows sensitivity analysis and looks at a variety of feedstock scenarios.
At Vermont Tech, we conducted a feasibility study for the VTCAD project that included a simple spreadsheet analysis (2013) . The spreadsheet allows sensitivity analysis and looks at a variety of feedstock scenarios.
Tools to assess the economic feasibility or viability of anaerobic digestion
An on-line survey style 'Anaerobic digestion feasibility tool' was developed by Jeff Lasker, Sybil Sharvelle and Lucas Loetscher at Colorado State University. The tool asks questions, applies a decision tree and scores feasibility for a variety of AD designs at a variety of points during the survey.
https://erams.com/ad_feasibility_ad_tool/
The University of Wyoming and Montana State University have looked at factors affecting the fiscal feasibility of AD and believe that five quick questions can give a quick read of feasibility.
http://www.e3a4u.info/energy-technologies/anaerobic-digesters/economics/
William Lazarus of the University of Minnesota has developed a fairly simple spreadsheet too, ECON_DIGESTER, that performs a fairly detailed economic analysis of the costs and benefits of on-farm AD.
'Tool for doing rough initial calculations of annual costs and returns to be expected from owning and operating a methane digester on a dairy farm. Developed under a project funded from the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund.'
http://wlazarus.cfans.umn.edu/william-lazarus-spreadsheet-decision-tools/
De Vries et al. at the University of Florida have developed a similar spreadsheet, DIGESTER, to estimate economic viability of AD on dairy farms.
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/an176
At Cornell, Brent Gloy also developed a spreadsheet to analyze digester economics.
http://www.manuremanagement.cornell.edu/Pages/Assessment_Tools/Economic_Models.html
The EPA has developed the Co-Digestion Economic Analysis Tool (CoEAT) assesses the initial economic feasibility of food waste co-digestion at wastewater treatment plants for the purpose of biogas production. Some aspects of this tool can be applied to farm AD.
https://archive.epa.gov/region9/organics/web/html/index-2.html
An on-line survey style 'Anaerobic digestion feasibility tool' was developed by Jeff Lasker, Sybil Sharvelle and Lucas Loetscher at Colorado State University. The tool asks questions, applies a decision tree and scores feasibility for a variety of AD designs at a variety of points during the survey.
https://erams.com/ad_feasibility_ad_tool/
The University of Wyoming and Montana State University have looked at factors affecting the fiscal feasibility of AD and believe that five quick questions can give a quick read of feasibility.
http://www.e3a4u.info/energy-technologies/anaerobic-digesters/economics/
William Lazarus of the University of Minnesota has developed a fairly simple spreadsheet too, ECON_DIGESTER, that performs a fairly detailed economic analysis of the costs and benefits of on-farm AD.
'Tool for doing rough initial calculations of annual costs and returns to be expected from owning and operating a methane digester on a dairy farm. Developed under a project funded from the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund.'
http://wlazarus.cfans.umn.edu/william-lazarus-spreadsheet-decision-tools/
De Vries et al. at the University of Florida have developed a similar spreadsheet, DIGESTER, to estimate economic viability of AD on dairy farms.
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/an176
At Cornell, Brent Gloy also developed a spreadsheet to analyze digester economics.
http://www.manuremanagement.cornell.edu/Pages/Assessment_Tools/Economic_Models.html
The EPA has developed the Co-Digestion Economic Analysis Tool (CoEAT) assesses the initial economic feasibility of food waste co-digestion at wastewater treatment plants for the purpose of biogas production. Some aspects of this tool can be applied to farm AD.
https://archive.epa.gov/region9/organics/web/html/index-2.html
Studies of the economics of on-farm AD
A 2010 study by Bishop et al. at Wisconsin State University examined the economic feasibility of on-farm AD. They considered capital and O&M costs, electric production, tipping fees, separated solids, and carbon credits. Their study includes a sensitivity analysis.
http://csanr.wsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CSANR2010-001.Ch04.pdf
In 2012, Shelford and Gooch at Cornell studies the barriers to implementing AD on small farms in New York State. Their findings suggest that economics and regulations are the limiting factor in New York and other states.
http://www.manuremanagement.cornell.edu/Pages/Assessment_Tools/Small_Farm_AD_report_final_12_11_12.pdf
A feasibility study of anaerobic digestion of food waste in St. Bernard's Parish Louisiana conducted by NREL concluded that the areas low landfill and energy costs did not allow the project to be fiscally viable
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/57082.pdf
A 2010 study by Bishop et al. at Wisconsin State University examined the economic feasibility of on-farm AD. They considered capital and O&M costs, electric production, tipping fees, separated solids, and carbon credits. Their study includes a sensitivity analysis.
http://csanr.wsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CSANR2010-001.Ch04.pdf
In 2012, Shelford and Gooch at Cornell studies the barriers to implementing AD on small farms in New York State. Their findings suggest that economics and regulations are the limiting factor in New York and other states.
http://www.manuremanagement.cornell.edu/Pages/Assessment_Tools/Small_Farm_AD_report_final_12_11_12.pdf
A feasibility study of anaerobic digestion of food waste in St. Bernard's Parish Louisiana conducted by NREL concluded that the areas low landfill and energy costs did not allow the project to be fiscally viable
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/57082.pdf
The importance of co-products and the bio-refinery approach
Capitalizing on digester co-products (Biocycle, August 2014) makes the case that co-products marketing is the 'sweet spot' of AD economics. The article introduces advances in nutrient separation technology and marketing.
https://www.biocycle.net/2014/08/13/capitalizing-on-digester-coproducts/
Capitalizing on digester co-products (Biocycle, August 2014) makes the case that co-products marketing is the 'sweet spot' of AD economics. The article introduces advances in nutrient separation technology and marketing.
https://www.biocycle.net/2014/08/13/capitalizing-on-digester-coproducts/