IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v52y2015icp815-828.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A review of policy drivers and barriers for the use of anaerobic digestion in Europe, the United States and Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Edwards, Joel
  • Othman, Maazuza
  • Burn, Stewart

Abstract

Anaerobic digestion (AD) of biomass has become a common technology used in many European nations and is receiving increased attention in other nations. The chief attraction of AD is it generates renewable energy. Yet it also manages and treats organic waste, recycles key nutrients to soil, and can create local jobs; making AD an attractive technology to governments. In this paper we review the role government policy has played in promoting AD use and driving its growth in five developed nations studied; Australia, Denmark, Germany, the UK and USA. These nations were chosen for review as they provide a breadth of AD use with the number of AD plants in the aforementioned nations totaling 78, 114, 9545, 265, and 1497. This review looks to demonstrate and discuss policy mechanisms introduced by each nation that has helped drive AD use, and identify areas where policy can help overcome enduring challenges that face the AD industry. Focused discussion is given to waste management, climate change and energy security policies, and to financial incentives made available to AD installations. Analysis shows that the impact of performance based incentives targeted at small-medium capacity AD plants, less than 500kW, have a significant positive correlation with the growth of AD use in the UK and Germany. The relatively new AD industry faces a number of barriers, which are also discussed, but with the help of supportive government policy for the technology, that considers the wide-ranging benefits of AD across government portfolios; investors will be more likely to show interest in the developing AD industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Edwards, Joel & Othman, Maazuza & Burn, Stewart, 2015. "A review of policy drivers and barriers for the use of anaerobic digestion in Europe, the United States and Australia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 815-828.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:52:y:2015:i:c:p:815-828
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032115007595
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.112?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Poeschl, Martina & Ward, Shane & Owende, Philip, 2010. "Prospects for expanded utilization of biogas in Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(7), pages 1782-1797, September.
    2. McConnell, Dylan & Hearps, Patrick & Eales, Dominic & Sandiford, Mike & Dunn, Rebecca & Wright, Matthew & Bateman, Lachlan, 2013. "Retrospective modeling of the merit-order effect on wholesale electricity prices from distributed photovoltaic generation in the Australian National Electricity Market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 17-27.
    3. Würzburg, Klaas & Labandeira, Xavier & Linares, Pedro, 2013. "Renewable generation and electricity prices: Taking stock and new evidence for Germany and Austria," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(S1), pages 159-171.
    4. Alexandre Kossoy & Klaus Oppermann & Alexandrina Platonova-Oquab & Suphachol Suphachalasai & Niklas Höhne & Noémie Klein & Alyssa Gilbert & Long Lam & Gemma Toop & Qian Wu & Markus Hagemann & Carlos C, "undated". "State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2014," World Bank Publications - Reports 18415, The World Bank Group.
    5. Mata-Alvarez, J. & Dosta, J. & Romero-Güiza, M.S. & Fonoll, X. & Peces, M. & Astals, S., 2014. "A critical review on anaerobic co-digestion achievements between 2010 and 2013," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 412-427.
    6. Salameh, Mamdouh G., 2003. "The new frontiers for the United States energy security in the 21st century," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(1-3), pages 135-144, September.
    7. Lipp, Judith, 2007. "Lessons for effective renewable electricity policy from Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5481-5495, November.
    8. Arora, Vipin & Cai, Yiyong, 2014. "U.S. natural gas exports and their global impacts," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 95-103.
    9. Mæng, H. & Lund, H. & Hvelplund, F., 1999. "Biogas plants in Denmark: technological and economic developments," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 64(1-4), pages 195-206, September.
    10. Appels, Lise & Lauwers, Joost & Degrève, Jan & Helsen, Lieve & Lievens, Bart & Willems, Kris & Van Impe, Jan & Dewil, Raf, 2011. "Anaerobic digestion in global bio-energy production: Potential and research challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4295-4301.
    11. Höök, M. & Söderbergh, B. & Aleklett, K., 2009. "Future Danish oil and gas export," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1826-1834.
    12. Yang, Liangcheng & Ge, Xumeng & Wan, Caixia & Yu, Fei & Li, Yebo, 2014. "Progress and perspectives in converting biogas to transportation fuels," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1133-1152.
    13. Raven, R.P.J.M. & Gregersen, K.H., 2007. "Biogas plants in Denmark: successes and setbacks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 116-132, January.
    14. Binkley, David & Harsh, Stephen & Wolf, Christopher A. & Safferman, Steven & Kirk, Dana, 2013. "Electricity purchase agreements and distributed energy policies for anaerobic digesters," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 341-352.
    15. Li, Xianguo, 2005. "Diversification and localization of energy systems for sustainable development and energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(17), pages 2237-2243, November.
    16. Hamawand, Ihsan & Yusaf, Talal & Hamawand, Sara G., 2013. "Coal seam gas and associated water: A review paper," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 550-560.
    17. Viju, Crina & Kerr, William A., 2013. "Taking an option on the future: Subsidizing biofuels for energy security or reducing global warming," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 543-548.
    18. Brent A. Gloy & Jonathan B. Dressler, 2010. "Financial barriers to the adoption of anaerobic digestion on US livestock operations," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 70(2), pages 157-168, August.
    19. Zglobisz, Natalia & Castillo-Castillo, Arturo & Grimes, Sue & Jones, Peter, 2010. "Influence of UK energy policy on the deployment of anaerobic digestion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5988-5999, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Madsen, Michael & Holm-Nielsen, Jens Bo & Esbensen, Kim H., 2011. "Monitoring of anaerobic digestion processes: A review perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 3141-3155, August.
    2. Yang, Liangcheng & Xu, Fuqing & Ge, Xumeng & Li, Yebo, 2015. "Challenges and strategies for solid-state anaerobic digestion of lignocellulosic biomass," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 824-834.
    3. Suberu, Mohammed Yekini & Bashir, Nouruddeen & Mustafa, Mohd. Wazir, 2013. "Biogenic waste methane emissions and methane optimization for bioelectricity in Nigeria," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 643-654.
    4. Li, Xue & Mupondwa, Edmund, 2018. "Commercial feasibility of an integrated closed-loop ethanol-feedlot-biodigester system based on triticale feedstock in Canadian Prairies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 401-413.
    5. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna & Qu, Songze & Ancev, Tihomir, 2019. "The effect of wind and solar power generation on wholesale electricity prices in Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 358-369.
    6. Pöschl, Martina & Ward, Shane & Owende, Philip, 2010. "Evaluation of energy efficiency of various biogas production and utilization pathways," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(11), pages 3305-3321, November.
    7. Cludius, Johanna & Forrest, Sam & MacGill, Iain, 2014. "Distributional effects of the Australian Renewable Energy Target (RET) through wholesale and retail electricity price impacts," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 40-51.
    8. Bell, William Paul & Wild, Phillip & Foster, John & Hewson, Michael, 2017. "Revitalising the wind power induced merit order effect to reduce wholesale and retail electricity prices in Australia," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 224-241.
    9. Zheng, Lei & Cheng, Shikun & Han, Yanzhao & Wang, Min & Xiang, Yue & Guo, Jiali & Cai, Di & Mang, Heinz-Peter & Dong, Taili & Li, Zifu & Yan, Zhengxu & Men, Yu, 2020. "Bio-natural gas industry in China: Current status and development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    10. Di Corato, Luca & Moretto, Michele, 2011. "Investing in biogas: Timing, technological choice and the value of flexibility from input mix," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1186-1193.
    11. Pradhan, Ashis Kumar & Rout, Sandhyarani & Khan, Imran Ahmed, 2021. "Does market concentration affect wholesale electricity prices? An analysis of the Indian electricity sector in the COVID-19 pandemic context," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    12. Hagos, Kiros & Zong, Jianpeng & Li, Dongxue & Liu, Chang & Lu, Xiaohua, 2017. "Anaerobic co-digestion process for biogas production: Progress, challenges and perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1485-1496.
    13. Wu, Gang & Wei, Yi-Ming & Fan, Ying & Liu, Lan-Cui, 2007. "An empirical analysis of the risk of crude oil imports in China using improved portfolio approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4190-4199, August.
    14. Luňáčková, Petra & Průša, Jan & Janda, Karel, 2017. "The merit order effect of Czech photovoltaic plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 138-147.
    15. Lamis Yousra Shahrazed Khelifa Zouaghi & Hayet Djelal & Zineb Salem, 2021. "Anaerobic co-digestion of three organic wastes under mesophilic conditions: lab-scale and pilot-scale studies," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 9014-9028, June.
    16. Di Maria, Francesco & Sisani, Federico & Norouzi, Omid & Mersky, Ronald L., 2019. "The effectiveness of anaerobic digestion of bio-waste in replacing primary energies: An EU28 case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 347-354.
    17. Daron Acemoglu, Ali Kakhbod, and Asuman Ozdaglar, 2017. "Competition in Electricity Markets with Renewable Energy Sources," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(KAPSARC S).
    18. Dariusz Kusz & Bożena Kusz & Ludwik Wicki & Tomasz Nowakowski & Ryszard Kata & Władysław Brejta & Anna Kasprzyk & Marek Barć, 2024. "The Economic Efficiencies of Investment in Biogas Plants—A Case Study of a Biogas Plant Using Waste from a Dairy Farm in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-23, July.
    19. Mittal, Shivika & Ahlgren, Erik O. & Shukla, P.R., 2019. "Future biogas resource potential in India: A bottom-up analysis," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 379-389.
    20. Andrew Cheon & Johannes Urpelainen, 2013. "How do Competing Interest Groups Influence Environmental Policy? The Case of Renewable Electricity in Industrialized Democracies, 1989–2007," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(4), pages 874-897, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:52:y:2015:i:c:p:815-828. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.