An Overview About of Limitations and Avenues to Improve Biogas Production

  • Helen Treichel
  • Sergio Luiz Alves Junior
  • Caroline Müller
  • Gislaine Fongaro
Part of the Biofuel and Biorefinery Technologies book series (BBT, volume 9)


Worldwide, biogas production has been successfully happening in rural and urban areas, catering to livestock and industry. However, there are great obstacles to be overcome and public policies to be developed aiming at the materialization of biogas plants for green energy purposes and recycling of nutrients. In this context, this chapter will discuss the main challenges encountered worldwide in the biogas chain, highlighting the scenario and innovations on biogas chain and the legal and administrative framework/incentives for biogas production and uses.


Innovations Bioenergy Biotechnology Green energy Administrative framework 


  1. ABC (2015) Biogas state profile: California. American Biogas Council, Washington, 5 p.
  2. ABC (2018) Operational and potential US biogas system. American Biogas Council, Washington, 2 p.
  3. Abdelsalam E, Samer M, Attia YA, Abdel-Hadi MA, Hassan HE, Badr Y (2016) Comparison of nanoparticles effects on biogas and methane production from anaerobic digestion of cattle dung slurry. Renewable Energy 87:592–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abdullahi YA, Akunna JC, White NA, Hallett PD, Wheatley R (2008) Investigating the effects of anaerobic and aerobic post-treatment on quality and stability of organic fraction of municipal solid waste as soil amendment. Bioresour Technol 99:8631–8636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Adelard L, Poulsen TG, Rakotoniaina V (2015) Biogas and methane yield in response to co- and separate digestion of biomass wastes. Waste Manag Res 33:55–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. AGGE-Stat (2018) Development of renewable energy sources in Germany 2017. Renewable Energy-Statistics, Federal Ministry for Economic Affair and Energy, 44 pGoogle Scholar
  7. Anjum M, Kumar R, Abdelbasir SM, Barakat MA (2018) Carbon nitride/titania nanotubes composite for photocatalytic degradation of organics in water and sludge: pretreatment of sludge, anaerobic digestion and biogas production. J Environ Manage 223:495–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bassani I, Kougias PG, Treu L, Porté H, Campanaro S, Angelidaki I (2017) Optimization of hydrogen dispersion in thermophilic up-flow reactors for ex situ biogas upgrading. Bioresour Technol 234:310–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Britz W, Delzeit R (2013) The impact of German biogas production on European and global agricultural markets, land use and the environment. Energy Policy 62:1268–1275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bu F, Dong N, Kumar Khanal S, Xie L, Zhou Q (2018) Effects of CO on hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis under thermophilic and extreme-thermophilic conditions: microbial community and biomethanation pathways. Bioresour Technol 266:364–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carlini M, Mosconi EM, Castellucci S, Villarini M, Colantoni A (2017) An economical evaluation of anaerobic digestion plants fed with organic agro-industrial waste. Energies 10:1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carpenter AW, Laughton SN, Wiesner MR (2015) Enhanced biogas production from nanoscale zero valent iron-amended anaerobic bioreactors. Environ Eng Sci 32:647–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. CIBiogás (2017) Mercosur biogas and biomethane report. GAHB—Mercosur Ad Hoc Group on Biofuels. CIBiogás, Foz do Iguaçu, 58 pGoogle Scholar
  14. Córdoba V, Fernández M, Santalla E (2016) The effect of different inoculums on anaerobic digestion of swine wastewater. J Environ Chem Eng 4:115–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Damave M-C (2018) Key points of the agr’iDay of 03/07/2018: innovating for the future: bioeconomy in the UK and France. 11 pGoogle Scholar
  16. Daniel-Gromke J, Rensberg N, Denysenko V, Stinner W, Schmalfuβ T, Scheftelowitz M, Nelles M, Liebetrau J (2018) Current developments in production and utilization of biogas and biomethane in Germany. Chem Ing Tech 90:17–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. De Francisci D, Kougias PG, Treu L, Campanaro S, Angelidaki I (2015) Microbial diversity and dynamicity of biogas reactors due to radical changes of feedstock composition. Bioresour Technol 176:56–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Deremince B, Königsberger S (2017) Statistical report 2017. European Biogas Association, Brussels, p 13Google Scholar
  19. Edwards J, Othman M, Burn S (2015) A review of policy drivers and barriers for the use of anaerobic digestion in Europe, the United States and Australia. Renew Sustain Energy 52:815–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. EPRI (2017) Implications of the UK’s ban on petrol and diesel vehicles by 2040. Electric Power Research Institute: Quick Insights, California, p 7Google Scholar
  21. EU (2006) Directive 2006/12/CE.
  22. EU (2009) Directive 2009/28/CE.
  23. EU (2014) Directive 2014/94/UE.
  24. EurObserv’ER (2017) Biogas barometer. 14 p.
  25. Fan YV, Klemeš JJ, Lee CT, Perry S (2018) Anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste: energy and carbon emission footprint. J Environ Manage 223:888–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Feng Y, Guo Y, Yang G, Qin X, Song Z (2012) Household biogas development in rural China: on policy support and other macro sustainable conditions. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16:5617–5624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ferraro A, Dottorini G, Massini G, Mazzurco Miritana V, Signorini A, Lembo G, Fabbricino M (2018) Combined bioaugmentation with anaerobic ruminal fungi and fermentative bacteria to enhance biogas production from wheat straw and mushroom spent straw. Bioresour Technol 260:364–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. FNR (2017) Bioenergy in Germany—facts and figures 2016. Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Gülzow-Prüzen, p 51Google Scholar
  29. Forgács G, Lundin M, Taherzadeh MJ, Sárvári Horváth I (2013) Pretreatment of chicken feather waste for improved biogas production. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 169:2016–2028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gómez X, Meredith W, Fernández C, Sánchez-García M, Díez-Antolínez R, Garzón-Santos J, Snape CE (2018) Evaluating the effect of biochar addition on the anaerobic digestion of swine manure: application of Py-GC/MS. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. Scholar
  31. Gonzalez-Fernandez C, Barreiro-Vescovo S, de Godos I, Fernandez M, Zouhayr A, Ballesteros M (2018) Biochemical methane potential of microalgae biomass using different microbial inocula. Biotechnol Biofuels 11:184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. GSE (2015) Incentivazione delle fonti rinnovabili. Bollettino: Gestore Servizi Energetici. 77 pGoogle Scholar
  33. GSE (2017) Incentivazione delle fonti rinnovabili. Bollettino: Gestore Servizi Energetici. 97 pGoogle Scholar
  34. Gu L, Zhang Y-X, Wang J-Z, Chen G, Battye H (2016) Where is the future of China’s biogas? Review, forecast, and policy implications. Pet Sci 13:604–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hermann L, Hermann R (2018) Report on regulations governing AD and NRR in EU member states. Systemis: circular solutions for biowaste. The Netherlands, 123 pGoogle Scholar
  36. Hewetson BB, Zhang X, Mosier NS (2016) Enhanced acid-catalyzed biomass conversion to hydroxymethylfurfural following cellulose solvent-and organic solvent-based lignocellulosic fractionation pretreatment. Energy Fuels 30:9975–9977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. IEA (2014) Africa energy outlook: a focus on energy prospects in sub-saharan Africa. World energy outlook special report. International Energy Agency, Paris, p 237Google Scholar
  38. IEA (2016) Energy policies of IEA countries: Italy 2016 review. International Energy Agency, Paris, p 210Google Scholar
  39. IEA (2017a) Bioenergy task 37 biogas: country report Germany. International Energy AgencyGoogle Scholar
  40. IEA (2017b) Energy access outlook 2017. International Energy Agency, Paris, p 140Google Scholar
  41. IEA (2017c) UK country reports. IEA bioenergy task 37. International Energy AgencyGoogle Scholar
  42. IEEJ (2017) Outlook 2018—prospects and challenges until 2050: energy, environment and economy. The Institute of Energy Economics, Japan, p 22Google Scholar
  43. IGU (2015) Biogas—from refuse to energy. International Gas Union, Fornebu, p 19Google Scholar
  44. IRENA (2017a) Biogas for domestic cooking: technology brief. International Renewable Energy Agency, Abu Dhabi, p 31Google Scholar
  45. IRENA (2017b) Biogas for road vehicles: technology brief. International Renewable Energy Agency, Abu Dhabi, p 61Google Scholar
  46. IRENA (2018a) Off-grid renewable energy solutions: global and regional status and trends. International Renewable Energy Agency, Abu Dhabi, p 20Google Scholar
  47. IRENA (2018b) Renewable energy statistics 2018. International Renewable Energy Agency, Abu Dhabi, p 347Google Scholar
  48. ITAIPU (2017) Relatório annual 2017. Itaipu Binacional, 141 pGoogle Scholar
  49. Jain S, Newman D, Cepeda-Márquez R, Zeller K (2018) Global food waste management: an implementation guide for cities. World Biogas Association, London, p 143Google Scholar
  50. Jimeno M (2015) Renewable energy policy database and support—RES-LEGAL EUROPE. National profile: Italy. Eclareon GmbH, Berlin, p 146Google Scholar
  51. Kabir MM, Forgács G, Horváth IS (2013) Enhanced methane production from wool textile residues by thermal and enzymatic pretreatment. Process Biochem 48:575–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Koçar G, Civaş N (2013) An overview of biofuels from energy crops: current status and future prospects. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 28:900–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kougias PG, Treu L, Benavente DP, Boe K, Campanaro S, Angelidaki I (2017) Ex-situ biogas upgrading and enhancement in different reactor systems. Bioresour Technol 225:429–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kuzmanova E, Zhelev N, Akunna JC (2018) Effect of liquid nitrogen pretreatment on various types of wool waste fibres for biogas production. Heliyon 4:e00619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lu YQ, Xu Y, Dong B, Dai XH (2018) Enhancement of anaerobic methane production by removal of organic-bonding metals from sewage sludge. Huan Jing Ke Xue 39:284–291Google Scholar
  56. Markard J, Wirth S, Truffer B (2016) Institutional dynamics and technology legitimacy—a framework and a case study on biogas technology. Res Policy 45:330–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Maroulis G (2015) Renewable energy policy database and support—RES-LEGAL EUROPE. National profile: United Kingdom. Eclareon GmbH, Berlin, p 117Google Scholar
  58. Moscoviz R, Toledo-Alarcón J, Trably E, Bernet N (2016) Electro-fermentation: how to drive fermentation using electrochemical systems. Trends Biotechnol 34:856–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mulat DG, Huerta SG, Kalyani D, Horn SJ (2018) Enhancing methane production from lignocellulosic biomass by combined steam-explosion pretreatment and bioaugmentation with cellulolytic bacterium Caldicellulosiruptor bescii. Biotechnol Biofuels 11:19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Nzila A (2017) Mini review: update on bioaugmentation in anaerobic processes for biogas production. Anaerobe 46:3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ozbayram EG, Akyol Ç, Ince B, Karakoç C, Ince O (2018) Rumen bacteria at work: bioaugmentation strategies to enhance biogas production from cow manure. J Appl Microbiol 124:491–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Patinvoh RJ, Feuk-Lagerstedt E, Lundin M, Sárvári Horváth I, Taherzadeh MJ (2016) Biological pretreatment of chicken feather and biogas production from total broth. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 180:1401–1415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Paudel SR, Banjara SP, Choi OK, Park KY, Kim YM, Lee JW (2017) Pretreatment of agricultural biomass for anaerobic digestion: current state and challenges. Bioresour Technol 245:1194–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Pfau SF, Hagens JE, Dankbaar B (2017) Biogas between renewable energy and bio-economy policies—opportunities and constraints resulting from a dual role. Energy Sustain Soc 7:17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Podkaminer K, Xie F, Lin Z (2017) Analyzing the impacts of a biogas-to-electricity purchase incentive on electric vehicle deployment with the MA3T vehicle choice model. Oak Rodge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, p 40Google Scholar
  66. Quan W, Wang X, Song C (2017) Selective removal of H2S from biogas using solid amine-based “molecular basket” sorbent. Energy Fuels 31:9517–9528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. REN21 (2018) Renewables 2018: global status report. Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century, Paris, 324 pGoogle Scholar
  68. Sasaki K, Sasaki D, Morita M, Hirano S, Matsumoto N, Ohmura N, Igarashi Y (2010) Bioelectrochemical system stabilizes methane fermentation from garbage slurry. Bioresour Technol 101:3415–3422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sasaki K, Sasaki D, Kamiya K, Nakanishi S, Kondo A, Kato S (2018a) Electrochemical biotechnologies minimizing the required electrode assemblies. Curr Opin Biotechnol 50:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sasaki K, Sasaki D, Tsuge Y, Morita M, Kondo A (2018b) Changes in the microbial consortium during dark hydrogen fermentation in a bioelectrochemical system increases methane production during a two-stage process. Biotechnol Biofuels 11:173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Schievano A, Pepé Sciarria T, Vanbroekhoven K, De Wever H, Puig S, Andersen SJ, Rabaey K, Pant D (2016) Electro-fermentation—merging electrochemistry with fermentation in industrial applications. Trends Biotechnol 34:866–878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Shiga TM, Xiao W, Yang H, Zhang X, Olek AT, Donohoe BS, Liu J, Makowski L, Hou T, McCann MC, Carpita NC, Mosier NS (2017) Enhanced rates of enzymatic saccharification and catalytic synthesis of biofuel substrates in gelatinized cellulose generated by trifluoroacetic acid. Biotechnol Biofuels 10:310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Song Z, Zhang C, Yang G, Feng Y, Ren G, Han X (2014) Comparison of biogas development from households and medium and large-scale biogas plants in rural China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 33:204–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sun Q, Li H, Yan J, Liu L, Yu Z, Yu X (2015) Selection of appropriate biogas upgrading technology—a review of biogas cleaning, upgrading and utilization. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 51:521–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sutherland AD, Varela JC (2014) Comparison of various microbial inocula for the efficient anaerobic digestion of Laminaria hyperborea. BMC Biotechnol 14:7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tambone F, Scaglia B, D’Imporzano G, Schievano A, Salati V, Adani F (2010) Assessing amendment and fertilizing properties of digestates from anaerobic digestion through a comparative study with digested sludge and compost. Chemosphere 81:577–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Thomas HL, Seira J, Escudié R, Carrère H (2018) Lime pretreatment of miscanthus: impact on BMP and batch dry co-digestion with cattle manure. Molecules 23:E1608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. UK (2012) The feed-in tariffs order (FTO) 2012.
  79. UN Climate Change Conference (2017) COP23—governments meet to fast forward implementation of Paris agreement’s goals UN climate change news. Bonn, 5 Nov 2017Google Scholar
  80. USDA (2014) Biogas opportunities roadmap. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Energy, 27 pGoogle Scholar
  81. Valenti F, Porto SMC, Selvaggi R, Pecorino B (2018) Evaluation of biomethane potential from by-products and agricultural residues co-digestion in southern Italy. J Environ Manage 223:834–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Venturin B, Frumi Camargo A, Scapini T, Mulinari J, Bonatto C, Bazoti S, Pereira Siqueira D, Maria Colla L, Alves SL Jr, Paulo Bender J, Luís Radis Steinmetz R, Kunz A, Fongaro G, Treichel H (2018) Effect of pretreatments on corn stalk chemical properties for biogas production purposes. Bioresour Technol 266:116–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Vidhi R, Shrivastava P (2018) A review of electric vehicle lifecycle emissions and policy recommendations to increase EV penetration in India. Energies 11:483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wangliang L, Zhikai Z, Guangwen X (2016) Enhancement of biogas yield of poplar leaf by high-solid codigestion with swine manure. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 179:270–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wojnowska-Baryła I, Bernat K, Sartowska S (2018) Biological stability of multi-component agri-food digestates and post-digestates. Waste Manag 77:140–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wütenhagen R, Bilharz M (2006) Green energy market development in Germany: effective public policy and emerging customer demand. Energy Policy 34:1681–1696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Zhang X, Qu T, Mosier NS, Han L, Xiao W (2018) Cellulose modification by recyclable swelling solvents. Biotechnol Biofuels 11:191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zhao K, Li Y, Zhou Y, Guo W, Jiang H, Xu Q (2018) Characterization of hydrothermal carbonization products (hydrochars and spent liquor) and their biomethane production performance. Bioresour Technol 267:9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Helen Treichel
    • 1
  • Sergio Luiz Alves Junior
    • 2
  • Caroline Müller
    • 2
  • Gislaine Fongaro
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Laboratory of Microbiology and Bioprocess, Department of Environmental Science and TechnologyFederal University of Fronteira SulErechimBrazil
  2. 2.Research Group of Enzymatic and Microbiological ProcessesFederal University of Fronteira SulChapecóBrazil
  3. 3.Laboratory of Applied Virology, Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Parasitology (MIP)Federal University of Santa CatarinaFlorianópolisBrazil

Personalised recommendations