WÄRTSILÄ RENEWABLE GAS/

PUREGAS SOLUTIONS

BIOGAS UPGRADING/
CAPURE TECHNOLOGY

November 19th, 2020

American Biogas Council

Biogas Upgrading Case Studies Webinar

1 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 Today’s Speakers

Joe Ayala George Yavari

General Manager
Senior Project Manager
Wärtsilä Puregas
North America Wärtsilä Puregas North
America

Fredrik Patrick Serfass

Vigertsson (Moderator)
Service Manager Executive Director

Wärtsilä Puregas American Biogas Council

North America
 Quick Notes

Audio
- You should be able to hear me talking now. If you can’t,
use the questions module to describe your issue.

- Two Audio Options: Phone or Computer

Choose one and connect

- Pro tip: Don’t call in on our phone if your audio is set to Questions
“Mic and Speakers”

- Ask questions using the Questions Panel on the right

side of your screen at any time.

- The recording of the webinar and the slides will be

available after the event. We will post them online and
send you a link. American Biogas Council
www.americanbiogascouncil.org
Who we are
The only US organization
representing the entire biogas
industry
All sectors represented
• Project developers/owners
• Equipment retailers and dealers
• Waste management companies
• Waste water companies 200+
• Farms
organizations
• Utilities 2,000+
• Municipalities individuals
• Consultants and EPCs
• Financiers, accountants, lawyers
and engineers
• Non-profits, universities and
government agencies
American Biogas Council
www.americanbiogascouncil.org
The US Biogas Market

Current 2,200+
Operational 15,000+
255 on Farm Biogas Potential
1,269 Water Systems New Biogas
Systems
66 Food Scrap Wait, Don’t Biogas
645 at Landfills Systems ONLY Work
on LARGE Farms?
Breaking down 222 Dairy
Potential Biogas Systems….
8,300 on Farm 1: > 20,000 cows
6:10,000-20,000 head
4,000 Wastewater 16: 5,000-10,000 head.
Total LARGE farm
1,000 Food Scrap digesters: 10%
440 at Landfills
American Biogas Council
www.americanbiogascouncil.org
BIOGAS PROCESS

6 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
BIOGAS PROCESS

7 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
CAPURE PROCESS

1 2 3 4 5

Absorption

8 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
99,9% METHANE RECOVERY

99.9% of the CH4 in the biogas can be sold Best In Class

• Always the highest revenue • No other single technology achieves
this efficiency
CApure Technology
• No affinity for CH4 / high affinity for CO2

9 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
<0,1% METHANE SLIP

Minimises GHG emissions

Helps achieve sustainability
criteria
CO2 can be used directly for
crop propagation
No need for additional
exhaust treatment
Easier to recover CO2 for
Food Grade applications

10 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
HEAT BALANCE PROCESS OVERVIEW

Biogas upgrading without heat integration

11 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
HEAT BALANCE PROCESS OVERVIEW

Biogas upgrading with heat integration

12 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
LOWEST COST OF OWNERSHIP

• < 0.06 kWh/Nm3 Biogas in electricity consumption

• CApure process operates at low pressure (only the CH4 is compressed)

• < 0.1 kWh/Nm3 Biogas in net heat consumption

• 95% of the heat used can be recovered
Recovered by
• Low consumption of water and solvents Wartsila Puregas
• Long life, biodegradable organic solvents used in CApure process Solutions unique
are part of a closed-loop system upgrading process.

• Low maintenance cost

• Robust design, Easy access, 98% uptime guaranteed

13 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
EXTENSIVE PRODUCT RANGE

Core model Max Capacity 5 core models - available in 2 versions

(scfm) • Standard version
• Low pressure version (LP)
CA30LP 567
CA50LP 800
CA60LP 1521
CA70LP 2276
CA80LP 3780

14 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
HIGHEST BUILD QUALITY AND DESIGN

Manufactured and fully tested

before delivered to site

High-Grade Stainless Steel

used throughout

Built-in redundancy of key

components such as
compressors and blowers

Easy access for maintenance

US manufactured in
Dubuque, Iowa

15 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
CAPURE MANUFACTURING FOOTPRINT

Kalmar, Sweden
HQ & Main Workshop

IA, USA
WA, USA
OK, USA

16 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE SUPPORT

• Packages include remote operation, supervision,

control, service, maintenance & 24/7 phone support

• Installation, Start-Up, Commissioning and Operator

Training included as standard

• Extended warranty packages available

• Remote monitoring and call out available

• 98% uptime guarantee - further improved through

optimisation program

17 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
EXTENSIVE REFERENCE LIST

• Over 40 operational sites

• Sites in USA, Sweden, UK, Denmark, Germany, Norway, Ireland, Switzerland
• Two new installations in US in 2019/2020
• Range of substrates including food waste, agricultural residues, green crops, WWTP

18 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 1.3. REFERENCES PLANTS
21. Buchan, GBR, 2015, 1250 Nm3/h *)
1. Borås, SWE, 2002, 450 Nm³/h, co-digestion **) FW, MSW 22. Riverside, GBR, 2015, 2.000 Nm3/h *)
23. Biokraft, NOR, 2017, 2200 Nm3/h with liquefaction **) FW
2. Göteborg, SWE, 2006, 1600 Nm³/h, WWTP *)
24. Rybjerg, DNK, Membrane plant, 2016,
3. Kalmar, SWE, 2008, 200 Nm³/h, co-digestion **) FW 25. Grøn Gas Vraa, DNK, 2016, 3000 Nm³/h
4. Falkenberg, SWE, 2009, 750 Nm³ h, co-digestion *) FW 26. Sønderjysk, DNK, 2016, 5000 Nm³/h
5. Stockholm, SWE, 2009, 800 Nm³/h, co-digestion **) FW 27. Somerset, GBR, 2016, 1250 Nm³/h
28. Willand, GBR, 2016, 1250 Nm³/h
6. Stavanger, NOR, 2009, 500 Nm³ /h, co-digestion *) FW
29. Granville, GBR, 2016, 3000 Nm³/h
7. Könnern, DEU, 2009, 3400 Nm³/h, green crops *) 30. Ekogas, SWE, 2017, 700 Nm³/h
8. Oslo, NOR, 2010, 750 Nm³/h, WWTP **) 31. Korskro, DNK, 2018, 5000 Nm³/h

9. Karlstad, SWE, 2010, 200 Nm³/, WWTP **) 32. Högbytorp, SWE, 2018, 2000 Nm³/h
33. Holsted, DNK, 2019, 3000 Nm³/h
10.Linköping, SWE, 2010, 3400 Nm³/h, co-digestion **) FW, MSW
34. Tekniska verken Linköping, LBG, SWE, 2019,
10. Sävsjö, SWE, 2012, 600 Nm³/h, manure co-digestion **) FW 35. Bånlev, DNK, 2019, 3000 Nm³/h
11. Freiburg, DEU, 2012, 1000 Nm³/h, green crops * 36. GreenLab Skive Biogas, DNK, 2019, 5000 Nm³/h
37. VEAS, NOR, 2020, 2000 Nm³/h
12.Växjö, SWE, 2012, 500 Nm³/h, WWTP **) FW, MSW
38. Thorsö, DNK, 2020, 2000 Nm³/h
13. Weissenborn, DEU 2013, 700 Nm³/h, green crops *) 39. Three Mile Canyon Farms, USA, 2019, 6000 Nm³/h
14. Zürich, CHE, 2013, 1400 Nm3/h, WWTP *) MSW 40. Sønderjysk, DNK, 2020, 6000 Nm³/h
15. Karlskoga, SWE, 2014, 900 Nm3/h **) FW, MSW 41. Junction City Expansion, USA 2020, 6000 Nm³/h

16. Crouchland, GBR, 2014, 2000 Nm3/h *)

17. Kalmar, SWE, 2014, 600 Nm3/h **) FW, MSW *) Grid injection to natural gas grid,
18. Hemmet, DNK, 2015, 900 Nm3/h *) **) Vehicle fuel filling station or local bio methane grid

19. Glenmore, IRL, 2016, 1800 Nm3/h Food waste FW, Municipal solid waste MSW

20. Lindum, NOR, 2015, 600 Nm3/h **) FW

19 © Wärtsilä 11/12/2020
 The amine advantage
George Yavari

20 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 WHY AMINE?

• Amine has been used since the 1960s by the oil and gas
industry for processing and sweetening of natural gas.

• More recently small-scale versions have been developed

for the removal of CO2 from biogas and CO2 removal
(carbon capture) from flu gas.

• Amine is the most energy efficient media for CO2 removal

providing the highest CH4 recovery, the highest CH4
purity and the lowest OPEX

• The use of Amine reduces the methane slip to less than

0.1% which is more than a 500% reduction compared to
other technologies

• Methane is a harmful GHG - approx 28 times more

harmful than CO2. Thereby biogas upgrading by Amine Gas Sweetening Plant

emits much less GHG than other upgrading technologies

21 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 IS AMINE DANGEROUS OR POLLUTING?

• Dimethylamine is a BIODEGRADABLE organic

solvent with the formula (CH3)2NH

• A Puregas CA50 will be filled with only 1.8 m3 of

amine and 1.8 m3 of water

• The solution is in a CLOSED-LOOP SYSTEM and the

amine is recycled back into the process. None is
consumed in the upgrading process.

• In biogas upgrading plants, handling of the amine

needs to follow the same precautions as other liquids
PUREGAS CA Upgrading Plant
such as compressor oils, glycol, condensate etc i.e.
wear protective gloves/protective clothing/eye
protection etc. Avoid breathing
dust/fume/gas/mist/vapours/spray.

22 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 How does amine process compare with other upgrading technologies?
Parameters Amine process Membrane Water scrubbers PSA

Technology -process steps Pre-treatment needed: VOCs and Pre-treatment needed: H2S & VOC
siloxanes are removed before the removal + Gas cooler/Chiller
membranes
Performance values (electricity consumption) 0,06 kWh/Nm3 0,28 kWh/Nm3 (3-stage) 0,25 kWh/Nm3 (have not met 0,3 kWh/Nm3
the performance tests on 0,21)
Operational conditions Higher temperature than others = Low temperatures (excess heat Microbiological growth in the water – Swinging is managed with
The hot streams allow heat cannot be utilised without a heat capacity decrease & cleaning (fatty buffertanks (continuous process)
integration & heating of pump) substrates) Low Temp (see previous)
substrates. Low Temp (see previous)
Methane slip <0.1% of inlet CH4 <2,5% of inlet CH4 <5% of inlet CH4 <4% of inlet CH4

Product quality (remaining CO2) <1 vol% CO2 in product ~1 vol% CO2 in product (3-stage), ~2 vol% CO2 in product ~2 vol% CO2 in product
1-stage has higher CO2 in product
Health, environment, safety (HSE): Solvent: amine A dry system Water treatment – impurities end up Gas-cooler will knock-out water and
Raw gas impurities are removed in each in water streams VOC
technology but by different means and the Leakages to environment are Gas cooler with chiller as
sidestreams need to be treated differently minimised with process safety pretreatment collecting the impurities Traces of VOC in the offgas
Amine traces go out only with off- (water, VOC, impurities) & AC (VOC,
gas (<150 micrograms/Nm3 H2S)
CO2)
Utilities & efficiency (cooling water Efficient heat integration possible No water consumption but high Water consumption and high No water consumption but high
consumption) – heat integration reduces the and with heat integration no electrical consumption electrical consumption electrical consumption
total low energy consumption for the cooling water needed
upgrading) Less water consumption
CAPEX & foot print Amine CAPEX attractive, Higher footprint and CAPEX Same footprint as amine Higher footprint
(large plants, >500 Nm3/h) less footprint
CAPEX & foot print Higher footprint and CAPEX Lower footprint and CAPEX 1000-2500 Nm3/h mid range 1000-2500 Nm3/h mid range
(small plants, < 500 Nm3/h)

23 © Wärtsilä
 Electricity Consumption Comparison

24 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 Electricity Yearly Consumption

Basis: 3500 scfm of inlet raw biogas flow

Using membrane system increase the electricity cost by 1,260,000 dollars /year.

Chemical Absorption 0.06 kwh/Nm3

Membrane 0.28 kwh/Nm3

Difference 0.22 kwh/Nm3

Yearly Electricity usage difference 12,578,834 kw/year

Electricity cost 0.10 dollar / kwh

Total Energy Cost Difference 1,257,883.40 dollars / year

25 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 Methane Recovery and Revenue Comparison

Basis: 3500 scfm of inlet raw biogas

Methane Product biomethane in Product gas Production

Recovery scfm Caloric value btu/ft3 Million btu / year

CApure amine process 99.90% 2028 1000 1,065,901

Membrane System 97.0% 1969 1000 1,034,959

Difference 2.90% 59 33,942

Biomethane price $35 per million btu

More Revenue in a Year
By utilizing Wartsila Puregas CApure amine process technology
$ 1,082,972.52

26 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 Integration of heat recovered from biogas upgrader into the digestion process

27 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 Operation & Automation
Fredrik Vigertsson

28 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
CAPURE PROCESS OVERVIEW

Absorption
column Chillers
Stripper
column H2S filter

Condensers Biogas
blowers

Gas room
Electrical room

Auxillary cooler
CApure room

© Wärtsilä
 Uptime and Reliability

• Facility is going through a Factory Acceptance Test before being shipped to site

• Well tested PLC program with a long history

• All analog signals are trended

• Easy to use HMI panel with user friendly interface

• 24/7 helpdesk with online support with a skilled Wärtsilä engineer receiving the calls

30 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
31 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
32 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020 Project: C202351 / Doc. 1529113 / SRA076
33 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020 Project: C202351 / Doc. 1529113 / SRA076
34 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 Case Studies
Fredrik Vigertsson

35 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020
 REFERENCES PLANTS

More Biogas – Kalmar, Sweden

• 750 Nm3/h raw biogas (65% methane)

• 99.95% methane efficiency
• 30,000 tons pa of food waste, manure and crop residues
• Heat supplied from biomass boiler
• Two high pressure compressors, each compress the biomethane to 250 Barg
• Four trailer filling stations
• Local CNG fueling

36 © Wärtsilä 11/12/2020
 REFERENCES PLANTS

Karlskoga Biogas – Sweden

• 900 Nm3/h raw biogas (65% methane)

• Food and agricultural waste
• 10% landfill gas with 45% methane added
• Two high pressure compressors, each compress the biomethane to 250 Barg
• 10 trailer filling stations
• Local CNG fueling

37 © Wärtsilä 11/12/2020
 REFERENCES PLANTS

Riverside Biogas – Glenfiddich Distillery

• 2000 Nm3/h biogas from spent malt.

• 99.9% methane efficiency
• Heat supplied from CHP
• Back up biogas boiler.
• Injects 1,200 Nm3/h biomethane direct
to the gas grid
• Propane enrichment and gas network entry facility.

38 © Wärtsilä 11/12/2020
 REFERENCES PLANTS

Buchan Biogas – Peterhead (SGN)

• 1200 Nm3/h biogas from agricultural waste

• 99.9% methane efficiency
• Heat supplied from biogas boiler
• Injects 720 Nm3/h biomethane direct to
the gas grid
• Propane enrichment and gas network entry facility.

39 © Wärtsilä 11/12/2020
 REFERENCES PLANTS

Biogas Zurich, Switzerland

• Wastewater treatment facility

• 1400 Nm3/h biogas from sewage sludge
• Heat supplied from biogas boiler
• Injects 840Nm3/h biomethane direct to
the gas grid
• Propane enrichment and gas network entry facility.

40 © Wärtsilä 11/12/2020
 REFERENCES PLANTS

Sønderjysk Biogas, Denmark

• 5,000 Nm3/h biogas from agricultural waste

• 540,000 tons of manure, straw and agricultural residues
• Injects c. 2,000 Nm3/h biomethane to
the gas grid
• Produces enough energy to heat 15,000 homes or fuel 570 city busses.

41 © Wärtsilä 11/12/2020
REFERENCES PLANTS

Castle Eaton Farm, UK

• 750 Nm3/h biogas from agricultural waste

• 99.9% methane efficiency
• Chopped straw & agricultural residues
• Virtual Pipeline
• Biomethane injected to the gas grid at
high pressure.
• Multiple sites feed into the same injection point.

42 © Wärtsilä 11/12/2020
REFERENCES PLANTS

Three Mile Canyon Farms, Oregon USA

• 6,000 Nm3/h biogas from dairy waste

• 99.9% methane efficiency
• Feedstock: Cow manure
• Pipeline injection for California market
• Biomethane injected to the gas grid at 900 psig
• Plant operating uptime over 99%
• Largest manure-to-RNG operations in the United States

43 © Wärtsilä 11/12/2020
REFERENCES PLANTS

Junction City Expansion Project, Oregon USA

• 6,000 Nm3/h biogas from agricultural and dairy waste

• 99.9% methane efficiency
• Feedstock: Hay, straw and cow manure
• Injecting on Northwest Natural Pipeline gas for California market
• Biomethane injected to the gas grid at 400 psig.
• Plant to be commissioned this year

44 © Wärtsilä 11/12/2020
WARTSILA NORTH AMERICA

Audio
Questions?

Questions

45 © Wärtsilä 12/11/2020