The potential contribution of
anaerobic digestion to UK energy
goals and the resulting market value
1|Page
Contents
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................ 3
1.
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................... 4
2.
Food waste ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5
3.
Farm animal wastes ........................................................................................................................................................... 4
4.
Crops................................................................................................................................................................................ 8
5.
Sewage sludge ................................................................................................................................................................ 10
6.
Other feedstocks.............................................................................................................................................................. 11
7.
Total feedstocks............................................................................................................................................................... 12
8.
Current feedstock use ...................................................................................................................................................... 16
9.
Potential market value ...................................................................................................................................................... 17
2|Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Based on analysis undertaken for this project, anaerobic digestion technically has the potential to deliver 16-34 TWh of
delivered energy per year in 2020 (equating to 0.7-1.6 GW of electrical capacity). This is 7-15% of our 2020 renewable
energy target.
Food waste AD has the potential to generate up to 9 TWh per year, recycling up to 9 million tonnes of food waste in the
process. Agricultural AD plants have the potential to generate up to 19 TWh.
This equates to [x] tonnes CO2e savings based solely reducing emissions from fossil energy generation (i.e. not accounting
for the other greenhouse gas benefits of AD).
Based on market trends and support schemes, the breakdown of plants we could expect to see if AD achieved its full
potential is 100-200 waste-based plants operating in the period 2020-2030 and 700-1,800 agricultural-based plants. This is
a potential figure, not an estimate.
The UK market value from these could be £600m - £1.4 bn per year in 10 years.
3|Page
1. INTRODUCTION
Data has been collected on the amount of feedstocks suitable for AD that are currently produced annually. This has been
from a range of sources. We have used these to establish a ‘technical’ potential for the amount of energy that could be
generated from AD in the UK. This ‘technical’ potential would therefore be met if all policy, financial and logistical issues
were overcome.
We have also applied several limiting factors to this ‘technical’ potential to produce a ‘realistic’ potential. This ‘realistic’
potential still assumes that policy and financial barriers are overcome. However, under this scenario we assume a higher
avoidance of avoidable food waste (reducing the potential for AD), and we assume that other factors such as competition
from energy-from-waste plants and lack of uptake by residents of food waste collections limits the feedstock that could be
available.
A further range of factors then alter the potentially available feedstock to AD up to 2020 and to 2030. For example,
population growth is likely to increase the amount of food waste generated by households between 2014 and 2020. So a
percentage increase is added to account for this. The sections on each feedstock list all the assumptions which are
included in the calculation to estimate the “technical” and “realistic” potential scenarios for 2020 and 2030.
We then compare the two scenarios to the feedstocks currently being used by the industry to estimate the percentage of the
potential that is currently being realised.
We the potential energy generation and cost data to estimate how the AD market might grow and how this may be
converted into an annual market value for the sector. It should be noted that these are only estimates of the potential
market, not an estimate of the amount that will actually be built (which will be lower than the potential).
4|Page
2. FOOD WASTE
2.1. Food waste assumptions
The assumptions relevant to food waste are the following, based on data interpreted from various sources1.
Population assumptions
Total population growth 2014-2020
"Technical" scenarios and
4.1% household "realistic" scenario
Total population growth 2020-2030
"Technical" scenarios and
5.3% household "realistic" scenario
Economy assumptions
Annual GDP/ industrial per capita growth 2014-2020
Cumulative GDP/ industrial per capita growth 2014-2020
Annual GDP/ industrial growth 2020-2030
Cumulative GDP/ industrial growth 2020-2030
1%
6.2%
1%
10.5%
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
Percentage reduction in avoidable food waste by 2020
Percentage reduction in avoidable food waste by 2020
Further percentage reduction in avoidable food waste 2020-2030
Further percentage reduction in avoidable food waste 2020-2030
50%
10%
50%
10%
"Realistic" scenario
"Technical" scenarios
"Realistic" scenario
"Technical" scenarios
Percentage of commercial/ industrial food waste that is avoidable
"Technical" and "realistic"
75% scenarios
Avoidable food waste assumptions
Food waste collection assumptions
Percentage of food waste that can be collected (i.e. cannot collect all food waste): e.g. due
to households not participating.
75% "Realistic" scenario
Competition assumptions
Decrease in food waste availability (in 2014, and from 2014-2020 and from 2020-2030)
due to energy-from-waste and/ or composting/ land spreading contracts/ competition
15% "Realistic" scenario
1
Including http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/household-food-and-drink-waste-uk-2012 ,
http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/Estimates%20of%20waste%20in%20the%20food%20and%20drink%20supply%20chain_0.
pdf , http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/food-waste-hospitality-and-food-service-sector ,
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/npp/national-population-projections/2012-based-reference-volume--series-pp2/results.html#tabFuture-Size-of-the-Population
5|Page
2.2. Household waste
For household food waste, the following wet tonne outputs per year may be available:
Year
2012
2020
2030
Total amount of food and drink waste
generated by households in the UK
(million wet tonnes)
avoidable
unavoidable
Discharged to
sewer (not
available to
AD)
Food waste
collections (should
be available for AD)
- illustrative only
Composted at
home (not
available for AD)*
Fed to animals
(not available
to AD)
Potentially
available to AD
(million wet
tonnes)
7.0
4.2
2.8
1.6
0.54
0.5
0.3
4.6
6.8
5.1
6.8
4.2
4.0
2.3
4.0
1.4
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
1.6
1.2
1.6
1.0
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.3
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
4.5
3.4
4.5
2.7
Competi
tion
Percentage
collection
N/A
N/A
4.6
15%
75%
15%
75%
2.9
4.5
2.1
4.5
1.7
15%
75%
Total potentially remaining
for AD in 2012 "technical"
Total potentially remaining
for AD in 2012 (see
assumptions list for
explanation) "realistic"
"technical"
"realistic" scenario
"technical"
"realistic" scenario
* 2012 composting, sewer and animal feed proportion assumed to continue in future
years
1|Page
2.3. C&I waste
The assumptions for commercial and industrial waste are the following, based on data2 on surveys on the grocery (including food manufacturing) and hospitality sectors. These
numbers do not include industrial liquid effluents, so are an underestimate.
Grocery sector
Sector
Sub-sector
Million
tonnes
pa
Grocery sector
Food wholesale and retail
Food manufacturing factories
0.4
3.9
Sector total Of which landfill
(potentially
available to AD
under both "high"
and "low"
scenarios)
4.345
0.045
Of which land
spreading
(potentially
available to AD
under both "high"
and "low"
scenarios)
Of which unknown
destination
(potentially
available to AD
under both "high"
and "low"
scenarios)
Of which recycling
(including
composting)
(potentially
available to AD
under "high"
scenario)
Of which
thermal (not
likely to be
available to
AD)
2014
"high"
2014
"low"
2
0.6
1.3
0.4
3.9
2.6
Hospitality sector
Sector
Hospitality sector
Sub-sector
Hotels
Restaurants
Fast food
Pubs
Million tonnes pa
0.08
0.20
0.08
0.17
2
http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/Estimates%20of%20waste%20in%20the%20food%20and%20drink%20supply%20chain_0.pdf, http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/food-wastehospitality-and-food-service-sector and https://www.fdf.org.uk/corporate_pubs/waste_survey_2010.pdf
2|Page
Leisure outlets
Staff canteens
Schools
Hospitals
Services
0.06
0.02
0.12
0.12
0.07
0.92
Sector total 2014
Using the assumptions listed above in [section 2.1], including on avoiding food waste, the below tonnages could be attained:
2014 m wet tonnes
2020 m wet tonnes
"high"
"low"
Percentage reduction due to food waste avoidance
4.9
3.6
"high"
8%
5.0
"low"
38%
2.3
2030 m wet tonnes
"high"
"low"
8%
38%
5.1
1.5
3|Page
3. FARM ANIMAL WASTES
3.1. Animal waste assumptions
The following assumptions are relevant to the animal waste estimates:
Economy assumptions
Annual GDP/ industrial per capita growth 2014-2020
Cumulative GDP/ industrial per capita growth 2014-2020
Annual GDP/ industrial growth 2020-2030
Cumulative GDP/ industrial growth 2020-2030
1%
6.2%
1%
10.5%
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
Agriculture assumptions
To estimate the crop tonnages for the "high" scenario, we assume that crop use will be a
fraction of the total wet tonnes of manures (i.e. one tonne of crops will be used for every 4
or 5 tonnes of manure). The actual range of availability of crops will clearly be greater, but
linking the crops used to manures demonstrates the role that crops can play in improving
waste management of manures.
Annual yield growth 2014-2030
Cumulative yield growth 2014-2020
Cumulative yield growth 2020-2030
15%
0.8%
4.9%
8.3%
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
4|Page
Maize yield 2014
42 wet tonnes per hectare
The following table gives the assumptions for animal waste availability based on data from the UK greenhouse gas inventory and DEFRA’s livestock excreta volumes3:
Animal type
Number of
animals
(2010)
Volume of
Excreta
per month
(M3)*
Average
manure per
animal per
year (tonnes)
Total Manure
Production per
annum (tonnes)
Liquid
System
Daily
Spread
Solid
Storage
and Dry
Lot
Pasture
Range and
Paddock
Poultry
without
bedding
Poultry
with
bedding
Incineration
Potential
manure
capture (%
indoors)
Wet tonnes manure
per year
Cattle:
Dairy cows
1,846,634
1.4
16.8
31,023,451
38%
13%
4%
45%
55%
Beef cows
1,656,702
1.35
16.2
26,838,572
5%
14%
16%
65%
35%
Dairy heifers
407,708
1.2
14.4
6,604,869
9%
9%
13%
69%
31%
Beef heifers
377,530
0.78
9.36
3,533,680
5%
14%
16%
65%
35%
Dairy replacements >1 year
500,809
0.6
7.2
3,605,825
9%
9%
13%
69%
31%
Beef all others >1 year
2,458,422
0.6
7.2
17,700,638
5%
14%
16%
65%
35%
Dairy calves <1 year
519,447
0.6
7.2
3,740,018
0%
14%
31%
55%
45%
Beef calves <1 year
2,341,838
0.6
7.2
16,861,233
0%
14%
31%
55%
45%
Sows
360,268
0.33
3.96
1,426,661
17%
17%
24%
42%
58%
Gilts
141,152
0.13
1.56
220,197
17%
17%
24%
42%
58%
Boars
16,809
0.26
3.12
52,444
17%
17%
24%
42%
58%
Fattening & other pigs 80 - >110 kg
673,425
0.26
3.12
2,101,086
25%
29%
44%
2%
98%
Fattening & other pigs 50-80 kg
968,938
0.18
2.16
2,092,906
25%
29%
44%
2%
98%
1,133,631
0.1
1.2
1,360,357
25%
29%
44%
2%
98%
17,062,898
9,393,500
2,047,509
1,236,788
1,117,806
6,195,223
1,683,008
7,587,555
Pigs:
Other pigs 20-50 kg
3
827,464
127,714
30,418
2,059,064
2,051,048
1,333,150
http://naei.defra.gov.uk/ and https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/261371/pb14050-nvz-guidance.pdf
5|Page
Pigs < 20 kg
26%
23%
30%
79%
556,558
0%
99%
0%
0%
91%
0%
50%
0%
100%
1%
0%
32%
36%
99%
114,005
1,098,866
391,965
1,876,612
4%
0%
48%
0%
96%
161,829
1,174,174
0.05
0.6
704,504
21%
Growing pullets
8,724,012
1.1
0.0132
115,157
49%
1%
0%
49%
Laying fowls
28,751,081
3.5
0.042
1,207,545
46%
9%
46%
Breeding flock
9,606,990
3.4
0.0408
391,965
50%
0%
Table chicken
105,309,326
1.5
0.018
1,895,568
32%
3,902,122
3.6
0.0432
168,572
48%
Poultry:
Turkeys (averaged male/female
figures)
*1 m3 assumed to = 1 tonne
Animal bedding additional tonnage (tonnes as percent of animal excreta)
Total
20%
68,343,578
15%
10,251,537
58,092,042
121,645,250
Percent unavailable in "realistic" scenario due to logistics, size of farm, losses etc.
Unavailable due to logistics, size of farm, losses etc.
Total potentially available ("realistic")
This produces the following tonnages:
Feedstock type
Low/ High scenario
Low/ high scenario assumptions
Million wet tonnes
2014
2020
2030
58.1
52.3
47.1
Farm animal wastes and bedding
Low
- Decreasing livestock numbers
6|Page
High
- GDP/ industrial growth
- Stable livestock numbers
68.3
72.5
80.1
7|Page
4. CROPS
4.1. Crops assumptions
The following assumptions relate to crop tonnages:
Agriculture assumptions
To estimate the crop tonnages for the "technical" potential scenario, we have linked the
amount of crops that could be used for AD to the amount of animal wastes that could be
treated alongside those crops through AD. This reflects the industry trend for using crops to
support the treatment of animal wastes. Here we assume that for each tonne of crop used,
4-5 tonnes of manure will be used. The following percentage gives the additional
percentage of crops we assume for each tonne of animal waste:
Annual yield growth 2014-2030
Cumulative yield growth 2014-2020
Cumulative yield growth 2020-2030
Maize yield 2014
Decreasing livestock numbers 2014-2020 and 2020-2030
15%
0.8%
4.9%
8.3%
42
10%
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
"Technical" scenarios
wet tonnes per hectare
"Realistic" scenario
Percent unavailable in "realistic" scenario due to logistics, size of farm, losses etc.
15% "Realistic" scenario
The “technical” scenario wet tonnes equates to approximately 1% of UK agricultural land. The tonnages increase with yield
improvements in future4. For the “realistic” scenario we use the amount of land used in 2012 for bioenergy in the UK and the land used
for crops for AD and solely adjust for yield growth.
Bioenergy agricultural land use data (for "realistic" scenario)
2012 area used for bioenergy crops (excluding AD)
2012 AD
Total bioenergy + AD
42,000 hectares
15,500 hectares
57,500 hectares
These assumptions give the following tonnages:
Feedstock type
Low/ High scenario
Crops
Low
4
Low/ high scenario assumptions
- Only current bioenergy land use is available for AD
- No yield increases
Million wet tonnes
2014
2020
2030
2.4
2.4
2.4
Taking account of estimates used in http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/ap106e/ap106e.pdf
8|Page
High
- Proportion of crops in 2014 is related to 2014 manures use
- Yield increases
10.3
10.8
11.3
9|Page
5. SEWAGE SLUDGE
For sewage sludge we have used existing data on sewage sludge tonnages5, converting them to wet tonnes (30-35 million wet
tonnes).
We have adjusted for population growth.
Sewage assumptions
percent of current "realistic" scenario
Current sewage sludge percentage used for AD 70%
Population assumptions
Total population growth 2014-2020 4.1% "Technical" scenarios and household "realistic" scenario
Total population growth 2020-2030 5.3% "Technical" scenarios and household "realistic" scenario
This gives:
Feedstock type
Low/ High
scenario
Sewage sludge
Low
High
Low/ high scenario assumptions
- Accounts for population growth
- Lower end of the estimates of sewage sludge production
assumed
- Accounts for population growth
- Higher end of sewage sludge production assumed
Million wet tonnes
2014
2020
2030
30
31
33
35
36
38
5
Page 12, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69400/anaerobic-digestion-strataction-plan.pdf , http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/market-studies/oft1372.pdf
10 | P a g e
6. OTHER FEEDSTOCKS
For other potential sources of feedstock that may be available in future with further market, infrastructure and research and
development we have made some assumptions on the amount of other material that may become available over time. There are a
large number of these potential feedstocks, so we have judged the overall figures rather than trying to break them down individually:
Feedstock type
Other potential sources:
- Nature conservation managed
(e.g. wetland reed beds - see case
studies and DECC funding)
- Algae/ sea kelp etc. (see Norfolk
CC studies, VTT, academic
research)
- Municipal street and park waste
(e.g. leaves and grass cuttings)
- Other farm and horticultural
wastes (e.g. greenhouse industry
wastes, on-site farm residues,
straw, orchard waste)
- Aquaculture wastes
- Household garden green wastes
(e.g. lawn cuttings, leaves)
Low/ High
scenario
Low/ high scenario assumptions
Low
High
- Potential for new sources of feedstock to emerge
following technological progress/ R&D/ demonstration
and commercialisation programmes etc.
Million wet tonnes
2014
2020
2030
0.2
0.2
0.2
1
2
4
11 | P a g e
7. TOTAL FEEDSTOCKS
We calculate the energy value of the feedstocks by using the following assumptions:
Feedstock and gas yields
Feedstock and gas yields
Dry matter
Household food waste
25%
C&I food waste
25%
Crops
33%
Animal wastes and bedding
10%
Sewage sludge
5%
Average (figure to use for "potential new feedstock")
20%
MWh per m3
Biogas yield (m3
Biogas yield
raw biogas per
CH4
per wet
dry tonne)
percentage
tonne
700
62%
175
700
62%
175
600
62%
200
200
55%
20
400
60%
20
520
60%
118
0.0101
Please note that these are all estimates of the average numbers across a large number of individual feedstocks so should not be used
for other purposes.
The following is a summary of the assumptions for each feedstock:
Feedstock type
Low/ High
scenario
Household food waste
Low
High
C&I food waste
Low
High
Low/ high scenario assumptions
- Accounts for population growth
- High household food waste reductions
- High competition from composting/ EfW
- Of remaining 'potential', a proportion is not collected (e.g.
due to lack of food waste collections)
- Accounts for population growth
- Low household food waste reductions
- High food waste collections
- Accounts for population growth
- High business food waste reductions
- High competition from composting/ EfW
- Of remaining 'potential', a proportion is not collected (e.g.
due to lack of food waste collections)
- Accounts for population growth
- Low business food waste reductions
- GDP/ industrial growth
- High food waste collections
12 | P a g e
Farm animal wastes and bedding
Low
Low
- GDP/ industrial growth
- Stable livestock numbers
- Only current bioenergy land use is available for AD
- No yield increases
High
- Proportion of crops in 2014 is related to 2014 manures use
- Yield increases
High
Crops
Other potential sources:
- Nature conservation managed (e.g. wetland reed
beds - see case studies and DECC funding)
- Algae/ sea kelp etc. (see Norfolk CC studies, VTT,
academic research)
- Municipal street and park waste (e.g. leaves and
grass cuttings)
- Other farm and horticultural wastes (e.g.
greenhouse industry wastes, on-site farm residues,
straw, orchard waste)
- Aquaculture wastes
- Household garden green wastes (e.g. lawn cuttings,
leaves)
Sewage sludge
- Decreasing livestock numbers
- Percentage which could not be available due to logistics
etc.
Low
High
Low
High
- Potential for new sources of feedstock to emerge
following technological progress/ R&D/ demonstration and
commercialisation programmes etc.
- Accounts for population growth
- Lower end of the estimates of sewage sludge production
assumed
- Accounts for population growth
- Higher end of sewage sludge production assumed
13 | P a g e
The results of the overall analysis are the following:
Feedstock type
Household food
waste
C&I food waste
Farm animal wastes
and bedding
Crops
Other potential
sources
Low/ High
scenario
Million wet tonnes
Million dry tonnes
TWh useable
energy (accounts
for parasitic load)
MW biogas capacity
(80% load factor)
TWhe-equivalent
MW electricalcapacity-equivalent
(80% load factor)
2014
2020
2030
2014
2020
2030
2014
2020
2030
2014
2020
2030
2014
2020
2030
2014
2020
2030
Low
2.9
2.1
1.7
0.7
0.5
0.4
2.9
2.1
1.7
331
241
197
1.2
0.8
0.7
132
96
79
High
4.6
4.5
4.5
1.2
1.1
1.1
4.5
4.4
4.4
519
508
503
1.8
1.8
1.8
208
203
201
Low
3.6
2.3
1.5
0.9
0.6
0.4
3.5
2.3
1.5
401
261
172
1.4
0.9
0.6
161
104
69
High
4.9
5.0
5.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
4.8
4.9
5.0
548
559
576
1.9
2.0
2.0
219
223
230
Low
58.1
52.3
47.1
5.8
5.2
4.7
5.8
5.2
4.7
663
597
537
2.3
2.1
1.9
265
239
215
High
68.3
72.5
80.1
6.8
7.3
8.0
6.8
7.3
8.0
780
828
915
2.7
2.9
3.2
312
331
366
Low
2.4
2.4
2.4
0.8
0.8
0.8
2.7
2.7
2.7
308
308
308
1.1
1.1
1.1
123
123
123
High
10.3
10.8
11.3
3.4
3.5
3.7
11.4
12.0
12.6
1,306
1,370
1,437
4.6
4.8
5.0
523
548
575
Low
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.1
0.1
0.1
15
15
15
0.1
0.1
0.1
6
6
6
High
1
2
4
0.2
0.4
0.8
0.6
1.2
2.5
71
142
283
0.2
0.5
1.0
28
57
113
14 | P a g e
Sewage sludge
Low
30
31
33
1.5
1.6
1.6
3.6
3.8
4.0
415
432
455
1.5
1.5
1.6
166
173
182
High
35
36
38
1.75
1.8
1.9
4.2
4.4
4.6
484
504
531
1.7
1.8
1.9
194
202
212
Low
97
91
86
10
9
8
19
16
15
2,134
1,854
1,684
7
6
6
854
742
673
High
124
131
143
15
15
17
32
34
37
3,709
3,910
4,245
13
14
15
1,484
1,564
1,698
Total
Percentage of 225
TWh 2020 renewable
energy target
Low
7%
High
15%
As well as renewable energy targets, this will make a significant contribution to greenhouse gas reduction, landfill diversion and recycling targets.
15 | P a g e
8. CURRENT FEEDSTOCK USE
Using our information on current feedstock use for AD we calculate the following progress for each feedstock towards its potential:
Feedstock type
Current use
mtpa (wet)
Food waste: household, municipal and industrial
Farm animal wastes and bedding
Crops
Current use as
percentage of 2020
potential
Low
36%
High
17%
Low
1%
High
1%
Low
39%
High
9%
Low
50%
High
5%
Low
67%
High
58%
Low
33%
High
16%
1.6
0.6
0.9
Other potential sources:
- Nature conservation managed (e.g. wetland reed beds - see case studies
and DECC funding)
- Algae/ sea kelp etc. (see Norfolk CC studies, VTT, academic research)
- Municipal street and park waste (e.g. leaves and grass cuttings)
- Other farm and horticultural wastes (e.g. greenhouse industry wastes,
on-site farm residues, straw, orchard waste)
- Aquaculture wastes
- Household garden green wastes (e.g. lawn cuttings, leaves)
0.1
Sewage sludge
21.0
Total (as percentage of potential energy generation)
High/ low
2020
scenario
We are therefore currently fulfilling 16-33% of AD’s potential. Therefore, there could be room for an industry five times the current size.
16 | P a g e
9. POTENTIAL MARKET VALUE
The majority of agricultural plants in operation are approximately 0.5 MWe in size on average. Food waste plants are often 2 MWe.
The UK could therefore potentially support the following number of farm-based and waste-based plants:
2020
Typical
plant
capacity
MWe
(equivalent)
Agriculturalbased plants
Food wastebased plants
Other'
feedstock
type plants
Total
(excluding
sewage)
"technical"
potential
capacity
"realistic"
potential
capacity
2030
"technical"
potential
number of
plants
"realistic"
potential
number of
plants
"technical
" potential
capacity
"realistic"
potential
capacity
"technical"
potential
number of
plants
"realistic"
potential
number of
plants
0.5
879
362
1,759
724
941
338
1,882
676
2
427
201
213
100
432
147
216
74
1
57
6
57
6
113
6
113
6
2,029
830
2,211
756
Based on our analysis, the capital and operating cost of plants of these sizes are typically the following, which result in the following
potential annual market value:
Typical
plant
capacity
MWe
(equivalent)
Agriculturalbased plants
Food wastebased plants
Other'
feedstock type
plants
Total (excluding
sewage)
Cost assumptions
Annual
operating cost
per plant
(includes
Capital cost
feedstock
per plant
differentials)
"technical" potential scenario
If constructed
over a 10 year
period,
average
annual capex
Annual opex
after 10 years
"realistic" potential scenario
If constructed
over a 10 year
period,
average
annual capex
Annual opex
after 10 years
0.5
£2,200,000
£500,000
£193,466,614
£439,696,850
£79,611,718
£180,935,723
2
£6,000,000
£1,100,000
£255,921,908
£469,190,164
£120,523,219
£220,959,235
1
£4,400,000
£1,000,000
£24,908,342
£56,609,868
£2,663,977
£6,054,493
£474,296,864
£965,496,882
£202,798,914
£407,949,450
£1,439,793,746
£610,748,364
The potential market value for AD is therefore £700m - £1.4bn in an individual year (if 10% of these were built in a year) and assuming
the maximum number of plants incur operating costs.
17 | P a g e