IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v76y2015icp107-111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Agricultural biogas plants – A systematic analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats

Author

Listed:
  • Brudermann, Thomas
  • Mitterhuber, Corinna
  • Posch, Alfred

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss the prospects of agricultural biogas plants. We conducted an integrated SWOT–AHP analysis for such plants in Austria in order to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT factors), and to weight the factors identified based on expert judgments, calculated according to the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. The results show that financial aspects are dominant in three of the four SWOT categories. Technological aspects and issues regarding utilization seem to play a relatively minor role. Factors that are not directly under the control of plant operators are currently perceived as crucial for the success of agricultural biogas plants. We conclude that such plants will only succeed in contributing to sustainable energy supply goals when economic and political conditions are favorable over the long term.

Suggested Citation

  • Brudermann, Thomas & Mitterhuber, Corinna & Posch, Alfred, 2015. "Agricultural biogas plants – A systematic analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 107-111.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:76:y:2015:i:c:p:107-111
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.11.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421514006302
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.11.022?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. Srirangan, Kajan & Akawi, Lamees & Moo-Young, Murray & Chou, C. Perry, 2012. "Towards sustainable production of clean energy carriers from biomass resources," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 172-186.
    2. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    3. Buysman, Eric & Mol, Arthur P.J., 2013. "Market-based biogas sector development in least developed countries —The case of Cambodia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 44-51.
    4. Qu, Wei & Tu, Qin & Bluemling, Bettina, 2013. "Which factors are effective for farmers’ biogas use?–Evidence from a large-scale survey in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 26-33.
    5. Brudermann, Thomas & Reinsberger, Kathrin & Orthofer, Anita & Kislinger, Martin & Posch, Alfred, 2013. "Photovoltaics in agriculture: A case study on decision making of farmers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 96-103.
    6. Kurttila, Mikko & Pesonen, Mauno & Kangas, Jyrki & Kajanus, Miika, 2000. "Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis -- a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 41-52, May.
    7. Bluemling, Bettina & Mol, Arthur P.J. & Tu, Qin, 2013. "The social organization of agricultural biogas production and use," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 10-17.
    8. Carrosio, Giovanni, 2013. "Energy production from biogas in the Italian countryside: Policies and organizational models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 3-9.
    9. Djatkov, Djordje & Effenberger, Mathias & Lehner, Andreas & Martinov, Milan & Tesic, Milos & Gronauer, Andreas, 2012. "New method for assessing the performance of agricultural biogas plants," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 104-112.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Luo, Tao & Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Huang, Ruyi & Chen, Qiu & Mei, Zili & Pan, Junting & Liu, Hongbin, 2020. "Analysis of revolution in decentralized biogas facilities caused by transition in Chinese rural areas," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    2. Madurai Elavarasan, Rajvikram & Pugazhendhi, Rishi & Jamal, Taskin & Dyduch, Joanna & Arif, M.T. & Manoj Kumar, Nallapaneni & Shafiullah, GM & Chopra, Shauhrat S. & Nadarajah, Mithulananthan, 2021. "Envisioning the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through the lens of energy sustainability (SDG 7) in the post-COVID-19 world," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    3. Idiano D’Adamo & Rocío González-Sánchez & Maria Sonia Medina-Salgado & Davide Settembre-Blundo, 2021. "E-Commerce Calls for Cyber-Security and Sustainability: How European Citizens Look for a Trusted Online Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, June.
    4. Idiano D’Adamo & Claudio Sassanelli, 2022. "Biomethane Community: A Research Agenda towards Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, April.
    5. Zaman, Rafia & Brudermann, Thomas & Kumar, S. & Islam, Nazrul, 2018. "A multi-criteria analysis of coal-based power generation in Bangladesh," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 182-192.
    6. Kari-Anne Lyng & Lise Skovsgaard & Henrik Klinge Jacobsen & Ole Jørgen Hanssen, 2020. "The implications of economic instruments on biogas value chains: a case study comparison between Norway and Denmark," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(8), pages 7125-7152, December.
    7. Ahmad, Salman & Nadeem, Abid & Akhanova, Gulzhanat & Houghton, Tom & Muhammad-Sukki, Firdaus, 2017. "Multi-criteria evaluation of renewable and nuclear resources for electricity generation in Kazakhstan," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1880-1891.
    8. Skovsgaard, Lise & Jacobsen, Henrik Klinge, 2017. "Economies of scale in biogas production and the significance of flexible regulation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 77-89.
    9. Reinsberger, Kathrin & Brudermann, Thomas & Hatzl, Stefanie & Fleiß, Eva & Posch, Alfred, 2015. "Photovoltaic diffusion from the bottom-up: Analytical investigation of critical factors," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 178-187.
    10. Skovsgaard, Lise & Jensen, Ida Græsted, 2018. "Recent trends in biogas value chains explained using cooperative game theory," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 503-522.
    11. Karatayev, Marat & Hall, Stephen, 2020. "Establishing and comparing energy security trends in resource-rich exporting nations (Russia and the Caspian Sea region)," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    12. Herbes, Carsten & Halbherr, Verena & Braun, Lorenz, 2018. "Factors influencing prices for heat from biogas plants," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 308-318.
    13. Idiano D’Adamo & Rocío González-Sánchez & Maria Sonia Medina-Salgado & Davide Settembre-Blundo, 2021. "Methodological Perspective for Assessing European Consumers’ Awareness of Cybersecurity and Sustainability in E-Commerce," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-10, October.
    14. Masayasu Asai & Takashi Hayashi & Mitasu Yamamoto, 2019. "Mental Model Analysis of Biogas Energy Perceptions and Policy Reveals Potential Constraints in a Japanese Farm Community," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, January.
    15. D'Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Imbert, Enrica & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "A Socio-economic Indicator for EoL Strategies for Bio-based Products," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    16. Ali Akbar Jamali & Ramin Tabatabaee & Timothy O. Randhir, 2021. "Ecotourism and socioeconomic strategies for Khansar River watershed of Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(11), pages 17077-17093, November.
    17. Marcin Zieliński & Aleksandra Karczmarczyk & Marta Kisielewska & Marcin Dębowski, 2022. "Possibilities of Biogas Upgrading on a Bio-Waste Sorbent Derived from Anaerobic Sewage Sludge," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-14, September.
    18. Gerald Schweiger & Fabian Kuttin & Alfred Posch, 2019. "District Heating Systems: An Analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats of the 4GDH," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-15, December.
    19. Kiunke, Theresa & Gemignani, Natalia & Malheiro, Pedro & Brudermann, Thomas, 2022. "Key factors influencing onshore wind energy development: A case study from the German North Sea region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    20. Ramos-Suárez, J.L. & Ritter, A. & Mata González, J. & Camacho Pérez, A., 2019. "Biogas from animal manure: A sustainable energy opportunity in the Canary Islands," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 137-150.
    21. Chanthawong, Anuman & Dhakal, Shobhakar, 2016. "Stakeholders' perceptions on challenges and opportunities for biodiesel and bioethanol policy development in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 189-206.
    22. Moon-Koo Kim & Jong-Hyun Park & Kyungsoo Kim & Byoungkyu Park, 2020. "Identifying factors influencing the slow market diffusion of electric vehicles in Korea," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 663-688, April.
    23. D'Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "A New Socio-economic Indicator to Measure the Performance of Bioeconomy Sectors in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    24. Bega, François & Lin, Boqiang, 2023. "China's belt & road initiative energy cooperation: International assessment of the power projects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 270(C).
    25. D'Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Gastaldi, Massimo & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "RES-T trajectories and an integrated SWOT-AHP analysis for biomethane. Policy implications to support a green revolution in European transport," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).

    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. Bluemling, Bettina, 2013. "Synopsis of the Special Issue Section: “The social organization of agricultural biogas production and use”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 52-54.
    2. Reinsberger, Kathrin & Brudermann, Thomas & Hatzl, Stefanie & Fleiß, Eva & Posch, Alfred, 2015. "Photovoltaic diffusion from the bottom-up: Analytical investigation of critical factors," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 178-187.
    3. Masayasu Asai & Takashi Hayashi & Mitasu Yamamoto, 2019. "Mental Model Analysis of Biogas Energy Perceptions and Policy Reveals Potential Constraints in a Japanese Farm Community," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, January.
    4. Bianca Cavicchi & Sergio Palmieri & Marco Odaldi, 2017. "The Influence of Local Governance: Effects on the Sustainability of Bioenergy Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-22, March.
    5. Brunnhofer, Magdalena & Gabriella, Natasha & Schöggl, Josef-Peter & Stern, Tobias & Posch, Alfred, 2020. "The biorefinery transition in the European pulp and paper industry – A three-phase Delphi study including a SWOT-AHP analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    6. Ilić, Damir & Milošević, Isidora & Ilić-Kosanović, Tatjana, 2022. "Application of Unmanned Aircraft Systems for smart city transformation: Case study Belgrade," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    7. Zeinab Asadpourian & Mehdi Rahimian & Saeed Gholamrezai, 2020. "SWOT-AHP-TOWS Analysis for Sustainable Ecotourism Development in the Best Area in Lorestan Province, Iran," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 152(1), pages 289-315, November.
    8. Ortiz, Willington & Terrapon-Pfaff, Julia & Dienst, Carmen, 2017. "Understanding the diffusion of domestic biogas technologies. Systematic conceptualisation of existing evidence from developing and emerging countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1287-1299.
    9. Bluemling, Bettina & de Visser, Ina, 2013. "Overcoming the “club dilemma” of village-scale bioenergy projects—The case of India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 18-25.
    10. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    11. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    12. Guh, Yuh-Yuan, 1997. "Introduction to a new weighting method -- Hierarchy consistency analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 215-226, October.
    13. Grzegorz Ślusarz & Barbara Gołębiewska & Marek Cierpiał-Wolan & Jarosław Gołębiewski & Dariusz Twaróg & Sebastian Wójcik, 2021. "Regional Diversification of Potential, Production and Efficiency of Use of Biogas and Biomass in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-20, January.
    14. Cui, Ye & E, Hanyu & Pedrycz, Witold & Fayek, Aminah Robinson, 2022. "A granular multicriteria group decision making for renewable energy planning problems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 1047-1059.
    15. Xiaoxia Li, 2022. "Research on the Development Level of Rural E-Commerce in China Based on Analytic Hierarchy and Systematic Clustering Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-18, July.
    16. Wirth, Steffen, 2014. "Communities matter: Institutional preconditions for community renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 236-246.
    17. Briguglio, Marie & Formosa, Glenn, 2017. "When households go solar: Determinants of uptake of a Photovoltaic Scheme and policy insights," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 154-162.
    18. Bauer, Fredric & Hulteberg, Christian, 2014. "Isobutanol from glycerine – A techno-economic evaluation of a new biofuel production process," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 261-268.
    19. Danijela Tuljak-Suban & Patricija Bajec, 2022. "A Hybrid DEA Approach for the Upgrade of an Existing Bike-Sharing System with Electric Bikes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-23, October.
    20. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, 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:enepol:v:76:y:2015:i:c:p:107-111. 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/locate/enpol .

    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.