Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO region of Poland

Report 2024/23

Sarah Eidsmo, Haakon Vennemo, Andreas Stranden Hoel-Holt, Anna Bojaniwicz-Bablok og Izabela Potapowicz

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO region of Poland

Category	Reports
Sub-Categories	Power and energyClimate change and the green transformation
Year	2024
Report Number	23
Author(s)	Sarah Eidsmo Haakon Vennemo Andreas Stranden Hoel-Holt Anna Bojaniwicz-Bablok Izabela Potapowicz
Download	file_download (3.3 MB)
Read in browser	PDF

Report 20	24/23	 | 	For 	Tomaszów Mazowiecki Municipality	 	
 	
 	
 	
Opportunities for 	producing	 biogas 	in 	the MOFTMO 	are	a of 	
Poland	 	
A pre	-feasibility study	 of 	biogas in 	Municipal 	Functional 	Area	 Tomaszów Ma-	
zowiecki	-Opoczno 	 	
Anna Bojanowicz	-Bablok, 	Sarah Eidsmo, Andreas H	oel	-Holt,	 Natalia Horak,	 Izabela Pota-	
powicz	, Agnieszka Sobol	 and Haakon Vennemo

Opportunities fo	r producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	2 	
 
D	ocument details	 	
Title	 	Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO 	area 	of Poland	 	
Report Number	 	2024/23	 	
Author	 	Anna Bojanowi	cz-Bablok, Sarah Eidsmo, Andrea	s Hoel	-Holt, 	Natalia Horak, Izabela Pota-	
powicz, Agnieszka Sobol and Haakon Vennemo	 	
ISBN	 	978	-82	-8126	-685	-8 	
Project 	Number	 	23	-HVE	-13	 	
Project Leader 	 	Haakon Vennemo	 	
Date of completion 	 	29	.07.2024	 	
Source front page photo 	 	 Vladyslav Horoshevych	 (iStock	) 	
Availability 	 	Public	 	
Keywords	 	Power and energy, 	green transition, 	local and regional analysis	 	
 
 
 
 
 
About us	 	
Vista 	Analys	e is a social science consultancy with its main emphasis on economic research, policy analysis and advice, 	
and evaluations. We carry out projects to the highest professional standards, with independence and integrity. Our 
key thematic areas include climate 	change, energy, transport, urban planning and welfare issues.	 	
Our employees have high academic credentials and broad experience within consulting. When needed we utilise an 
extensive network of companies and resource persons nationally and internationally.	 The company is fully employee	-	
owned.	 	
Institute of Environmental Protection 	- National Research =nstitute (=OŚ	-PIB) is an R&D institute conducting scientific 	
research in the fields of environmental protection, sustainable development, counteracting climate	 change, and ra-	
tional use of the environment and its resources. It develops the scientific basis for environmental protection, provides 
knowledge to national, regional, and local governments and businesses, and conducts activities to raise ecological 
aware	ness and shape the ecological attitudes of society. The Institute's staff are highly qualified, highly active and 	
committed to their tasks, and the level of research and development work carried out meets high standards.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	3 	
 
Preface	 	
This pre	-feasibility study 	is a deliverable from the project 	Green transition in practice: 	Demonstrating and dissemi-	
nating the benefits of producing biogas from bio	-waste	, financed by the 	Fund for Bilateral Relations 	within the 	Euro-	
pean Economic Area Financial Mechanism 2014	-2021 an	d the Norwegian Financial Mechanism 	2014	-2021. 	The 	gen-	
eral idea of the project is to 	compare similarities and differences in the 	challenges facing biogas in Poland and Nor-	
way. 	The pre	-feasibility study 	identifies challenges and opportunities in the MOFTMO 	area	 of Poland. 	The study has 	
been prepared October 2023 	– July	 2024. 	The authors would like to thank 	representatives of Tomaszów Mazowiecki 	
Municipal Office	 and	 Water and Sewage Management Plant in 	Tomaszów Mazowiecki 	for	 their kind 	support 	during 	
project	 preparation	, as well as Zbigniew Gieleciak 	(=OŚ	-PIB) 	and Barbara Petrykowska (KOWR) 	for sharing their 	
knowledge, consultation and valuable comments	. We thank L	eif Grandum	 and Jonas J. Lie	 (Vista Analyse) for provid-	
ing excellent 	research assistance	. 	
 	
29.07.2024 	 	29.07.2024 	
Ha	akon Vennemo	 	 Anna Bojanowicz	-Bablok	 	
Professor, partner 	 	 	Chief specialist 	
Vista Analyse AS	 	 	 	 	 	 =OŚ	-PIB

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	4 	
 
Contents	 	
Executive summary	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	.......................	 7 	
1 	Background and scope	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	........	 14	 	
1.1	 	European political context	 	14	 	
1.2	 	Polish policies and regulations	 	15	 	
1.3	 	Infrastructure, technology, and logistics	 	18	 	
1.4	 	Fin	ancial aspects	 	26	 	
2 	Resource evaluation of MOFTMO	 ................................	................................	................................	......................	 31	 	
2.1	 	The MOFTMO	 	31	 	
2.2	 	Mapping of available feedstock in the MOFTMO	 	32	 	
2.3	 	Perspectives on future feedstock potential	 	36	 	
2.4	 	Biogas and energy potential of the available feedstock	 	37	 	
2.5	 	Stakeholders (in th	e) agricultural sector and municipalities	 	40	 	
3 	Restrictions and barriers	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	.....	 42	 	
3.1	 	Technical barriers	 	42	 	
3.2	 	Economic barriers	 	42	 	
3.3	 	Institutional barriers, org	anizational and legal barriers	 	42	 	
3.4	 	Social barriers	 	43	 	
4 	Opportunities and best practice	 ................................	................................	................................	.........................	 45	 	
4.1	 	Examples from other regions 	in Poland	 	45	 	
4.2	 	Examples from Norway	 	48	 	
4.3	 	Examples from other countries	 	51	 	
4.4	 	Local ideas	 	53	 	
4.5	 	Conclusion	 	54	 	
5 	Biogas at the Tomaszow Mazowiecki wastewater treatment plant 	– a business case	 ................................	......	 56	 	
5.1	 	Biogas production in two phases	 	56	 	
5.2	 	Phase 1: Sewage sludge as substrate	 	57	 	
5.3	 	Phase 2 	– Municipal and industrial waste	 	66	 	
5.4	 	Minimum grant for a 10	-12 percent real rate of return	 	72	 	
5.5	 	External benefits of biogas production at 	Tomaszów Mazowiecki	 	73	 	
6 	Conclusions	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	.........................	 78	 	
References	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	................................	.. 80	 	
Appendices	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	................................	. 83	 	
A 	Methane production potential from selected subtrates	 	83	 	 
Figur	es 	
Figure S.1	 	Land cover in the MOFTMO	 ................................	................................	................................	..............	 8 	
Figure 1.1	 	Average costs of biogas production technologies per unit of energy produced (excluding 
feedstock), 2018	 ................................	................................	................................	.............................	 27	 	
Figure 1.2	 	Biogas facility CAPEX range by facility capacity and feedstock type	 ................................	...............	 28

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	5 	
 
Figure 1.3	 	Biogas facility OPEX range by facility capacity and feedstock type	 ................................	.................	 29	 	
Figure 1.4	 	Costs related to pre	-treatment of feedstock	 ................................	................................	..................	 30	 	
Figure 2.1	 	Administrative location of the MOFTM	O ................................	................................	........................	 31	 	
Figure 2.2	 	Land cover in the MOFTMO	 ................................	................................	................................	............	 32	 	
Figure 2.3 	 	Theoretical annual potential for energy found in the agricultural biogas and power 
electricity of the generator sets.	 ................................	................................	................................	.....	 39	 	
Figure 4.1	 	The Copenhill power plant.	 ................................	................................	................................	.............	 52	 	
Figure 5.1	 	Amount of dry matter of sewage sludge produced in a year in WWTP in Tomaszów 
Mazowiecki	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	.....	 58	 	 
Tab	les 	 	
Table 1.1	 	Classification of biogas production technologies	 ................................	................................	............	 23	 	
Table 1.2	 	Biogas upgrading stages according to the directions of use	 ................................	...........................	 26	 	
Table 2.1	 	Available feedstock for biogas production in MOFTMO	 ................................	................................	. 35	 	
Table 2.2	 	Potential bio	-waste (food and kitchen waste) amounts assuming increasing collection 	
levels	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	...............	 36	 	
Table 2.3	 	Theoretical potential for methane production in MOFTMO	 ................................	...........................	 37	 	
Table 5.1	 	Chara	cteristics of sludge after thickening	 ................................	................................	.......................	 58	 	
Table 5.2	 	Options for phase 1	 ................................	................................	................................	........................	 60	 	
Table 5.3	 	CAPEX for all options in phase 1 (in PLN)	 ................................	................................	........................	 60	 	
Table 5.4	 	OPEX for each option in phase 1 (in PLN)	 ................................	................................	.......................	 61	 	
Table 5.6	 	Annual income and reduced expenses for each option in phase 1 (in P	LN)	 ................................	... 63	 	
Table 5.7	 	Sum costs, income and annual cash flow for each option in phase 1 (in million PLN)	 ....................	 64	 	
Table 5.8	 	NVP for various discount rates when projects lifespan is 20 years (in million PLN)	 ........................	 65	 	
Table 5.9	 	NVP for various discount rates when projects lifespan is 20 years, compared to baseline (in 
million PLN)	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	.....	 65	 	
Table 5.10	 	Project’s minimum duration for options in Phase 1 to be more profitable than the baseline
 ................................	................................	................................	................................	........................	 65	 	
Table 5.11	 	Internal rate of return for the options in Phase 1	 ................................	................................	...........	 66	 	
Table 5.12	 	Internal rate of return (IRR) for option 1B if costs increase, compared to baseline	 .......................	 66	 	
Table 5.13	 	Internal rate of return (IRR) fo	r option 1B if income is increased, compared to the baseline	
 ................................	................................	................................	................................	........................	 66	 	
Table 5.14	 	Options and scenarios for phase 2	................................	................................	................................	.. 67	 	
Table 5.15	 	CAPEX for each option in phase 2 (in PLN)	 ................................	................................	.....................	 68	 	
Table 5.16	 	OPEX for all options in phase 2 (in PLN)	 ................................	................................	..........................	 68	 	
Table 5.17	 	Substrates for the biogas production process in phase 2	 ................................	...............................	 68	 	
Table 5.18	 	Annual income and reduced expenses for each option in phase 	2 (in PLN)	 ................................	... 69	 	
Table 5.19	 	Sum costs, income and annual cash flow for each option in phase 2 (in million PLN)	 ....................	 70	 	
Table 5.20	 	NPV in million PLN	 ................................	................................	................................	..........................	 70	 	
Table 5.21	 	NPV compared to baseline (in million PLN)	 ................................	................................	....................	 70	 	
Table 5.22	 	NVP for various discount rates when projects lifespan is 20 years, compared to baseline (in 
million PLN)	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	.....	 71	 	
Table 5.23	 	Project’s minimum duration for options in Phase 1 and Phase 2 to be more profitable than 
the baseline	 ................................	................................	................................	................................	....	 71	 	
Table 5.24	 	Internal rate of return for options in Phase 1 and Phase 2 when compared to baseline	 ...............	 71	 	
Table 5.25	 	Increased investment costs (in %) compared to the baseline	 ................................	........................	 72	 	
Table 5.26	 	Minimum grant for the two best options in phase 1 and 2 to be profitable (in million PLN)	 .........	 72	 	
Table 5.27	 	Estimations of GHG and NH	3 emissions in phase 1 and comparison to baseline	 ............................	 75	 	
Table 5.28	 	Estimations of GHG and NH	3 emissions in phase 2 and comparison to 	baseline	 ............................	 76

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	6 	
 
Table 5.29	 	Estimations of GHG and NH3 emissions in phase 2 and comparison to baseline, without 
digestate drying	 ................................	................................	................................	..............................	 76	 	
Table A.1	 	Methane production potential from selected substrates	 ................................	...............................	 83

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	7 	
 
Executive summary	 	
We examine the opportunities for producing biogas in the 	Municipal 	Functional 	Area	 Tomaszów 	
Mazowiecki	-Opoczno (	MOFTMO	) in Poland. 	The 	area	 has 	significant	 bio	mass	 resources	. Based 	
on a	n analysis 	of available 	resources, as well as regulatory and technical 	conditions,	 we develop 	
a business case for investing in 	biogas 	production 	at the	 wastewater 	treatment 	plant	 managed 	
by Water and Sewage Management	 Plant	 in Tomaszów Mazowiecki	. The first 	investment 	phase 	
utilizes wastewater sludge	 and grease trap sludge	. The second phase adds municipal 	and indus-	
trial 	wast	e as 	substrate	s. Compared to the present practice we	 find the first phase to generate 	
an expected internal rate of return (real) of 4.7 percent. 	Adding	 the second phase the internal 	
rate	 of return increa	ses to	 7.8 percent. 	Therefore, to increase profitability, it is important to in-	
clude 	a second phase despite the high	er costs and extended investment implementation time.	 	
Biogas is 	part of the strategy for European climate neutrality	 	
Euro	pean 	Union leaders 	have agreed to achiev	e climate neutrality by 2050. 	Biogas is 	important 	
for meeting th	is goal. 	The 	EU	 Renewable Energy Directive (Directive (EU) 2023/2413) 	says that by 	
2030	 at least 42.5 % of gross final energy consumption 	should come	 from renewable sources. It 	
emphasises the role of energy production from biomass and bio	-waste.	 The EU target for biogas 	
and biomethane production is 35 billion cubic meters per year by 2030. In 202	2, almost 20,000 	
biogas plants and more than 1,300 biomet	hane plants operated in Europe, producing 16.8 billion 	
cubic meters of biogas and 4.2 billion cubic meters of 	upgraded biogas	 (biomethane	) (data from 	
The European Biogas	 Association)	. 	
Poland and Norway are committed to increasing the role of biogas in thei	r energy mixes since 	
both have low biogas production compared to the potential. The broader use of biogas will help 
Poland fulfil its Paris commitments and improve energy security. Poland has a well	-established 	
national network of gas pipelines into which 	biomethane can potentially be fed to increase the 	
flexibility of biogas end	-uses. District heating is another potent	ial use of 	bio	-waste	 in Poland.	 	
The government's plans for green transformation in Norway (Meld. St. 13 (2020	-2021)) repeat-	
edly indicate 	bio	-waste	 and bioenergy as key resources in achieving the goals. Norway has no 	
national gas grid, but a potential for liquefied biogas for transportation, and a potential for more 
heating based on 	bio	-waste	. 	
The similarities and differences in the challenges	 of each country suggest that Norway and Poland 	
can learn from each other in this area	. This report 	contributes by 	exploring 	the opportunities 	for 	
biogas production in the 	Municipal Functional 	Area 	Tomaszów	 Mazowiecki	-Opoczno 	(MOFTMO) 	
in Poland. It is hoped that the study of MOFTMO will act as an example and inspiration for other 	
municipal units and areas 	of Poland. At the same time, 	the 	study	 showcases certain barriers that 	
currently limit the 	MOFTMO area 	from utilizing the full potentia	l for producing biogas. 	These are 	
both regulatory, te	chnical and economic in nature.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	8 	
 
The MOFTMO has 	little built	-up area	 	
The MOFTMO 	consists of 14 municipalities of the Tomaszowski and Opoczyński districts in the 	
Łódzkie Voivodeship. An inter	-municipal ass	ociation 	has been	 established to develop a joint strat-	
egy for integrated territorial investments and its implementation	. In terms of land use, 	the 	
MOFTMO 	area	 is a predominantly agricultural (	figure S.1	). Agricultural land, with a predominance 	
of arable land, covers 	more than half	 of the 	area	. Further, t	he 	MOFTMO	 has 	close to 40 per cent	 	
forest cover. Forests are located in the central part of the 	area	, along the valley of the Pilica River, 	
the region's 	main river, and smaller streams.	 	
Figure S.	1 	Land cover in the MOFTMO 	 	
 	
Source:	 	IOŚ	-PIB based on Corine Land Cover (EEA) and Head Office of Geodesy and Cartography (GUGiK)	 	
The 	area	 is inhabited by approximately 	160,000 people (as of 2021). The largest city is Tomaszów 	
Mazowiecki	 (the largest red area in	 figure S.1	), which 	houses	 1/3 of the region's population. The 	
MOFTMO	 has three smaller towns and numerous small towns and villages.	 	
We have performed a mapping of	 available 	biomass resources 	in the 	area	. The results are	 as 	
follows:

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	9 	
 
 	Biodegradable waste from industry	: 7 600 Mg/year.	 	
 	Sludge from municipal wastewater treatment plants	: ca 2 300 	- 2 700 Mg dry mass/year	 	
 	Municipal 	bio	-waste	 (food and kitchen waste): ca 59	0 Mg/year	 	
 	Plant biomass	: A	bout 128	 000 Mg/year	, mostly corn and straw	. 	
 	Animal biomass	: About 	675	 000 Mg/year	, of which 	ca 	430 	000 Mg of manure and 	245 	000 	
Mg of slurry	. 	
These are significant resources. 	Quan	titatively speaking the largest potential 	obviously lies in ag-	
ricultural waste.	 	
Barriers 	cut into	 the 	potential 	 	
Polish regulations distinguish between 	biogas plants and agricultural biogas plants. Biogas plants 	
other than 	agricultural are 	registered 	at the	 Energy Regulatory Office (URE)	, a 	central government 	
administration body established to carry out tasks related to fuel and energy management regu-
lation and competition promotion.	 Biogas plants other 	than agricultural are not limited by the 	
choice of 	substrates	. Depending on the technology	, they can accept diverse feedstock materials 	
such as 	sewage sludge	 and industrial or	 municipal 	bio	-waste	. 	
Agricultural biogas plants are registered in the 	National Support 	Centre for	 Agriculture 	(KOWR), 	
the executive agency of the Ministry of Agriculture 	and Rural Development responsible for the 	
implementation and application of instruments supporting active agricultural policy and rural de-
velopment.	 The Act on facilitating the preparation and implementation of investments in agricul-	
tural biogas plants and	 their operation appl	ies to 	facilities managed by farmers, and it introduces 	
a number of legal restrictions regarding maximum yearly biogas production and acceptable sub-
strates.	 In short, 	municipalities and intermunicipal organisations have limited options	 in influenc-	
ing the development of agricultural biogas plants	. There	fore	, despite 	its 	big potential	 agricultural 	
biogas is 	not the focus of th	is prefeasibility study	. 	
Due to its properties, biogas could be fed into the country's existing gas network after appropriate 
processing. Unfortunately, access to this network is limited as the gas network is not widespread 
throughout the country. In addition, the high costs of co	nnection to the 	network	 and the need to 	
match the biogas parameters to those required by the 	network	 can present a formidable techno-	
logical and financial challenge.	 Electricity produced from biogas could be fed into the country’s 	
electricity network	. Howev	er, connecting to the electricity grid 	may involve high costs	. High costs	 	
and 	a lack of connection capacity at distribution network operators lead to refusals.	 	
There are other economic and financial barriers as well. 	A biogas plant requires a high 	investment 	
cost,	 particularly	 if it includes upgrading raw biogas to biomethane.	 There are economies of scale 	
and unit costs are generally lower in larger plants, but larger plants require 	the logistics 	for a larger 	
inflow of biomass.	 	
Recently, there have 	been more and more public campaigns to raise the ecological awareness of 	
citizens and increase the level of social acceptance for this type of investment in local communi-
ties.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	10	 	
 
Support systems enlarge the potential	 	
National regulations provide several suppo	rt systems dedicated to biogas plants, namely a feed	-	
in tariff (FIT), feed	-in premium (FIP), and auction system. The rules also allow obtaining a guaran-	
tee of the origin of electricity generated from biogas (these do not constitute public aid). The 
support	 for biomethane 	is in the form of the FIP system. Poland has a feed	-in-tariff system for 	
renewable energy	 installations that feed energy into the electricity grid. The system is designed 	
for installations with a total electrical capacity of less than 0.5 MW, producing energy from, among 
others, agricultural biogas, biogas from landfills or biogas from sewage 	sludge. It guarantees the 	
sale of all	, or part of	, the energy not used by the 	producer	 at a fixed price	 equal to 95% of the 	
reference price to a mandated supplier or a chosen entity	. The second system is 	a feed	-in-pre-	
mium, dedicated to larger installations	 (from 	0.5 MW	 to 1 MW in the case of biomass energy 	
production). 	The 	feed	-in-premium	 allows the sale of electricity from biogas at a fixed price equal 	
to 90% of the reference price exclusively to an entity selected by the producer. 	The possibility to 	
benef	it from the indicated support is limited to 17 years. 	The reference price varies depending on 	
the specific technology and capacity of the installation and is determined by regulations 	at a level 	
higher than the market price of energy.	 The auction system, g	enerally used by energy producers 	
in biogas plants with a capacity 	above	 1 MW, involves competing producers submitting bids to sell 	
a specified amount of energy in a given calendar year. The producer who wins the auction gains 
the right to cover the negative balance, which is the difference between the market price of elec-
tric	ity and the winning bid submitted in the auction, for a period not exceeding 15 years.	 The 	
system is known as “contract for difference”.	 	
The business case for p	roducing biomass at the 	Tomaszow Ma-	
zowiecki	 wastewater treatment plant	 	
We examine the business c	ase for producing bio	gas	 at the 	Tomaszow Maz	owiecki	 wastewater 	
treatment plant	. Following examples from other wastewater treatment plants in the region, in 	
Poland, Norway and internationally	, the plant has plans to develop 	biogas production in two 	
phases.	 	
 	Phase 1 	is a biogas plant with sewage sludge as substrate	 	
 	Phase 2 is an expansion to 	include 	municipal 	and industrial 	bio	-waste	 and 	as substrate	s for 	
biogas production	 	
Phase 1: Biogas from sewage s	ludge	 	
In recent years	 between 	2100	-2700	 Mg of dry matter of sewage sludge 	have been	 produced 	an-	
nually	 during the wastewater treatment	. Until 2020, the generated sewage sludge was 	dewatered	 	
and transferred to an external company for further treatment. Since 2021, the sludge has been 
dewatered an	d dried at 130 degrees, and a soil improver has been produced. A sudden increase 	
in gas prices 	in 2022 	caused the treatment plant to limit sludge drying and forced it to transfer 	
unprocessed sludge directly after dewatering for further treatment.	 	
In 	phase 	1 the investment would consist 	of a	 modernization of the sewage treatment plant, al-	
lowing for:

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	11	 	
 
 	stabilization of sludge in the methane fermentation process supported by thermal	-pressure 	
hydrolysis and production of electricity and heat from biogas	 	
 	water rec	overy from treated sewage	 	
 	recovery of pho	sphorus in the form of struvite	 	
The outcome of the project will be:	 	
1. Reconstruction and extension of the sludge treatment line as a sludge treatment facility 
with sludge sterilization, biogas production and utilization (Task 1) and phosphorus recovery 
in the form of granulated struvite (Task 2) and treatment and disinfectio	n of treated 	
wastewater to recover water for 	industrial 	purposes 	(e.g., washing streets or watering 	
greenery) 	(Task 3),	 	
2. Expansion of the 	command	-and	-control system to include equipment for the new sludge 	
line, phosphorus recovery and water recovery facilit	ies	. 	
The investment cost 	of phase 1 is projected to be 65 million PLN. The annual cash flow compared 	
to the baseline, under different assumptions, is e	stimated at 3.6	-5.1 million PLN, for an internal 	
rate of return 	of 0	-4.7 	percent annually. 	The 	4.7 percent rate of return 	results 	when 	part of the 	
biogas is used to dry digestate and produce soil	-improving product	, while 	the remaining biogas is 	
used for 	electricity and heat production. The electricity produced will replace electricity from the 	
grid.	 	
Phase 2: Municipal 	and industrial 	bio	-waste	 	
Anaerobic 	co	-digestion	 of wastewater sludge with other biodegradable materials 	can	 offer sev-	
eral benefits, encompassing environmental, economic, and operational aspects	. 	
The biogas yield from digesting wastewat	er sludge alone planned in phase 1 will not enable en-	
ergy self	-sufficiency	, which wastewater treatment plants are obliged to strive	 for	. Expanding the 	
biogas plant and adding co	-substrates could improve the energy balance of the installation	. 	
In several st	udies, t	he anaerobic co	-digestion of wastewater sludge with an organic fraction of 	
municipal solid waste (OFMSW) was shown to result in higher biogas production than digesting 
sludge alone while enhancing the quality of biogas by increasing the methane con	tent. Similar 	
effects are achieved with the co	-digestion of biodegradable was	te from the agri	-food industry.	 	
The additional benefits are connected to improved municipal waste management in the 	area	. 	
Implementing a separate collection of an organic fraction	 of municipal solid waste and using it as 	
one of the substrates would result in closing the biomaterial loop of the waste system in the 	area	. 	
In phase 2, the investment would encompass the instal	lation of pretreatment facility for biode-	
gradable waste from 	municipal and industrial so	urces	 and additional biodigester	. 	
The outcome of this phase w	ould be:	 	
1. Improved biogas and methane yield and better energy balance of the wastewater treat-
ment plant.	 	
2. Improved management of organic fraction of municipal solid waste

Opportunities for producing biogas in 	the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	12	 	
 
The investment cost of phase 2 is projected to be 	69	-72	 million PLN	 depending on	 scenario	. The 	
annual cash flow compared to the baseline, under different assumptions, is estimated at 	5.3	-7.2 	
million PLN, for an internal rate of return of 	4.5	-7.8 percent a	nnually. The 	7.8 percent rate of 	
return results when 	industrial bio	-waste is added to the food and kitchen waste from municipal-	
ities. Two additional digesters are needed in this case, adding to investment cost, but	 the extra 	
investment cost is more than pa	id for by income from treating bio	-waste, from gate fees 	and from 	
lower electricity expenses. 	This is a preliminary assessment	 at the 	pre	-feasibility st	age. Further 	
study 	is needed to evaluate what is practically achievable. 	 	
Observa	tions	 	
Based on the anal	ysis w	e make	 the following 	observations	: 	
 	The 	profitability of biogas production at 	Tomaszow Maz	owiecki	 increases 	significantly	 when 	
municipal waste and industrial waste 	is included. The additional costs of including waste is 	rela-	
tively 	low, and the plant 	will cover much of its electricity needs, saving considerable costs in the 	
process.	 	
 	A grant is needed to 	achieve 	private profitability of 10	-12 percent. For phase 1 	the grant	 	
should be in the range of 22	-29 million PLN. For phase 2 the grant is smaller, 	10	-23 	million 	PL 	
This is another way of stating that the prof	itability increases in phase 2.	 	
 	There is no way that smaller 	wastewater	 treatment plants 	can become self	-sufficient in 	
terms of energy without using other substrates than sludge	. The Tomaszow Maz	owiecki	 	
wastewater treatment plant	 requires 5.5 GWh of electricity per year, and based on slud	ge the 	
plant will produce about 	2.6 GWh. Adding household and industrial bio	-waste 	electricity pro-	
duction increases to 4.4 GWh	. Th	is observation means that 	availa	ble grants/loans should not 	
limit the substrate to one stream (eg. only agricultural, only sludge, only municipal 	bio	-waste	) as 	
sometimes 	is the case.	 	
 	There is a need to find the use for excess heat. 	In phase 1 profitability increases when heat 	
is used to dry digestate. 	Still in 	this scenario, and 	in 	phase 2 there is heat that goes unutilized. 	
Finding a use for the heat 	could improve profitability	 and social acceptance	. It may also 	reduce 	
environmental	 and climatic	 impacts as 	excess heat 	just warms the air. 	One may consider to in-	
clude 	the full use of heat as condition in loan 	agreements.	 	
 	How the digestate is treated (as a bio	-fertiliser or as a waste) has an impact on profitability	. 	
This is brought out clearly 	both in 	phase1 and phase 2 at the 	Tomaszow Maz	owiecki	 wastewater 	
treatment plant	. It is necessary to improve the regulations and conditions for using digestate in 	
agriculture.	 	
 	External grants or 	concessionary loans will improve 	investor profitability 	at the 	Tomaszow 	
Ma	zowiecki	 wastewater treatment plant.

Opport	unities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	13

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	14	 	
 	
1	 	Background and scope	 	
Our 	aim with this report 	is to demonstrat	e the feasibility and benefits of using 	bio	-waste	 and 	
biomass 	for biogas pr	oduction in the Municipal Functional 	Area 	Tomaszów Mazowiecki	-Opoczno 	
(MOFTMO)	. Th	e report is meant to	 lay the groundwork for scaling	-up in other 	municipal units and 	
areas	. 	
This chapter sets the stage by discussing the political and regulatory context for 	biogas pro	duction	, 	
the 	necessary 	infrastructure for the biogas value chain	, and financial aspects of biogas production.	 	
Chapter 	2 discusses the potential for produ	cing biogas in the MOFTMO, 	both currently and in the 	
future. Chapter 	3 discusses 	restrictions and 	barriers to reali	zing the potential in the MOFTMO. 	
Chapter 	4 focuses on opportunities, as well as best practice examples 	from other regions of Po-	
land, from Norway, from 	Germany 	and from 	Denmark.	 	
A conclusion to emerge from chapter	s 1-4 is that 	realistic opportunities for 	commercial 	biogas 	
production	 in the MOFTMO currently lie in 	using sludge	 and	 municipal waste	. Hence, in chapter 	
5 we develop the business case for 	constructing a biogas plan in two phases. Phase 	1 uses	 sewage 	
sludge as a substrate. Phase 	2 is an expansion to 	allow the use of municipal 	and industrial 	bio	-	
waste	. 	
1.1	 	Europe	an political context	 	
The European 	Union l	eaders have agreed to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. As a stepping 	
stone towards this goal, they have decided to reduce the EU's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 
by more than half compared to 1990 levels by 2030.	 Achieving these objectives requires signifi-	
cant reductions in EU countries' greenhouse gas emissions and strategies to address any remain-
ing unavoidable emissions. Another critical aspect of the EU's efforts towards climate neutrality is 
the 'Fit for 55' 	package, which encompasses regulations on energy, transportation, emission trad-	
ing and reductions, as well as land use and forestry. Investment in renewable energy sources (RES) 
is essential fo	r realising climate neutrality.	 	
Increasing biogas and biomethan	e production in the EU can help meet climate neutrality and 	
other targets in water and wastewater management, nature cons	ervation, and waste manage-	
ment.	 	
The Renewable Energy Directive (Directive (EU) 2023/2413) sets a target of at least 42.5 % of the 
Union	's gross final energy consumption in 2030 for energy from renewable sources. It also em-	
phasises the role of energy product	ion from biomass and bio	-waste.	 	
The water and wastewater management sector 	is also expected to contribute to climate goals and 	
the cir	cular economy. According to the proposed policy (COM/2022/541 final), municipal 	
wastewater treatment plants must achieve energy neutrality by 2045. In addition to producing 
energy for their 	own 	use, they will also be obliged to use tertiary treatment, i.e.	 phosphorus and 	
nitrogen removal. 	Sludge	-fuelled municipal biogas plants can help meet both obligations.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	15	 	
 
The EU's Farm	-to-Fork Strategy (COM/2020/381 final) highlights the role and potential of a circu-	
lar economy for farmers, who can and should take advant	age of the opportunity to reduce me-	
thane emissions from livestock farming and the opportunity to manage agricultural waste and 
residues, including manure. A proposed solution in the 	strategy is to develop renewable energy 	
and invest in biogas plants. The 	strategy also sets the course of action in nature conservation, 	
obliging EU countries to reduce nutrient loss by at least 50% while ensuring no loss in soil fertility 
and reducing fertiliser use by at least 20%	 by 2030	. 	
A study commissioned by the European 	Commission's Directorate General for Climate Action 	
(2023) investigates possible ways to price GHG emissions from agricultural activities along the 
agri	-food value chain	, in order	 to reduce emissions 	from	 this sector. The study presents five op-	
tions for an Emission Trading System (ETS) that could incentivise climate mitigation action in agri-
culture. 	Since	 the largest sources of GHG emissions come	 from enteric fermentation from live-	
stock, nitrous oxide emis	sions mainly from the use of synthetic fertilisers, and manure manage-	
ment from livestock production, all these areas will be impacted by potential regulations. Imple-
menting the ETS in agriculture will be an incentive to change how manure is managed. Using 	it to 	
produce biogas is o	ne way to reduce GHG emissions.	 	
The EU target for biogas and biomethane production is 35 billion cubic meters per year by 2030. 
In 2022, 	according to the European 	Biogas Association, 	almost 20,000 biogas plants and more 	
than 1,300 	biomethane plants operated in Europe, producing 16.8 billion cubic meters of biogas 	
and 4.2 billion cubic meters of biomethane	 (EBA 2023)	. 	
1.2	 	Polish policies and regulations	 	
The biogas sector in Poland is influenced by EU directives and regulations on climate change mit-
igation, renewable energy, waste management, wastewater treatment, and environmental pro-
tection. At the same time, national conditions, such as resource availab	ility, infrastructure, na-	
tional legislation and policy, shape it. Due to its cross	-sectoral characteristic, policies 	and regula-	
tions 	within several administrative areas influence the biogas system.	 	
Poland	, as a member of EU,	 is committed to increasing the role of renewable energy sources, 	
including biogas, in its energy mix. The National Energy Policy 2040 (NEP2040) sets targets for 
increasing the use of 	renewable energy sources	 to 21% of gross final energy 	consumption and	 	
limiting emissions by 30% by 2030 (compared 	with	 1990 levels). Due to its properties, 	biomethane 	
derived	 from 	biogas can successfully replace natural gas as a source of heating or fuel. 	The 	
NEP2040 also assumes that in 2030, the ability to transport through 	gas networks a mixture con-	
taining around 10% of decarbonised gases (in particular biomethane derived from biogas and hy-
drogen) will be achieved.	 	
According to estimates by European Union 	(Guidehouse	, 2022)	, but also national institutions 	
(Jacyszyn, 2021), P	oland has a large potential for biogas production due to the large share of ag-	
riculture in our country. The by	-products and waste generated during agricultural production are 	
suitable inputs for the methane fermentation process. According to researchers at	 Poznań Uni-	
versity of Life Sciences 	(Kowalczyk	-Huśko, Dach, 2022)	, the potential 	for	 agricultural biogas pro-	
duction in Poland is approximately 13.5 billion cubic meters of raw material per year 	(7.8 billion

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	16	 	
 
cubic meters of biomethane)	. Managing waste and b	iomass will also improve the quality of the 	
environment.	 	
The main sources 	(substrates) 	of 	inputs for biogas production	 are	 agricultur	al biomass and waste 	
(animal and plant	), municipal and industrial 	biodegr	adable 	waste, 	and 	sewage and wastewater 	
sludge.	 The	se 	sources have different characteristics, as well as different purposes of their use and 	
legal regulations.	 	
Both the Ministry of Climate and Environment and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Develop-
ment influence the possibility of using biomass an	d waste in biogas production. In the direction 	
of intervention, the "Strategy for Sustainable Development of Rural Areas, Agriculture and Fishery 
2030" lists investments to use locally available energy raw materials and other resources per ter-
ritorial pote	ntial (including biomass and waste). The "National Waste Management Plan 2028" 	
(KPGO 2028) 	sets out the directions of activities in biodegradable waste (municipal and other) 	
and municipal sewage sludge management. One of the goals in managing biodegradable	 waste 	
other than municipal waste is to increase the share of processing waste from agriculture and food 
processing industry in the fermentation process, including that in agricultural biogas plants. Re-
garding municipal solid waste, the goal is to ensure s	elective collection of 	bio	-waste	 from resi-	
dents and catering establishments and limit the landfilling of biodegradable municipal waste	. The 	
document explicitly mentions the management of 	bio	-waste	 in biogas plants as one of the direc-	
tions for handling muni	cipal waste.	 	
The current regulations oblige municipalities (Act on Maintaining Cleanliness and Order in Mu-
nicipalities) to: 	 	
 	limit the landfilling of municipal waste to	 30% yearly in the period 2025	-2029, to 20% yearly 	
in the period 2030	-2034, and to 10% yearly from 2035 onward 	 	
 	limit the landfilling of bio	-waste to max 35%	 of 	the amount of bio	-waste generated in 1995	 	
 	prepare for re	-use and recycling 	the 	following percen	tages of municipal waste: in 2023 	– 	
35%, in 2024 	– 45%, in 2025 	– 55%, then every year 1% more till 2035 	– 65%	 	
Regarding municipal sewage sludge, the 	KPGO 2028	 set	s the goal to reduce the amount of mu-	
nicipal sewage sludge generated as waste, abandon landf	illing completely, and increase the 	
amount of sludge treated before it is released into the environment. 	The course	 of action pro-	
posed in the 	"National 	Wastewater Treatment Programme	" (V= update) (AKPOŚK 2022	) for sludge 	
reduction 	includes intensifying	 the	 anaerobic stabilisation process (and biogas production) and 	
intensifying	 the final sludge dewatering process. Sewage sludge, after appropriate treatment, can 	
be used for compost production and fertilisation in agriculture.	 	
At the stage of biogas productio	n, there is a distinction between biogas plants and agricultural 	
biogas plants, resulting from the type of substrates processed	 and the resulting division of respon-	
sibilities and competencies between different administrative areas.	 Agricultural biogas plants pro-	
duce agricultural biogas (or electricity, heat, and biomethane from agricultural biogas), where ag-
ricultural biogas is defined as gas obtained in the methane fermentation process of a limited cat-
alogue of substrates of agricu	ltural or food processing origin. Agricultural biogas	 plants are regis-	
tered in the National Agriculture Support Center (KOWR)	1, the 	executive 	agency of the Ministry 	
 	 	 	
1 To visit the registry, go here: 	https://www.gov.pl/web/kowr/rejestr	-wytworcow	-biogazu	-rolniczego

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	17	 	
 
of Agriculture and Rural Development	 responsible 	for the implementation and application of 	in-	
struments supporting active agricultura	l policy and rural development.	 	
The Act on facilitating the preparation and implementation of investments in agricultural biogas 
plants and their operation introduces many simplifications that speed up the construct	ion and 	
facilitate the management of the existing agricultural biogas plants, such as preferential terms for 
location and simplification for the use of digestate as fertilizer. However, the act does not apply 
to all facilities, but only to those managed by	 farmers, and it introduces a number of legal re-	
strictions regarding maximum yearly biogas production and acceptable substrates.	 	
Biogas plants 	other 	than agricultural ones are not limited by the choice of 	substrates	. Depending 	
on the technology, they can accept diverse feedstock materials such as 	sewage sludge	 and indus-	
trial or	 municipal 	bio	-waste	. These b	iogas plants 	are	 registered 	at the	 Energy Regulatory Office 	
(URE)	2, a central government administration body esta	blished to carry out tasks related to fuel 	
and energy management regulation and competition promotion.	 	
The market for electricity generation from biogas, excluding agricultural biogas, is supervised by 
the President of 	URE	. The office grants a license to c	onduct business activities in this field and 	
verifies compliance with its conditions. It also makes an entry in the register of small installations 
of renewable energy sources and verifies compliance with the statutory requirements for con-
ducting regulated	 business activity in this area. 	Supervising the market of agricultural biogas, bio-	
components, and bioliquids, as well as the functioning of energy cooperatives and the production 
of liquid biofuels by farmers for their use, is exercised by the General Dir	ector of KOWR.	 	
Investments in biogas plants 	in Poland 	are	 gaining popularity due to emerging solutions 	that facil-	
itate	 implementation, 	such as	 legal 	frameworks	 for small agricultural biogas plants and funding 	
opportunities. 	National regulations provide several support systems dedicated to biogas plants, 	
including	 feed	-in 	tariffs	 (FIT), feed	-in 	premiums	 (FIP), and 	an 	auction system. 	These regulations	 	
also allow 	for 	electricity generated from biogas 	to obtain guarantees of orig	in (these do not con-	
stitute public aid).	 	
Poland has a FIT system for 	renewable energy 	source (	RES	) installations that feed energy into the 	
electricity grid	. This	 system is designed for installations with a total electrical capacity of less than 	
0.5 MW,	 producing energy from	 sources such as	 agricultural biogas, 	landfill 	biogas	, or sewage 	
sludge	 biogas	. It guarantees the sale of all	, or part of	, the energy not used by the 	producer 	at a 	
fixed price	 equal to 95% of the reference price to a mandated supplier	 or a chosen entity	. The 	
second system	, the FIP (feed	-in-premium) market price subsidy system, 	is dedicated to larger in-	
stallations (from 500 kW to 1 MW in the case of energy production	 from biomass	). The 	FIP	 system 	
allows the sale of electricity from biogas at a fixed price equal to 90% of the reference price ex-
clusively to an entity selected by the producer.	 The possibility to benefit from 	this	 support is lim-	
ited to 	a maximum of 	17 years. 	The reference price	 varies depending on the specific technology 	
and capacity of the installation and is determined by 	regulations.	 Currently, the highest reference 	
price applies to the smallest installations using agricultural biogas in high	-efficiency cogeneration	, 	
amountin	g to 1025 PLN per MWh	, which is more than two and a half times higher than the market 	
price of energy.	 For a biogas plant with a capacity of less than 500 kW using only biogas obtained 	
from sewage treatment plants, the reference price is PLN 572/MWh. If th	e energy is produced in 	
 	 	 	
2 To visit the registry, go here: 	https://rejestry.ure.gov.pl/o/21

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	18 	
 
high	-efficiency cogeneration, the price is PLN 714/MWh. For biogas plants with capacities be-	
tween 0.5 and 1 MWh, the reference prices are PLN 520 and 663/MWh, respectively.	 	
The 	auction system,	 generally used by energy producers in b	iogas plants with a capacity greater 	
than 1 MW, 	involves	 competing producers submitting bids to sell a specified amount of energy in 	
a given calendar year. The producer who wins the auction gains the right to cover the negative 
balance, which is the differ	ence between the market price of electricity and the winning bid sub-	
mitted in the auction, for a period not exceeding 15 years. 	The scheme is known as “contract for 	
difference”. 	However, due to the less attractive reference prices for biogas plants greater	 than 1 	
MW compared to those for 	smaller	 biogas plants, the enforcement of competition by rejecting 	
extreme bids, and the significant increase in investment costs and the purchase of substrates for 
biogas production, auctions dedicated to large biogas plan	ts have remained unresolved for years	3. 	
Support for biomethane is based on a FIP mechanism. The support period in this system is 20 
years from the first day of biomethane sales covered by the support, but not longer than June 30, 
2048. The reference price 	of biomethane is determined by regulations. Currently, the reference 	
price of biomethane for a renewable energy source installation producing biomethane from bio-
gas is 538 PLN/MWh. In the case of producing biomethane from agricultural biogas, the reference	 	
price is 545 PLN/MWh.	 	
Recently, there have been more and more public campaigns to raise the ecological awareness of 
citizens and increase the level of social acceptance for this type of investment in local communi-
ties.	 	
1.3	 	Infrastructure, 	technology,	 and logi	stics 	 	
In anaerobic digestion, microorganisms metabolise organic	-rich biomass (e.g., agricultural, indus-	
trial and 	municipal	 wastes) to produce biogas, a mixture of mainly methane and carbon dioxide. 	
The anaerobic digestion of organic matter is a four	-step 	process, including hydrolysis, acidogen-	
esis, acetogenesis, and methanogenesis. Every step is associated with different microbial popu-
lations. The time needed for biomass degradation to biogas, or macromolecules to mainly me-
thane and carbon dioxide, varies 	depending on the nature of the chemical bonding of the carbo-	
hydrate in the biomass.	 	
1.3.1	 	Infrastructure for 	substrate 	collection	 	
One of the substrate sources for biogas production is 	the 	biodegradable fraction of municipal solid 	
waste. 	In Poland since 2012, th	e responsibility for collection and management of municipal solid 	
waste l	ies with municipalities. In each municipality, waste management is organized according to 	
the rules established by the relevant resolutions of municipal councils. The responsibility to im-
prove infrastructure, particularly waste collection and recovery, and a	chieving reuse and recycling 	
targets also lies with municipal authorities. Municipalities 	in Poland, like in the res	t of Europe, 	are 	
obliged to ensure selective collection of municipal waste, including at least paper, metals, plastics, 
 	 	 	
3	https://codozasady.pl/p/aktualne	-uwarunkowania	-rynku	-biogazu	-w-polsce	; accessed 	
27.06.2024

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO	 area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	19	 	
 
glass, multi	-materia	l packaging waste, and bio	-waste.	 The collection of municipal waste is fi-	
nanced by the waste fee paid by the inhabitants to the municipalities and, in the case of municipal 
waste from other sources, paid by owners to the collection companies. The main prin	ciple in de-	
termining the waste fee is the necessity to ensure the self	-financing of the waste management 	
system. The waste fees should cover the costs of collecting waste from inhabitants, its transport 
and treatment, but also the administrative costs and 	cost of educational activities. 	Segregated	 	
municipal	 waste is collected from properties according to a schedule established by the munici-	
pality, using special vehicles and transported to a waste management site, e.g. sorting plant, com-
posting plant, incine	ration plant,	 or landfill. Municipalities are also setting up collection points for 	
municipal waste, where residents/businesses can individually deliver their waste, including bio	-	
waste.	 The condition for using 	bio	-waste	 in anaerobic digestion is the separ	ate collection of food 	
and kitchen waste, which is an appropriate substrate for the process. At the same time, imple-
menting separate collection is difficult. Local governments face many problems in this area. In 
addition to the organizational (the need to 	equip households with additional bins) and logistical 	
aspects (	bio	-waste	 requires more frequent collection), the lack of finances is also a problem. Cur-	
rently, in many municipalities, 	the	 high fees charged to residents for waste collection do not cover 	
the	 costs of managing the system.	 	
Biodegradable industrial solid waste, e.g.	, from the food industry, 	which also is a	n appropriate	 	
substrate for biogas production, 	is transported by special trucks, based on 	mutual	 agreements	 	
between producers and transport companies	, to 	appropriate 	waste 	treat	ment facilities such as 	
composting or biogas plants. Liquid biodegradable waste, e.g.	, from dairies or food processing 	
plants, is delivered by barrel trucks to specially prepared storage	 tanks at the treatment plant	s. 	
Another 	group of 	substrates for biogas production	 is sewage sludge produced at wastewater 	
treatment plants. 	Collecti	ng	 and treat	ing	 municipal wastewater, like waste management, is one 	
of the municipality's own responsibilities. Municipal w	astewater 	from a defined area is trans-	
ported via sewer pipelines 	(or, in the case of a lack of sewage systems, by 	septic t	rucks)	 to a 	
wastewater tre	atment plant, where it undergoes a treatment process. The 	generated preliminary 	
and 	secondary 	sludge	 can be transported by pipelines to the sludge treatment part of the plant	. 	
For industrial wastewater, two main approaches can be distinguished. 	Wastewater 	meet	ing	 the 	
requirements (limits) of a municipal wastewater treatment plant in terms of its pollutant content 
can be discharged to this plant. If the pollut	ant	 content is exceeded, it may be necessary, for 	
example, to build an on	-site wastewater treatment 	plant. The sludge from the on	-site wastewater 	
treatment plant is then transported to a 	waste treatment plant	. 	
A significant source	 of 	substrates for biogas 	plants 	is agricultural 	biomass	. It includes animal by	-	
products, vegetable by	-products and crops	 for silage production	. Some of th	is biomass	 can be 	
used by farmers for their purposes, e.g. manure and slurry can be used as fertiliser on their land. 
However, with a large cattle or pig farm, the resulting volumes of manure and slurry can be prob-
lematic 	to manage.	 Generated biomass used in agriculture or forestry is not classified as waste 	
and recorded in any database.	 Excessive biomass, requiring further treatment, becomes waste. 	
To transfer the waste to be managed/processed by another party, farmers mus	t enter into ap-	
propriate contracts and agreements for the transfer 	and treatment 	of waste accord	ing	 to the law. 	
Such waste is transported by suitable vehicles to the place of treatment, e.g. a composting plant, 
incineration plant or biogas plant. Until col	lection, the waste must be stored appropriately, e.g. 	
the manure must be stored on impermeable ground to prevent environmental pollution.

Opportunities fo	r producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	20	 	
 	
1.3.2	 	Biogas production 	infrastructure	 	
Three types of 	biogas	 plant can be distinguished depending on the type of 	substrate 	used:	 	
 	biogas plant 	using	 biodegradable 	municipal or industrial waste,	 	
 	biogas plant at a wastewater treatment plant	 using sewage sludge	, 	
 	agricultural biogas plant	 using agricultural biomass or waste from agri	-food processing	. 	
Each biogas plant, regardless 	of the type of substrate to be processed, consists of several basic 	
segments:	 	
 	segment I 	– substrate storage and pre	-treatment segment (this segment includes, among 	
others, substrate tanks, pumps, macerator, hygienization system and raw material stor-
age/rem	oval system, batch averaging)	; 	
 	segment II 	– digester (may be constructed of various materials, e.g. concrete, two	-fibre plas-	
tics, steel sheet; the digester is usually equipped with an agitator, foam detector and 
catcher, liquid level meter inside the diges	ter)	; 	
 	segment III 	– heating system (to maintain the correct temperature for the selected fermen-	
tation process, equipped with heat exchangers)	; 	
 	segment IV 	– gas installation system (responsible for collection, purification and storage of 	
the biogas produced	, a very important part of this system is the desulphurization unit)	; 	
 	segment V 	– storage or processing segment for the digestate (e.g. digestate tank, installa-	
tion for further processing of the digestate into fertilizer, 	digestate 	dehydration installation	 	
– centrifuge or press)	; 	
 	segment VI 	– combined heat and power plant, equipped with cogeneration units producing 	
electricity and heat which will be used to heat 	digestate 	in the digesters and as central heat-	
ing and to power electrical equipment in the treat	ment plant. 	Surplus 	electricity and heat 	
may be sold.	 A heat exchanger is a key element in this system, which heats the 	digestate	 in 	
the digesters.	 	
Location is essential	 when 	build	ing	 a biogas plant	. The choice of location depends on several fac-	
tors, includ	ing	 the area needed for the investment, access to 	substrates	 (including the possibility 	
of transporting them on paved roads), access to electricity 	infrastructure	 for connection to the 	
grid and, in 	the case of the production of biomethane from biogas, access to the gas grid.	 	
In the case of an agricultural biogas plant, the entire investment, including the storage area for 
substrate and digestate, covers an area of more than 1 ha. 	Due	 to their constru	ction in the vicinity 	
of large farms, i.e. sites of substrate production (e.g. manure, silage	), agricultural biogas plants	 	
are	 dispersed throughout the country. Agricultural biogas plants can also be located 	near 	food 	
processing plants, where there is a lo	wer demand for space. 	Municipal or industrial biogas plants 	
located next to food processing plants, 	wastewater	 treatment plants	, or waste 	treatment facilities	 	
demand little	 space because 	they are	 part of a 	more extensive	 technological system/infrastruc-	
ture complex	. These facilities already have space for the storage of substrate and digestate. In 	
this case, the biogas plant is only one component of the overall plant.	 	
Depending	 on the type of substrate and their location, 	biogas plants 	are characterised by varying 	
parameters	. These parameters include, among others, 	the	 availability	 and energy value	 of sub-

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	21	 	
 
strate (feedstock), 	ease of fermentation, 	annual capacity (	cubic meters	/year), electrical 	and 	ther-	
mal 	capacity	 because 	co	generation	 is often the method of choice for energy production	. The pos-	
sibility of using post	-fermentation residues (digestate) is also an important aspect.	 	
The efficiency of a biogas plant depends, among other things, on the choice of substrates, which 
have different 	organic content and 	methane 	productivity	. Many 	substrates	 can be used to pro-	
duce biogas. They differ primarily in origin, consistency, compositi	on, and density. The primary	 	
substrates for biogas production are:	 	
 	by	-products and waste from the food industry (e.g. from the distillery, meat and dairy indus-	
tries, fruit and vegetable processing)	 	
 	agricultural biomass and waste (e.g. manure, slurry, straw	, hay)	 	
 	sewage sludge from wastewater treatment	 	
 	biodegradable municipal waste	 	
 	energy plants intended for fermentation (e.g. corn, sunflower, grass, sorghum)	 	
The issues that need to be considered regarding subst	rates, besides their origin, are:	 	
 	composition (	dry matter content, organic matter content, carbon to nitrogen ratio)	 	
 	possible contaminants with inorganic materials, wood, bones, feathers, soil, disinfectant, 
pesticides, antibiotics	 	
 	seasonal fluctuation	 	
 	need for storage in terms of quantity and du	ration	 	
Proper substrate preparation is necessary for the anaerobic digestion process to run smoothly. 
Therefore, pre	-treatment is required to ensure process efficiency, maximise product yield, and 	
reduce operation costs. The pretreatment aims to remove 	non	-biodegradable materials and ho-	
mogenise the feedstock. There are different types of pretreatment methods:	 	
 	physical: mechanical, thermal, ultrasound, electrochemical	 	
 	chemical: alkali, acid, oxidative	 	
 	biological: microbiological, enzymatic	 	
 	combined proces	s: extrusion, thermochemical	 	
Contaminants in substrates are separated through screening. The maceration of feedstock aims 
to create the right consistency for further processing. Particular feedstock	s, such as sewage 	
sludge or animal by	-products, require a 	sanitisation sta	ge, eg. through pasteurisation.	 	
Depending on the feedstock, the pretreatment can be a simple process, as in the case of manures 
and slurries or a more complex, multistage process, as in the case of municipal 	bio	-waste	 or com-	
mercial and indu	strial biodegradable wastes. In the case of source	-separated food waste, de	-	
packaging and screening are required, similar to waste from the commercial sector containing 
expired or unfit	-for	-consumption products.	 Adequate elimination of contaminants is cruc	ial for 	
the process to be efficient and failure	-free. Contaminated feedstock can cause abrasion in the 	
hydraulic line and the pumps and reduce the available reactor volume in case of deposition (	Jank 	
et al. 2015	).

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	22	 	
 
Besides removing non	-biodegradable materia	ls and homogenising the feedstock, the pretreat-	
ment process aims to improve biogas yields. In the case of sewage sludge, the pretreatment of 
sludge is expected to help reduce its high resistance to both dewatering and biodegradation. The 
increase in nutrie	nts accessible to microbes enhances the digestion rates, reduces the retention 	
time, and increases biogas production (Kasinath et al. 2	021	). What is necessary to consider is that 	
any pretreatment is an additional step in the digestion process, and the impr	ovement of biogas 	
production should cover its capital and management costs.	 	
Another method of optimising the biogas production process and increasing its efficiency is co	-	
digestion. According to research (Kowalczyk	-Huśko, 2013; Grosser et al., 2017; Kasina	th et al., 	
2021), using a mix of substrates can significantly enhance biogas production compared with 
mono	-digestion.	 	
Biogas plants 	can be	 divided according to their size and amount of substrate:	 	
 	large	-scale	, centralised biogas plants 	- plants with a substrate input of 	50 	to 500 tonnes per 	
day; substrates are obtained from several sources, often located in close proximity to sub-
strate producers, e.g. large livestock farms or food processing factories,	 	
 	small	-sca	le, 	stand	-alone	 biogas plants 	- plants usually using substrates from a single source.	 	
A biogas plant's main elements are the separate digesters, where the 	digestion 	process and bio-	
gas production occur. These are characterised by different volumes, dependin	g on the amount 	
of substrate to be processed. In medium	-sized biogas plants, digesters with a volume of around 	
1,000 	cubic meters	 are most common. They are connected in systems (e.g., 2	-4 chambers). 	
Higher	-capacity plants have large separate digesters with	 more than 5,000 	cubic meters	 volumes. 	
In agricultural biogas plants, the typical volume of the digester is around 1,000	-1,500 	cubic me-	
ters	. 	
When determining the 	biogas 	plant’s	 electrical 	capacity	, it is important to consider whether the 	
energy produced 	wi	ll meet 	only 	the 	facility	's needs or 	be	 produce	d in larger volumes for sale and 	
fed into the grid.	 In the case of agricultural biogas plants, 	the typical 	electrical	 capacity of the 	
installation is 1 MW	. Still,	 there are also plants with 	a capacity of 2.4 MW or 3.5 MW	. D	ue to 	
special legal facilitations for establishing agricultural biogas plants of less than 0.5 MW, more 
installations of this size may appear on the market	. 	
The technical lifetime of a biogas plant is estimated to be more th	an 20 years (up to 30 years), 	
but this depends on a number of factors, including the regular carrying out of all necessary 
maintenance work and the replacement of individual parts or equipment in the plant.	 	
1.3.3	 	Biogas production technology	 	
The 	choice of	 biogas	 production technology depends primarily on the type of substrates selected. 	
Technological solutions are divided according to specific criteria, which include:	 	
 	dry matter content of the 	substrates	 	
 	process temperature	 	
 	the number of process steps	 	
 	the degree 	of separation of the individual digestion phases

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	23	 	
 
 	the method of substrate injection into the digester	 	
Table 	1.1 	Classification of biogas production technologies	 	
Criteria	 	Type of technology	 	Characteristics	 	
Process temperature	 	
Mesophilic	 	35	-37 degrees Celsius, most commonly used	 	
Thermophilic	 	55	-60 degrees Celsius, less commonly used. Higher 	
capacity, but process more sensitive to disturbance	 	
Dry matter content of 
the digester	 	
Wet fermentation	 	Dry matter 	content of substrates does not exceed 	
15%, and the fermented substrate is liquid	 	
Dry fermentation	 	Very high dry matter content in the feedstock, sol-
ids in the digestate	 	
The number of process 
steps	 	
Single	-stage	 	The installation includes one digester	 	
Multi	-stage	 	The installation comprises several chambers, where 
different processes are carried out in the individual 
stages, e.g. preheating in the 1	st stage	 	
The degree of separation 
of the individual diges-
tion phases	 	
Single	-phase	 	Substrate hydrolysis and	 methanogenesis take 	
place in one reactor with equal intensity	 	
Multi	-phase	 	Substrate hydrolysis and methanogenesis take 
place in separate reactors	 	
The method of substrate 
injection into the di-
gester	 	
Continuous	 	Substrate dosing is carried out evenly and 	continu-	
ously to maintain a constant biogas production rate	 	
Batch	 	The digester is filled once and emptied at the end of 
the process. The biogas production rate is higher at 
the beginning of the process, decreasing over time	 	
Source:	 	Kwaśny, Banach and Kow	alski (2012)	 	
1.3.4	 	Infrastructure for	 (raw)	 biogas demand	 	
There are various utilization pathways	 for 	both raw and upgraded forms of biogas. Commercially 	
feasible biogas utilization methods include electricity and heat generation with combined heat 
and power 	(CHP), electricity generation in fuel cells, multigeneration of heat, steam, electricity 	
and cooling in industry,	 injection 	in the gas grids,	 transport fuel, 	and production of chemicals 	
(Budzianowski 2016).	 Biogas purification, aimed at removing trace components adversely affect-	
ing the gas transmission grid, appliances, or end	-users, is necessary before its use. 	The 	process of 	
biogas upgrading, aimed at removing carbon dioxide to adjust the calorific value an	d relative den-	
sity, is an optional step but is necessary for injecting biogas into the gas grid or producing 
transport fuel.	 Biomethane or bio	-synthetic natural gas (bio	-SNG) is a clean fuel for transport or 	
injection into natural gas grids. Biogas can be 	upgraded to biomethane by separating carbon di-	
oxide or converting carbon dioxide to methane. Biomethane can be injected into the gas grid 
and/or converted to compressed 	bio	gas or liquefied 	bio	gas (	bio	-CNG and 	bio	-LNG, respectively) 	
to serve as a transport 	fuel. 	Bio	-CNG and bio	-LNG are chemically equivalent to compressed nat-	
ural gas (CNG	) and 	liquefied natural gas (	LNG	) respectively. 	The decision on how to best utilize 	
the energy largely depends on the facility’s size, available infrastructure and technology	, and 	
costs	.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	24	 	
 
On	-site 	electricity and 	heat	 generation	 and use	 	
Very often the primary	 purpose of building a biogas plant is to 	achieve energy 	self	-sufficiency	, 	
both electrically and thermally. The most common solution	 is to use an engine or power station 	
to generate 	electricity 	and 	heat	 simultaneously (cogeneration, CHP). For example, for all agricul-	
tural biogas plants operating in Poland, the most common pathway of biogas utilisation is the 
combined generation of heat and	 power (CHP) (Holewa	-Rataj and Kukulska	-Zając 2022). The	 bio-	
gas plant is equipped with a cogeneration engine, where the combustion of biogas results in elec-
tricity and heat, which 	are	 used in 	the operation of the plant 	and	 the associated facilities. 	The 	
efficiency of electricity production can reach 45% or more for gas engines and micro	-gas turbines. 	
CHP efficiencies of over 80% can be achieved if both the exhaust gas heat and water heated within 
the cylinder jacket are utilised (Budzianowski 2016). Usually	, there are no problems with the 	pro-	
duction and 	use of 	own 	electricity. 	However, the use of heat produced in cogeneration is prob-	
lematic. Many biogas power plants utilise the heat generated as a byproduct solely for internal 
purposes, specifically to susta	in the anaerobic digestion processes. They do not meet any external 	
heat demand. 	When the biogas plant has a connection with district heating systems, the heat can 	
be used in district heating	 (see more below)	. Some biogas plants 	install dryers to use	 the e	xcess 	
heat 	for drying	 digestate or 	various types of agricultural products (crops, especially legumes and 	
cereals), which is an essential treatment for storing and selling these products.	 Such installations 	
are becoming increasingly popular in Poland and Eu	rope	. Another possible use of excess heat is 	
to heat the greenhouses.	 	
Use in d	istrict heating	 	
If heat energy is produced in greater quantities than the biogas plant's requirements, it is possible 
to sell it to the local district heating network. Such a sol	ution is advantageous in the case of large 	
surplus heat and the proximity of a district heating hub, to which the biogas plant would have to 
make a connection. However, this is rarely the case, as biogas plants are often far from residential 
buildings. The	 construction of a connection to a heat network significantly increases investment 	
costs.	 	
Grid feed	-in 	
In Poland, purified and upgraded biogas (biomethane) can be fed into the natural gas distribution 
grid. According to the law, the injected biomethane mus	t meet the energy and quality require-	
ments for the given gas type. Before feeding biomethane into the grid, besides purification and 
upgrading, the gas grid operator issues a decision stating the conditions for connecting the bioga	s 	
installation to the gas	 grid.	 	
Transport fuel	 	
A viable and increasingly popular option is using biogas as a transport fuel. The biogas can be 
converted to compressed biogas (CBG) or liquified biogas (LBG). The key steps involve upgrading 
biogas to biomethane and compression of bi	omethane to CBG	, which can then be used in vehicles. 	
CBG is distributed through pipelines or transported in tanks to 	fuelling	 stations. Vehicles must be 	
compatible with CNG or dual	-fuel (CNG and diesel) systems. In the case of LBG, biogas is first

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	25	 	
 
upgraded	 to biomethane and then it is cooled to cryogenic temperatures (	-162°C) to convert it 	
into a liquid state. LBG is stored in cryogenic tanks and can be transported in insulated tankers 
over longer distances than CBG. LBG can be used as a fuel for vehicles t	hat run on liquefied natural 	
gas (LNG), especially heavy	-duty trucks and marine vessels.	 	
1.3.5	 	Digestate for soil improvement	 	
Due to its properties and its content of nutrients suitable for plant cultivation, the biogas	-derived 	
digestate is most often used in ag	riculture as a substitute for artificial fertiliser.	 	
The digestate can be introduced to the market as a by	-product of the fermentation process or as 	
an organic fertiliser. The use of digestate as a fertiliser requires a permit from the Ministr	y of 	
Agricult	ure and Rural Development. The digestate should be used in accordance with the recom-	
mendations/instructions.	 	
Due to the seasonality of fertilizer use under Polish climatic conditions, digestate must be stored	 	
between fertilization seasons	 in appropriate co	nditions that will maintain its properties and limit 	
its potential negative impact on the environment	 (from e.g. leakage, smell)	. 	
1.3.6	 	Technological developments and potential 	 	
As	 biogas	 production levels increase	 above a produce	r’s own energy need	, the 	economic feasibil-	
ity of	 biomethane production increases, opening up new opportunities for plant development 	
and use of the resulting product. Biomethane, which can successfully replace natural gas, is pro-
duced by 	upgrading 	biogas. There are several methods for 	upgrading	 biogas and obtaining bio-	
methane, among which we can distinguish (	Podgórska and Narloch 2022	): 	
 	physical absorption	 	
 	chemical absorption	 	
 	pressure absorption	 	
 	membrane separation	 	
 	cryogenic separation	 	
 	biological co	nversion	 	
 	in situ method (very rare).	 	
The most common method is physical absorption, where a water scrubber and solvent are used. 
In this method, the biogas is compressed and delivered to an absorption chamber through which 
it flows from the bottom to the t	op. In the chamber, the water seeps from the top to the bottom, 	
through which it will encounter a counter	-current of gas. Using a solvent, the biogas is com-	
pressed again and then cooled to around 10	-20	oC, allowing some of the 	steam	 to condense. Con-	
tact bet	ween the compressed biogas and the organic solvent results in the absorption of CO	2 and 	
H2S. The purified gas, already biomethane, contains about 98% pure CH	4. 	
A frequently used method for the purification of biogas from sewage treatment plants or landfill	s 	
is the membrane separation method, which allows the separation of impurities, 	again 	mainly 	CO	2 	
and H	2S. The membrane acts as a filter through which some components of the gas mixture to be 	
separated pass and others are retained. In this method, there are usually two membranes.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	26 	
 
The biological conversion method, which involves the biological treatment of biog	as, remains at 	
the research stage. According to the available literature, results to date demonstrate the high 
potential of the method, assuming simplification of technological installations and lower equip-
ment and operating costs.	 	
Available biogas purific	ation technologies allow, among other things, three stages of biogas puri-	
fication	 and upgrading	 to be distinguished.	 	
 
Table 	1.2 	Biogas upgrading stages according to the directions of use	 	
Stage of biogas upgrad	ing	 	Description of the upgrading process	 	Possible use of the product	 	
First stage	 	Water vapour removal 	 	
and 	 	
H2S removal (b	elow 1000 ppm)	 	
Combustion in furnaces to pro-
duce heat or steam	 	
Combustion in microturbines or 
Stirling engines	 	
Second stage	 	Steam 	removal and H2S removal	 (be-	
low 1000 ppm)	 	
and	 	
CO2 removal (below 5% by volume)	 	
Combustion in microturbines, 
CHP or Stirling engines	 	
Third stage	 	Steam removal and H2S removal (be-
low 1000 ppm)	 	
and	 	
CO2 removal (below 5% by volume)	 	
and	 	
Removal of various 	pollutants below 	
target/required levels	 	
Injection of biogas into the nat-
ural gas grid	 	
Production of CBG (com	-	
pressed biogas) or LBG (liquid 
biogas) fuels for vehicles	 	
Production of chemicals	 	
 	
Source:	 	Podgórska and Narloch 	(2022	) 	
 
The potential of biogas 	for biomethane production is relatively widely exploited in Europe. By 	
2021, there were almost 1,000 installations operating on the continent. In Poland, no biomethane 
plant is in operation as yet, although work on installations has begun. According to one	 of the 	
investors	 we have spoken to	, the first biomethane plant in Poland is to be commissioned in the 	
Warmińsko	-Mazurskie Voivodeship in the second half of 2024. The investor also has plans to con-	
vert three other existing biogas plants into biomethane 	plants.	 	
The development of biogas and biomethane production, and ultimately biofuels, will involve the 
need to expand vehicle fuelling infrastructure.	 	
1.4	 	Financial aspects	 	
The financial aspects of biogas production are influenced by	 capital (CAPEX) and operat	ional 	
(OPEX) costs, which 	vary 	across 	different	 facility sizes and 	feedstock types.	 Capital expenditure

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO	 area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	27	 	
 
(CAPEX) refers to the funds a company allocates to acquire and upgrade physical assets, such as 
buildings, equipment, machinery, and vehicles	. Operating	 expenses (OPEX) include the ongoing 	
costs that a company incurs for running its day	-to-day operations, such as maintenance and repair 	
of production equipment and facilities, expenses related to electricity, heat and other inputs, la-
bor costs, pre	-treatmen	t of fee	dstock, etc.	 	
=nternational Energy Agency’s (=EA) average costs of biogas production technologies are pre-
sented in 	Figure 	1.1. There are 	two	 main categories in	cluded in	 the figure: biodigesters	 and 	
wastewater digesters. Biodigesters	, referring to	 systems that use organic waste materials such as 	
agricultural waste, animal manure and food waste	, are sorted into three size categories: small, 	
medium, and large, with	 capacities of 	100 	cubic	 meters	/h, 250 	cubic meters	/h and 750 	cubic 	
meters	/h. The wastewater digester category refers to existing wastewater treatment plants 	
adapted to process sludge produced at a municipal level with a capacity of 	1,000 	cubic	 meters	/h 	
(IEA, 2020)	. The expected production lifetime of each technology is factored into the capital in-	
vestment calculations. The expected production lifetime is 20 years for	 both	 biodigesters (small, 	
medium, and large) and wastewater	 digesters. =t’s important to note that these figures exclude 	
the cost of feedstock	. 	
Figure 	1.1 	Average costs of biogas production technologies per unit of energy produced 
(excluding feedstock), 2018	 	
 	
Source:	 	(IEA, 2020)	 	
Wastewater digesters have the highest capital cost, with a CAPEX of approximately 33 euros per 
megawatt	-hour	. Biodigesters have decreasing capital costs as the capacity of the digester in-	
creases, starting a	t 27.9 euros/MWh for small digesters, 21.9 euros/MWh for medium digesters 	
and 16.5 euros/MWh for large digesters. The capital costs show economies of scale for biodigest-
ers, but this is not the case across technologies. 	The wastewater digester 	has	 a capaci	ty of 1,000 	
cubic meters of gas per hour, surpassing that 	of 	the largest biodigesters. However, it incurs higher 	
capital costs per 	megawatt	-hour.	 Operational costs for biodigesters also demonstrate economies 	
of scale. Small biodigesters incur an average OP	EX of 24.4 euros per 	megawatt	-hour	, compared 	
27,9	32,7	
21,9	16,5	
24,4	13.7	
18,7	
13,0	
0
10
20
30
40
50
60	
Biodigester - Small	Wastewater digester	Biodigester - Medium	Biodigester - Large	
Euro/MWh	
CAPEX	OPEX

Opportunities fo	r producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	28	 	
 
to 18.7 for digesters with medium capacity, and 13 euros for large biodigesters. According to the 
IEA	, a wastewater digester has an average OPEX of 13.7 euros per 	megawatt	-hour	, com	parable 	
to a large 	biodigester.	 	
Looking at total cost	, small biodigesters have the highest cost per megawatt	-hour, followed by 	
wastewater digesters	. For biodigesters, OPEX as a share of total costs decreases 	as plant capacity	 	
increases	, suggesting that scaling up the plant d	oes not proportionally increase man	-hours and 	
maintenance requirements.	 CAPEX as a share of total cost	s is 	slightly above 50 percent 	for all 	
biodigester capacity	; 56 percent for large digesters, 	54 percent for medium digesters and 	53 per-	
cent for small dige	sters. 	The cost 	structure 	for wastewater digesters distributes differently, with 	
CAPEX comprisi	ng about 	70 percent	 of total cost	s. This highlights a relatively high initial capital 	
investment for wastewater digesters, though their operational costs align c	losely with those of 	
large biodigesters.	 	
In 2023, the Biomethane Industrial Partnership (BIP) collected company data from several Euro-
pean biomethane producers. The report based on this data collection contains data on feedstock 
cost, biogas production cos	t, biogas upgrading cost, down	-stream biomethane costs, and by	-	
products. 	Capital and operational costs	 related to biogas production is presented in	 Figure 	1.2 	
and 	Figure 	1.3 , respectively. 	 	
Figure 	1.2 	Biogas facility CAPEX range 	by	 facility capacity	 and feedstock type	 	
 	
Source:	 	Based on figures from 	The Biomethane Industrial Partnership, 2023	 	
As seen	 in Figure 	1.2, plants with a capacity	 between 500 and 1300 cubic meters of gas per hour 	
have 	CAPEX	 ranging between 	approximately 	2300 and 5500 euros per kilowatt	, with an average 	
of 3400	. However, for larg	er plants, with a production capacity of more than 2000 cubic meters 	
per hour, 	CAPEX	 range	s between 900 and 1600 euros per kilowatt	, with an average of 1140. The 	
cost per kilowatt 	installed 	decreases as the capacity of the plant increases, suggesting	 significant 	
economies of scale	. This aligns with the IEA data in	 Figure 	1.1. Due to 	few 	observations, facilities 	
with capacities below 500 cubic metres per hour and th	ose between 1300 and 2000 cubic metres 	
per hour were excluded from the CAPEX overview.	 	
CAPEX	 also varies depending on the type of feedstock that goes into production. The Biomethane	 	
Industrial Partnership 	survey 	finds significant variation in capital costs	 between plants that use 	
0	
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000	
500 - 1300 m3/h	500 - 1300 m3/h
(public only)	
500 - 1300 m3/h
(non-public)	
>2000 m3/h	
Euro/kW

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	29	 	
 
public feedstock and those that use non	-public feedstock.	 In this case, public feedstock refers to 	
both municipal solid waste (MSW) and wastewater treatment plant sewage sludge	. Biogas plants 	
in the 500	-1300 	cubic	 meters	/h capacity	 range that use non	-public feedstock face capital costs 	
ranging between 2200 and 3000 euro per kilowatt. On the other hand, plants in the same capacity 
range using public feedstock face significantly higher capital costs, ranging between 3800 and 
5500 euro	s per kilowatt. According to the numbers reported to 	the Biomethane 	Industrial Part-	
nership, 	biogas plants that use public feedstock require approximately 80% mor	e investment than 	
other plants.	 	
Figure 	1.3 	Biogas facility OPEX range 	by	 facility capacity	 and feedstock type	 	
 	
Source:	 	Based on figures from 	The Biomethane Industrial Partnership, 2023	 	
Figure 	1.3 provides 	an overview of operational costs (OPEX) for biogas production, categorized 	
by size and 	type of	 feedstock. 	According to this 2023 data on 	from the Biomethane Industrial 	
Partnership, 	larger biogas plants typically incur lower oper	ational costs per MWh produc	ed	. How-	
ever, the	 economies of scale 	are	 not as 	pronounced	 as 	those observed 	for capital costs	, with 	the 	
average remaining around 	20 euros/MWh	 for 	facilities of all sizes using non	-public feedstock.	 	
Whether the facility use public or non	-public 	feedstock 	appears to be the most significant factor 	
influencing OPEX	. Facilities with a capacity of 500 to 1300 cubic meters per hour that use public 	
feedstock have 	an average 	OPEX three times higher than those using other feedst	ock in the same 	
capacity range.	 	
Accor	ding to the numbers from BIP, b	iogas production facilities using public feedstock 	tend to 	
incur higher capital and operational costs 	than other facilities.	 The biggest difference between 	
facilities that use public feedstock and those that use non	-public fe	edstock is 	the	 kind of pre	-	
treatment the feedstock requires	. Figure 	1.4 shows the average 	costs related to pre	-treatment 	
of feedstock for facilities using manure	, a no	n-public feedstock,	 and	 municipal solid waste, a pub-	
lic feedstock	. Total c	osts related to pre	-treatment of feedstock in a facility that use	s manure as 	
its	 main feedstock is approximately 	8 euros per megawatt	-hour. 	The total is evenly split, with 	
CAPEX acco	unting for 4.1 euros and OPEX for 3.7 euros per megawatt	-hour	. For facilities using 	
municipal solid waste or food waste as feedstock, the total costs are significantly higher	, approx-	
imately 	79 euros per megawatt	-hour.	 The split between CAPEX and OPEX 	is similar to that of non	-	
public facilities, with 	CAPEX accounting for approximately 45 percent of total costs. 	 	
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140	
500 - 1300 m3/h
(public only)	
500 - 1300 m3/h
(non-public)	
1300 - 2000	>2000 m3/h	
Eruo/MWh

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	30	 	
 
Figure 	1.4 	Costs related to pre	-treatment of feedstock	 	
 	
Source:	 	Based on figures from 	The 	Biomethane Industrial Partnership, 2023	 	
 	
4,1	
35,5	
3,7	
43,2	
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90	
Manure feedstock	MSW/Food waste	
Euro/MWh	
OPEX
CAPEX

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	31	 	
 	
2	 	Resource evaluation of 
MOFTMO	 	
2.1	 	The MOFTMO	 	
The subject of this study is an analysis of the possibilities of developing biogas production from 
biomass and 	bio	-waste in MOFTMO. The area consists of 14 municipalities of the Tomaszowski 	
and Opoczyński districts in the Łódzkie Voivodeship. An inter	-municipal association was estab-	
lished in order to develop a joint strategy for integrated territorial investments a	nd its implemen-	
tation. 	Figure 	2.1 shows the municipalities included in MOFTMO.	 	
Figure 	2.1 	Administrative location of th	e MOFTMO	 	
 	
Source:	 	IOŚ	-PIB based on Head Office of Geodesy and Cartography (GUGiK)	 	
MOFTMO is located in central Poland. In terms of land use, it is a predominantly agricultural area 
(see	 Figure 	2.2). Agricultural land, with a predominance of arable land, covers just over 53% of 	
the 	area	. The 	MOFTMO 	has high forest cover (around 38%). Forests are located in 	its 	central part, 	
along the valley of the 	main river 	– Pilica River, 	and smaller streams.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	32	 	
 
Figure 	2.2 	Land cover in the MOFTMO 	 	
 	
Source:	 	IOŚ	-PIB based on Corine Land Cover (EEA) and Head Office of Geodesy and C	artography (GUGiK)	 	
The 	MOFTMO area	 is inhabited by approximately 160,000 people (as of 2021). The largest city is 	
Tomaszów Mazowiecki, which is inhabited by 1/3 of the region's population. The 	area 	has three 	
smaller towns and numerous small towns and vill	ages.	 	
The 	MOFTMO's 	economy is based on industry and services. Companies in the mineral and chem-	
ical industry, which are involved in, among other things, the production of building materials and 
ceramics, and companies in the food industry play important ro	les in the economy of the region 	
and the individual municipalities. Agriculture is important for the food processing companies op-
erating in the 	area	. 	
2.2	 	Mapping of available feedstock 	in the MOFTMO	 	
Assessing the MOFTMO's biogas 	production 	potential requires 	analysing the available substrates. 	
The possible sources of substrates are:

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	33	 	
 
 	organic (biodegradable) fraction of municipal solid waste	 	
 	sludge from municipal wastewater treatment	 plants	 	
 	biodegradable waste from industry	 	
 	biomass and 	bio	-waste	 from agriculture	 (of animal and plant origin)	 	
2.2.1	 	Organic fraction from municipal 	solid 	waste	 	
According to =OŚ	-PIB 	(2022)	, a 	study on municipal waste generated in Polish municipalities, the 	
content of 	organic fraction	 in 	municipal solid waste 	generated 	(bio	-waste) 	is on average 28.68% 	
(from 28 to 31% depending on whether it is an urban or rural area and also on the population of 
the urban area). 	The municipal bio	-waste generated consists of green waste (grass, leaves, 	
branches) and food waste (residues from food pre	paration and waste	 from food consumption	). 	
In 2021, in 	the 	MOFTMO 	a total of 	54 861 Mg of municipal solid waste was collected	 (Polish BDO, 	
2021)	. Based on the data regarding the 	municipal solid waste 	generated and population, the po-	
tential for bio	-waste 	ge	neration 	in 	the area 	was assessed 	to be	 ca 16.6 thousand Mg.	 According 	
to the same study, food waste accounts for 61% of the generated bio	-waste so 	the potential for 	
generation of 	bio	-waste 	is ca 10.1 thousand Mg 	of food waste and 6.5 	thousand 	Mg of green waste 	
yearly.	 	
2.2.2	 	Source	-separated municipal 	bio	-waste	 	
In MOFTMO in 2021, in 11 out of 14 municipalities the municipal bio	-waste was separately col-	
lected. 	Kitchen and food waste was collected together with green waste from gardens and parks. 	
The am	ount collected was 	2 957	 Mg	 (Polish BDO, 2021)	. In this category	, in the case of selected 	
municipalities, 	waste from other sources than households 	were	 included (schools, offices, restau-	
rants and other small business etc.). 	Of the biodegradable waste collected from the 	area	, the city 	
of Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 had the largest share (78%).	 Taking into account the potential for bio	-	
waste 	generation 	of 16.6 thousand Mg, the bio	-waste collected 	separately 	in 2021 	amounted to 	
17.8	% of	 that theoretical value.	 According to a recent study (Favoino and Giavini, 2020), based on 	
the performance of various collection schemes and the composition of 	municipal 	bio	-waste, it can 	
be assumed that 	in MOFTMO 	20% of collected bio	-waste 	was 	food/kitchen waste. With this as-	
sumption	 and given the current collection rate	, of the 	bio	-waste 	collected 	in the 	area	 ca 590 	Mg 	
was 	food/	kitchen waste and 	ca 	2 360	 Mg green waste	. 	
2.2.3	 	Sludge	 from municipal wastewater treatment plants	 	
In 	the 	MOFTMO	, there are 	19	 municipal wastewater treatment plants with 	a total capacity of 40.5 	
thousand cubic meters per day. 	Between 	202	0 and 2022	, the 	average	 amount of municipal sew-	
age sludge produced during wastewater treatment amounted to 2.	6 thousand Mg	 of dry ma	ss 	
yearly	, of which 	on average 	14% was used in agriculture	 (Statistics Poland, BDL)	. Most of the sew-	
age sludge generated is produced at the 	wastewater	 treatment plant in Tomaszów Mazowiecki 	
(ca. 80%	). Assuming that 	whole or part of the sewage sludge could be fed into biogas plant, 	the 	
potential of municipal sewage sludge for use in biogas production is from 2.3 to 2.	6 thousand Mg 	
of dry mass yearly	.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	34 	
 	
2.2.4	 	Industrial 	biodegradable waste	 	
In 2021 in 	the 	MOFTMO, 	7.8	 thousand Mg of biodegradable waste other than municipal bio	-waste 	
and municipal sewage sludge 	was	 produced	 (Polish 	BDO, 2021)	. The largest share had waste from 	
the baking and confectionery industry (	52.8	%), food products that are expired or unsuitable for	 	
consumption (	23.3	%), and waste from the preparation and processing of meat, fish and other 	
foods of animal origin (	15.	1%).	 The greatest potential for biogas production has plant	-tissue waste 	
(ca 340 Mg/year), animal	-tissue waste (ca 630 Mg/year), sludge from on	-site effluent treatment 	
in plants processing meat, fish and other foods of animal origin (ca 550 Mg/year), materials	 un-	
suitable for 	consumption 	or processing (ca 4 000 Mg/year), and food products that are expired or 	
unsuitable for consumption (1 800 Mg/year).	 Of the municipalities of the MOFTMO, the biggest 	
potential	s in terms of substrates for biogas production 	ha	ve	 the cit	ies	 of 	Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 	
and	 Opoczno. 	The total amount 	of biodegradable industrial waste generated in the 	area	 is ca 7 	600 	
Mg yearly.	 	
2.2.5	 	Animal by	-products	 	
Animal by	-products (ABPs) are materials obtained from animals which are not intended for human 	
consumption. ABPs include	4: 	
 	slaughterhouse waste (skin, bones, horn and hooves, blood, fat and offal)	 	
 	catering waste	 	
 	fallen stock	 	
 	dead pets	 	
 	materials produced by animals such as manure, eggshells, feathers, wool, beeswax 	 	
 	former foodstuff of animal origin 	such as milk, eggs, meat that is no longer suitable for hu-	
man consumption (commercial reasons, quality, production failures etc	.). 	
Animal by	-products are covered by regulation 	(EC) No 	1069/2009 and, if they are also classified 	
as waste, by relevant waste l	egislation. The animal by	-products which are not classified as waste 	
are not covered by compulsory waste statistics and are not included the Polish Database on waste 
management (	Polish 	BDO).	 	
Of the animal by	-products that 	are 	generated in the MOFTMO, animal manure constitutes the 	
dominant amount. As this kind of biomass is not covered by 	the 	waste statistic, for mapping of 	
materials produced by animals	, estimates based on theoretical values were done. According to 	
the 2020 Agri	cultural Census in Poland, the MOFTMO had 29,000 head	s of cattle, 57,000 pigs, and 	
1.7 million poultry, with chickens accounting for 96% of the total poultry population	 (Statistics 	
Poland, BDL)	. Based on the indicators specified in agricultural production standards	 (Agricultural 	
Production Standards 	- Normatywy produkcji rolniczej)	, considering	 that ca 80% of animals in Po-	
land 	are	 kept in shallow litter barns (Kuś, Madej and Kopiński, 2006), 	the 	potential can be assessed 	
as ca 	430	 000 Mg of manure and 	245	 000 Mg of slurry.	 	
 	 	 	
4 https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/animal	-by-products

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO	 area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	35	 	
 	
2.2.6	 	Vegetable by	-products	 	
The total area of farmland in MOFTMO is 60.6 thousand ha. The dominant crops are cereals, which 
occupy 46% of the total cultivated area	 (ARiMR Database)	. Permanent pasture and grasses occupy 	
21.5% of the arable area. Corn is grown on 6% of the area. 	Assuming that 5	-10% of hay, 50	-70% 	
of straw, and 60% of corn can be used as a substrate for biogas production, based on the available 
indicators (Jasiulewicz a	nd Janiszewska, 2013; Jarosz, 2016; Niekurzak, 2022), 	the potential for 	
biomass from agriculture production in MOFTMO was assessed as:	 	
 	hay: 2 600 	– 5 200 Mg/year; average 3 900 Mg/year	 	
 	straw: 55 800 Mg/year	 	
 	corn: 68 000 Mg/year	 	
2.2.7	 	Energy crops	 	
Currently, in M	OFTMO, only 8.6 ha (0.014% of the 	area’s	 arable land) is dedicated to growing 	
willow. There are no other energy crops grown.	 	
2.2.8	 	Available feedstock for biogas production	 	
Based on biomass and 	bio	-waste	 mapping, 	the 	following feedstock from the MOFTMO can be 	
us	ed for biogas production	 (Table 	2.1): 	
 	Biodegradable waste from industry: plant	-tissue waste (ca 340 Mg/year), animal	-tissue 	
waste (ca 630 Mg/year), sludge from on	-site effluent treatment in plants processing meat, 	
fish and othe	r foods of animal origin (ca 550 Mg/year), materials unsuitable for consump-	
tion or processing (ca 4 000 Mg/year), food products that are expired or unsuitable for con-
sumption (1 800 Mg/year)	. Altogether about 7	 600 Mg/year.	 	
 	Sludge from municipal wastewater	 treatment plants (ca 2 300 	- 2 700 Mg dry mass/year)	 	
 	Municipal 	bio	-waste	 (food and kitchen waste): ca 590 Mg/year	 	
 	Plant biomass (ca 3 900 Mg/year of hay; ca 55 800 Mg/year of straw, ca 68 000 Mg/year of 
corn)	. Al	together about 128	 000 Mg/year.	 	
 	Animal biom	ass (ca 	430	 000 Mg of manure and 	245	 000 Mg of slurry)	 	
Table 	2.1 	Available feedstock for biogas production in MOFTMO 	 	
Municipality	 	
Biodegradable 
waste from in-
dustry [Mg]	 	
Sludge from 
municipal 
WWTPs	 [Mg 	
dry mass]	 	
Municipal 
bio	-waste 
(food/	 	
kitchen 
waste) 	[Mg]	 	
Plant bi-
omass 
[Mg]	 	
Animal bio-	
mass 	- 	
solid ma-
nure [Mg]	 	
Animal bi-
omass 	- 	
slurry [Mg]	 	
Białaczów 	 	123	 	22	 	2 	 10 273 	 	10 877	 	6 046	 	
Drzewica	 	21	 	23	 	- 	 4 916 	 	15 941	 	8 395	 	
=nowłódz 	 	- 	16	 	 14 	 	 1 002 	 	4 339	 	1 194	 	
Lubochnia 	 	6 	42	 	 14 	 	 5 616 	 	18 312	 	13 846	 	
Mniszków 	 	5 	10	 	 4 	 9 349 	 	30 715	 	18 034

Opportunities fo	r producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	36	 	
 
Opoczno	 	1 071	 	344	 	 62 	 	 11 642 	 	27 377	 	14 482	 	
Paradyż 	 	16	 	 2 	 1 	 11 173 	 	25 913	 	14 741	 	
Poświętne 	 	3 	7 	 1 	 3 920 	 	14 622	 	7 761	 	
Rokiciny 	 	19	 	18	 	- 	 25 666 	 	72 254	 	46 487	 	
Rzeczyca 	 	8 	2 	- 	 8 965 	 	55 538	 	41 909	 	
Sławno 	 	6 	3 	 2 	 11 949 	 	24 880	 	15 157	 	
Tomaszów 
Mazowiecki 
(city)	 	
6 753	 	2 165	 	 462 	 	 399 	 	7 605	 	1 929	 	
Tomaszów 
Mazowiecki 
(rural area)	 	
20	 	28	 	 22 	 	 7 414 	 	65 740	 	26 431	 	
Ujazd 	 	581	 	43	 	 8 	 15 423 	 	56 293	 	28 336	 	
TOTAL	 	7 633	 	2 72	5 	591	 	127 707	 	430 404	 	244 748	 	
Source:	 Own calculations	 based on Po	lish BDO, Statistics Poland BDL	 	
The dominant types of substrates for biogas production in the 	area 	are plant and animal biomass 	
from agriculture, with the municipality of Rokiciny assessed to have the highest 	availability	 (ca 	
144	 thousand Mg/year) and Ujazd, Rzeczyca and Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 (rural area) slightly lower 	
(between 	100	 and 	106 	thousand Mg/ye	ar). The second stream of substrates consists of industry 	
waste, with the cities of Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 and Opoczno having the highest potential availa-	
bility. From the municipal sector, the city of Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 has the highest potential for 	
biogas p	roduction by utilizing sludge from the 	wastewater treatment plant	 and collected bio	-	
waste.	 	
2.3	 	Perspectives on future feedstock potential 	 	
The future feedstock availability for biogas production in the 	area	 depend	s on bio	-waste and bi-	
omass's generation and collection potential. The proposed revision of the waste framework di-
rective	, requiring reduction of food waste generated	 can influence the amount of bio	-waste gen-	
erated by industry and households, limiting the av	ailability of substrates 	from	 these sectors. Im-	
proved collection schemes for municipal waste can increase the amount of bio	-waste available. 	
Change	s in 	the 	diet pattern 	towards	 less 	or more 	meat can influence the amount of 	animal bio-	
mass 	available.	 	
Assumin	g that in the coming years 	the 	MOFTMO	’s municipalities will implement separate collec-	
tion of food/kitchen waste and 	the amount of separately collected bio	-waste 	could 	increase	 to ca 	
75% of 	the 	maximum 	generation 	potential, the amount of bio	-waste collected 	in the form of	 	
food/kitchen waste 	could reach ca 7 600 Mg yearly	. Table 	2.2 shows the potential amounts of 	
bio	-waste 	(foo	d and kitchen waste) 	assuming 	increasing 	collection levels of 25, 50 and 75%.	 	
Table 	2.2 	Potential bio	-waste (food and kitchen waste) amounts assuming increasing 	
collection levels	 	
Municipality	 	Municipal bio	-waste (food and kitchen waste) 	 	
[Mg]

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	37	 	
 
 	25% of max potential 	 	50% of max potential	 	75% of max potential	 	
Białaczów 	 	 45 	 	 90 	 	 136 	 	
Drzewica	 	 85 	 	 171 	 	 256 	 	
=nowłódz 	 	 70 	 	 140 	 	 210 	 	
Lubochnia 	 	 103 	 	 206 	 	 309 	 	
Mniszków 	 	 46 	 	 92 	 	 138 	 	
Opoczno	 	 433 	 	 865 	 	 1 298 	 	
Paradyż 	 	 37 	 	 74 	 	 112 	 	
Poświętne 	 	 27 	 	 53 	 	 80 	 	
Rokiciny 	 	 98 	 	 196 	 	 294 	 	
Rzeczyca 	 	 40 	 	 80 	 	 120 	 	
Sławno 	 	 57 	 	 115 	 	 172 	 	
Tomaszów Mazowiecki 
(city)	 	
 1 166 	 	 2 333 	 	 3 499 	 	
Tomaszów Mazowiecki 
(rural area)	 	
 169 	 	 337 	 	 506 	 	
Ujazd 	 	 153 	 	 305 	 	 458 	 	
TOTAL	 	 2 529 	 	 5 058 	 	 7 587 	 	
Source:	 Own calculations	 based on 	Polish 	BDO and 	Statistics Poland, BDL	. 	
As more	 than 	60% 	of the bio	-waste (food and kitchen waste) 	in the 	area	 is generated in 	the 	cities 	
of Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 and Opoczno, implementing the separate collection of food and kitchen 	
waste in both municipalities would provide a valuable stream of substrates for the biogas plant.	 	
2.4	 	Biogas 	and energy 	potential of the available feedst	ock 	 	
The assessed theoretical 	potential for methane production 	from bio	-mass and bio	-waste 	in 	
MOFTMO is presented in	 Table 	2.3. Methane production potential from selected substrate	s is 	
shown in	 Appendix	 A. 	
Table 	2.3 	Theoretical potential for methane production in MOFTMO 	 	
Data unit	 	Methane production potential [cubic meters/years]	 	
 	biodegradable 
waste from in-	
dustry	 	
municipal 
WWTP 
sludge	 	
food/kitchen waste 	
(min 	– max)	 	
plant bio	-	
mass	 	
animal bio	-	
mass	 	
Białaczów 	 	9 331 	 	 5 535	 	103 	 	 144 	 	 1 243 	835	 	 589 730	 	
Drzewica	 	1 653	 	 5 109	 	- 	 - 	 961 174 	 	860 664	 	
=nowłódz 	 	- 	 3 832	 	722	 	 1 008 	 	 270 260 	 	 227 561 	 	
Lubochnia 	 	421	 	 14 263 	 	722	 	 1 008 	 	 1 383 565	 	 1 022 861 	 	
Mniszków 	 	374	 	 4 045	 	206	 	 288 	 	 1 750 510	 	 1 677 745 	 	
Opoczno	 	22 	032	 	 83 664 	 	3 199	 	 4 465 	 	 2 075 068 	 	 1 479 702

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	38	 	
 	
Paradyż 	 	1 252	 	 639	 	52 	 72 	 	 1 614 988 	 	 1 407 475 	 	
Poświętne 	 	101	 	 1 490 	 	52 	 72 	 	 819 649 	 	 789 567 	 	
Rokiciny 	 	1 499	 	 4 045	 	- 	 - 	 2 579 590 	 	 3 971 338 	 	
Rzeczyca 	 	388	 	 639	 	- 	 - 	 2 175 512	 	 3 099 825 	 	
Sławno 	 	366	 	 1 277	 	103	 	 144 	 	 2 055 400 	 	 1 359 290 	 	
Tomaszów 
Mazowiecki 	
(city)	 	
1 418 569	 	 409 592 	 	23 	836	 	 33 274 	 	 111 487	 	 398 500 	 	
Tomaszów 
Mazowiecki 
(rural area)	 	
935	 	 6 599	 	1 135	 	 1 584 	 	 1 448 647 	 	 3 511 718	 	
Ujazd 	 	51 699	 	 9 154	 	413	 	 576 	 	 1 714 873 	 	 3 043 549 	 	
TOTAL	 	1 625	 214	 	 549 883 	 	30 543	 	 42 637 	 	 20 204 558	 	23 439 526	 	
Source:	 	Own 	calculations	 based on 	Polish BDO, Statistics Poland BDL, ARiMR Database, 	Curkowski et al, 2009	, AL-	
PROJEKT, 2023, Krasucka 	and	 Oniszk	-Popławska, 2013.	 	
The total potential from all sources combined is 	close to 	38	 million 	cubic meters	 per year. 	Animal 	
and plant biomass 	has t	he biggest potential for methane production in the 	area	, with	 the	 munic-	
ipalities of Rokiciny, 	Rzeczyca, Ujazd	 and	 rural area of Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 municipality	 domi-	
nating (	52	% of 	total methane potential from 	agricultural 	biomass).	 	
In the municipal sector, waste from sludge from municipal wastewater treatment plants in To-	
maszów Mazowiecki and Opoczno	 has 	the biggest potential	. In industrial sector, industrial waste 	
from Tomaszów Mazowiecki	 has 	the biggest potential. The 	low	est	 potential 	lies with	 separately 	
collected municipal bio	-waste (food and kitchen waste).	 However, the use of separately collected 	
bio	-waste for biogas production, despite the low 	yearly 	methane production potential, can sup-	
port the sustainable management	 of municipal solid waste and the achievement of recovery and 	
recycling targets imposed on municipalities.	 Additionally, anaerobic co	-digestion with an organic 	
fraction of municipal solid waste as a co	-substrate can enhance the process. The 	addition of or-	
ganic fraction 	of municipal solid waste to wastewater sludge 	leads	 to 	increas	ed	 methane yield, 	
the removal of volatile solids, and 	a higher	 content of methane in biogas (Grosser et al., 2017).	 	
To analyse 	the 	theoretical production of energy from 	substrates 	available in MOFTMO	, the	 fol-	
lowing assumptions were made:	 	
 	the biogas plants have installed a combined heat and power system (CHP); electric effi-
ciency 38%, heat efficiency 43% 	 	
 	the heating value of biomethane of 9.3 kWh/Nm	3 	
 	generator runtime 8000 h/year	 	
 	he	at consumption for process purposes 30%; electricity consumption for process purposes 	
10%	 	
In theory	, from 	the	 amount of methane 	presented in 	Table 	2.3, ca 111	 GWh of 	net 	electrical en-	
ergy and 	350	 GWh	 of 	net 	heat 	energy 	per year can be obtained. 	With 	an	 electricity demand of 	
the MOFTMO households of ca 109 GWh per year, the electrical energy produced could cover 
this 	deman	d. 	
Based on the a	nalys	is of the potential of different sectors, 	in Figure 	2.3 the theoretical annual 	
potential for energy found in the biogas 	and theoretical power electricity of the generator sets 	is 	
presented.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	39	 	
 
Figure 	2.3 	Theoretical annual potential 	for energy found in the agricultural biogas and 	
power electricity of the generator sets	. 	
 	
Sour	ce: 	Own calculations based on Statistics Poland BDL, ARiMR Database, Curkowski et al, 2009, Krasucka 	and	 	
Oniszk	-Popławska, 2013.	 	
Given 	estimates	 from	 Poznań 	University of Life Sciences	5, that 	the lower limit of profitability of a 	
biogas plant is 	ca 	200 kW	, and for 	agricultural biogas plants the optimal size 	is 250	-499 kW	, in 	
every municipality except 	=nowłódz and city of Tomaszów 	Maz	owiecki	 at least 	one agricultural 	
bioga	s plant could be 	established	 (see 4.4 for 	examples of 	existing infrastructure)	. In case of 	in-	
dustr	y, only 	the 	agri	-food sector	 in 	the 	city 	of Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 generate	s enough sub-	
strates to justify 	building a biogas plant.	 The potential of 	the 	municipal sector is much smaller 	
than 	the 	agricultural sector	, but the prof	itability could be significant 	due to 	the 	high 	cost	s of 	waste 	
management	. We study this 	in chapter 	5. In the municipal sector	, the construction of a biogas 	
plant may be considered by the 	wastewater 	treatment plant in Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	, provided 	
 	 	 	
5	 https://www.teraz	-srodowisko.pl/aktualnosci/kazda	-gmina	-ma	-potencjal	-produkcji	-biogazu	-	
Jacek	-Dach	-wywiad	-13289.html	; accessed 27.06.2024.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	40	 	
 
that it 	will have access	 to additional substrates. In particular, it should 	examine 	the	 co	-digestion 	
with	 other 	biodegradable 	waste to optimize the process.	 	
The	 cooperation 	between different stakeholders 	is needed to 	exploit 	opportunities	 of biogas in 	
the MOFTMO	. The next section outlines 	which stakeholders to consider.	 	
2.5	 	Stakeholders	 (in the) agricultural sector and municipalities	 	
The development of a network structure around biogas plant investments could contribute to the 
growing importance of biogas in the MOFT	MO energy economy. The organisation of an ecosys-	
tem of partners (stakeholders) 	could 	be centred around a central biogas hub (biohub) with mul-	
tiple nodes (bioknots). The partners 	would be 	suppliers of the 	substrates 	for biogas production, 	
while at the same 	time getting rid of the ballast of their production or operations, and the by	-	
product converted into energy is distributed to distributed consumption points. Energy partner-
ships enable the mutual balancing of energy production and demand. A grid and distri	buted struc-	
ture 	offer	 the possibility of energy 	produced from	 local resources and 	consumed	 locally	, reducing 	
transmission losses as well as intermediary costs. It serves to improve local energy security in an 
economically efficient and environmentally frie	ndly way.	 	
Partnership is the key to the development of biogas investments. Such an initiative has also been 
taken at MOFTMO. =n 2018, the ‘Tomaszów Energy Cluster’ was established in Tomaszów Ma-
zowiecki under a civil agreement. The members of the Cluster a	re:	 	
 	local governments: the city of Tomaszów Mazowiecki, municipalities: Tomaszów Ma-
zowiecki (rural), Rzeczyca, Sławno;	 	
 	enterprises of thermal, e	lectric and RES energy industry	; 	
 	municipal companies;	 	
 	scientific, research institutions: Polish Academy of Scien	ces Institute of Mineral and Energy 	
Economy; Institute of Projects and Analysis;	 	
 	other members: 	Housing Association	 ‘Przodownik’.	 	
The cluster has an open character, i.e. new members may join it (according to the geographical 
limitation). 	The office of the 	Tomaszów Energy Cluster is run by Water and Sewage Management 	
Plant in Tomaszów Mazowiecki	. 	
The main goal of the initiative was to build energy self	-sufficiency based on renewable energy 	
sources, as well as to reduce air pollution. However, it should be 	noted that in the document 	
developed in September 2022: ‘Tomaszów Energy Cluster Development Strategy’ practically ne-
glected the potential of including biogas in the new energy architecture and achieving the indi-
cated goal.	 	
The full identification of poten	tial stakeholders in a biogas investment is hampered by the lack of 	
access to contact databases of actors in the MOFTMO. This makes it difficult to network potential 
partners, as well as information and promotion policies.	 	
Among the identified stakeholders for the implementation of a biogas investment in the 
MOFTMO region, the following groups of actors can be distinguished: 	 	
 	Government administration

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	41	 	
 
 	Regional administration	 	
 	Local government, including all municipalities in 	the MOFTMO 	 	
 	District Office of the Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture Opoczno	 	
 	District Office of the Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture Tomaszów 
Mazowiecki	 	
 	Business clusters and cooperatives, including the Ener	gy Cluster Tomaszów Mazowiecki	 	
 	Municipal economy enterprises	 	
 	Private sector	 	
 	Industry players	 	
 	Representatives of science	 	
In addition, potential stakeholder groups may include:	 	
 	Business environment institutions	 	
 	Formal social partners: social organisations, t	rade unions	 	
 	Individual social partners: c	ouncillors	 	
 	Residents	 	
 	Local and regional media

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	42 	
 	
3	 	Restrictions and barriers	 	
Barriers and constraints to the realisation of biogas investments relate to many aspects, which 
can be divided 	into	 technical, organisational	, institutional, economic and social	 barriers	. 	
3.1	 	Technical barriers	 	
One of the basic barriers is the limited availability of technology 	for biogas production 	in 	Poland.	 	
In 	addition	, one has to reckon with limited possibilities of servicing the installation or replacing 	
parts, which result from the lack of appropriately trained staff and 	the need to import	 techn	ology 	
from outside the country.	 	
Due to its properties, biogas could be fe	d into the country's existing gas network after appropriate 	
processing. Unfortunately, access to this network is limited 	as 	the gas network is not widespread 	
throughout the country. In addition, the high costs of connection to the grid and the need to 
matc	h the biogas parameters to those required by the grid can present a formidable technological 	
and financial challenge.	 Another barrier is the underdeveloped market for natural gas vehicles 	
(NGVs) and infrastructure. Biogas produced in a biogas plant has sim	ilar properties to natural gas 	
and could therefore be used successfully as a propulsion fuel.	 The problems concern the immatu-	
rity of the market in terms of biomethane plant infrastructure and biogas	 supply to the transport 	
sector in Poland.	 	
3.2	 	Economic 	barriers	 	
Among the economic barriers, 	the 	survey of biogas economics in 	chapter 	1.4	 indicate	s a high in-	
vestment cost	 for biogas plants. Additional costs are associated with the connection to the elec-	
tricity grid, which is required for the production of electricity from a bio	gas plant. 	Scale	 is a signif-	
icant barrier	, as indicated by the data in chapter 	1.4	. 	
Economic results would also improve with the ability to manage a larger spectrum of waste than 
is currently the case, which is affected by legal barriers. A further problem is the instabilit	y of the 	
market. This concerns the conditions for its development in terms of the formal and legal envi-
ronment. With regard to the operational process, the imbalance is due to uncertainty in the con-
tinuity of supply chains and stable feedstock for biogas p	lants. This situation limits the capital 	
capacity of the biogas market and the involvement of potential investors.	 	
A relatively 	under	-recognised issue limiting the development of the biogas market is the lobbying 	
towards the development of waste incinerati	on plants, which, when these investments are scaled 	
up, can potentially exert economic pressure to limit the waste stream to biogas plants.	 	
3.3	 	Institutional barriers	, organizational and legal barriers	 	
To date, the lack of programmes and projects to promote in	vestment in biogas and biomethane 	
has been identified as one of the institutional barriers. The situation has improved somewhat in 
recent	 year	s, but still requires promotional and educational measures. Biogas and biomethane 	
are insufficiently appreciated and taken into account in the balancing of the country's energy or

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO	 area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	43	 	
 
transport system, which is questionable with such a huge estimated biogas pro	duction potential.	 	
One of the main organisational and legal barriers is the lengthy process of project preparation and 
obtaining decisions and permits for investment implementation. The construction of a biogas 
plant is complicated and the 	plant	, due to it	s nature, may potentially have an impact on the envi-	
ronment. In addition, a further organisational barrier is the lack of adequate preparation and ap-
proach of officials to the specifics of the installation, applied technologies and produced processes, 
who 	issue decisions and permits. This barrier is slowly being overcome due to the growing interest 	
in biogas plants. An important aspect is also the acquisition of certificates for the biogas digestate, 
which will allow its use in agriculture.	 	
Another importan	t problem is the unequal treatment of agricultural biogas plants (usually small	-	
scale) and other biogas plants (e.g. municipal) in the legal system. The legal facilitations introduced 
for agricultural biogas plants do not translate into an increase in biog	as production on a sufficient 	
scale. 	Related to this is the lack of uniform regulations for the use of certain substrates in biogas 	
plants (not every substrate is considered waste in different situations). The 	difficulty of	 interpret-	
ing	 regulations is a ma	jor barrier to the development of non	-agricultural biogas plants.	 	
Planning documents of municipalities, where biogas plants are not included or their location is 
prohibited, are also sometimes a barrier to the location of biogas plants. 	Changing a planning	 	
document is time	-consuming and costly.	 	
With regard to organisational issues, it is also worth 	keeping	 in mind the formal and legal con-	
straints associated with the creation of partnerships, especially cluster structures or energy coop-
eratives. They are ter	ritorially limited initiatives and the objectives of their activities should be 	
defined around local needs and opportunities. The effectiveness of partnerships depends on the 
rational and effective use of the potential: locally available energy resources, 	energy infrastruc-	
ture, renewable energy sources, innovation, entrepreneurship in the area of energy generation, 
transmission, distribution and consumption management. The networking of partners and thus 
the organisation of partnerships in the bio	-waste and	 biogas sector in general is a problem. These 	
are indirectly due to a number of other conditions and barriers identified, but also directly in or-
ganisational terms due to difficulties in obtaining information and data and thus contacts. An iden-
tified diffi	culty is the lack of available databases, the lack of platforms for relationship building by 	
potential investors and the coordination of biogas development by the administration. Overcom-
ing difficulties in mapping business partners and stakeholders in gene	ral is important to build 	
awareness of the potential of the bio	-waste and biogas market.	 	
3.4	 	Social barriers	 	
The most difficult barrier to overcome can sometimes be the social one 	- the reluctance of local 	
communities to have investments built in their vicinit	y. Despite the potential benefits of biogas 	
plants, people do not agree to the construction of investments in their surroundings due to po-
tential nuisances, especially odours (the NIMBY phenomenon).	 However, it should be noted that 	
thanks to developments 	in biotechnology, various technologies and substances are being intro-	
duced that significantly reduce the environmental impact of biogas investments.	 Recently in Po-	
land, as a result of increased investor interest in the construction of biogas plants, there 	has been 	
a noticeable increase in negative public perception. A very important measure to overcome this 
barrier is the reliability and transparency of the biogas plant decision	-making and approval pro-	
cess, which must include public participation. In additi	on, information and education campaigns

Opportunities fo	r producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	44	 	
 
targeting different stakeholder groups play an important role in order to raise awareness of bio-
gas plant operation and public acceptance of this type of investment.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	45	 	
 	
4	 	Opportunities and best practice	 	
The construction 	of a biogas plant, depending on the scale of the project, can support the in-	
vestor's energy self	-sufficiency, but also bring benefits to a wider range of consumers. Biogas 	
plants can 	process	 different substrates and the multiplicity of directions in which 	biogas can be 	
used opens up many possibilities for development. The chapter discusses examples of various 
investments from Poland and European countries, which present development opportunities and 
good practice in investment implementation.	 	
4.1	 	Examples from 	other regions 	in Poland 	 	
4.1.1	 	Tychy	-Urbanowice Wastewater Treatment Plant (Tychy, Silesian Voivode-	
ship)	 	
The Tychy	-Urbanowice Wastewater Treatment Plant stands out from other municipal wastewater 	
treatment plants in Poland and even in the European Union, primari	ly due to its innovative tech-	
nology enabling total energy self	-sufficiency of 194% (as of 2019) and the powering of the nearby 	
Water Park with surplus energy. The Tychy Water Park was put into operation in 2018, fully pow-
ered with biogas produced through s	ludge fermentation by the Tychy Wastewater Treatment 	
Plant. Although the wastewater treatment plant had been producing biogas since 2006 and was 
energy self	-sufficient by 2010, its subsequent upgrades, including the implementation of pro-	
cesses for co	-diges	ting sewage sludge with biodegradable waste (at first with waste whey, later 	
expanding its catalog	ue	 of accepted biodegradable waste) and refining the produced biogas, al-	
lowed the treatment plant to increase the amount of biogas produced by 4 million 	cubic	 meters	 	
between 2009 and 2018 and 	to achieve such a high energy potential that it was able to meet the 	
demand of a second, very energy	-intensive public facility. The still obtained surpluses are sold to 	
the city's power grid and provide an additional sourc	e of income for 	Regionalne Centrum Gospo-	
darki Wodno	-Ściekowej S.A. (	RCGW SA	). 	
RCGW SA is the company that manages the Tychy	-Urbanowice Wastewater Treatment Plant, lo-	
cated in the southeastern part of the city of Tychy in Silesia Province. The company is 100	% owned 	
by the City of Tychy. The wastewater treatment plant accepts wastewater from the whole city, 
handling sewage both from its residents and its industrial plants, including Tyskie Browary 
Książęce 	(part of Kompania Piwowarska 	- the 	largest brewer in 	Poland 	owned by Asahi Europe & 	
=nternational in the structure of Hapan’s Asahi Group	) and the Fiat Auto Poland car factory, among 	
others.	 	
The average inflow of wastewater is 	32,731 	cubic	 meters	/d with a P.E. of 171,878. It is a mechan-	
ical	-biological type treatment plant with chemical support for phosphorus reduction. Raw 	
wastewater flows into the treatment plant via four interceptors, where there is no partition be-
tween industrial and municipal 	wastewater. Both types of 	wastewaters	 from all four interceptors 	
reach the 	grating 	hall in a single stream. At a further stage, during mechanical treatment, the 	
wastewater passes through sand traps, where after separation of its organic part, the sand is

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	46	 	
 
recovered and used for the company's own purposes as its good quality has allowed the revoca-
tion of its waste status. Wastewater later passes through the biological part of the treatment 	– 	
first through a sequence of C	-TECH technology reactors (patented by 	the Austrian company SFC 	
UMWELTTECHNIK GmbH.), then through the activated sludge chambers, after which the treated 
and clarified wastewater is released into the nearby river Gostynia.	 Finally, the pre	-sludge and 	
surplus sludge disposal stage is carried out	 by means of an anaerobic stabilization process, with 	
the sludge section of the treatment plant equipped with an airtight biofilter system that cleans 
the air of pollutants and odo	urs before it is released into the atmosphere. First, the sludge is 	
thickene	d to 5	-6% d.m., and then directed to two separate digesters with a total volume of 	11,000 	
cubic	 meters	, where methane fermentation of the sludge takes place under mesophilic condi-	
tions (38°C). This sludge is later dewatered and, if necessary, hygienized wi	th lime; the resulting 	
stabilized waste is taken off	-site and transferred to external entities. The biogas obtained from 	
the fermentation process is first desulfurized using adsorbers filled with turf ore, then temporarily 
stored in a membrane and "wet" ta	nk that have 	6370 	cubic	 meters	 and 	2000 	cubic	 meters	 in 	
volume respectively. The produced biogas undergoes a carbon dioxide purification process at the 
Biogas Purification Station (Stacja Oczyszczania Biogazu, SOB) thanks to technology implemented 
by T4B E	KOTECHNOLOGIE, thus increasing the methane content of biogas from 45% to about 	
70%. A portion of the gas is burned on site in three generators (two with an electrical output of 
345 kW and a thermal output of 531 kW each, one with an electrical output of 40	0 kW and a 	
thermal output of 394 kW) so as to provide the whole plant with 100% of its energy needs (ther-
mal for heating the digesters and the plant’s buildings, electrical for powering its machinery) and 
any excess is sold to an external power distributor	. The rest of the obtained biogas is compressed 	
and transferred via a 6	-kilometer pipeline to the Tychy Water Park, built in 2018 by RCGW SA in 	
relation to the expansion of the sludge treatment facilities and the ensuing increase in biogas and 
energy produ	ction. Biogas flaring takes place only in a situation of overflow, in which a backup 	
low	-temperature gas boiler with a capacity of 895 kW would prove insufficient.	 The biogas pro-	
duction at the treatment plant saves 77,000 tonnes of coal per year, which, in	 terms of atmos-	
pheric pollution, results in a reduction of 770 	tonnes	 of particulate matter, 154,000 tonnes of 	
carbon dioxide, more than a tonne of sulphur and 161	 tonnes	 of nitrogen. 	For the implementation 	
of such innovative green solutions, RCGW SA was a	warded the EMAS Awards in 2015 by the Eu-	
ropean Commission (thus becoming the first Polish recipient of this award) and received a nomi-
nation for the European Business Award for the Environment (EBAE) as well as numerous awards 
in business and eco	-friendlin	ess competitions (Eco	-laurels of the Polish Chamber of Ecology, Na-	
tional Ecological Competition “Friendly to the Environment”, “New =mpulse” award, etc.).	 	
4.1.2	 	Miejski Zakład Komunalny Sp. z o.o. w Stalowej Woli (Stalowa Wola, Pod-
karpackie Voivodeship)	 	
The Muni	cipal Utilities Company (MZK) in Stalowa Wola deals expertly and comprehensively with 	
all kinds of municipal utilities 	– within the company there are such divisions as the Water and 	
Sewage Division, Mechanical	-Biological Processing of Municipal Waste Divis	ion, Waste Transport 	
Division, City Cleaning Division, Thermal Power Division, Urban Green Spaces Division, Waste Dis-
posal Division, Wastewater Treatment Division and even a Public Transport Division. This allows 
for the integrated management of the city's	 technical infrastructure. In addition, there are two 	
wastewater treatment plants in Stalowa Wola: the Central Wastewater Treatment Plant (COŚ) 	-

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	47	 	
 
which accepts industrial wastewater and is managed by HSW 	- Wodociągi Sp. z o.o., and a Mu-	
nicipal Wastewater T	reatment Plant (MOŚ) 	- which accepts municipal wastewater, handled by 	
MZK	. T	reated wastewater from both plants is later discharged into the San River via a common 	
discharge collector.	 It is the cooperation of the above	-mentioned divisions that ensures an e	ffi-	
cient closed	-loop management of the city and its waste. What	 is more, the Municipal Mechanical 	
and Biological Waste Treatment Plant and the Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant, which pro-
duce biogas, together with the Energy Recovery Facility, which dea	ls with the process of thermal 	
transformation of the energy fraction of municipal waste, provide heat and electricity for the 
MZK's own needs and those of the city's residents.	 	
In operation since 1993, the Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant underwent mod	ernization 	
between 2006 and 2009, during which it was equipped with two Separate Fermentation Cham-
bers (WKF), where anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge by mesophilic bacteria takes place. The 
stabilized sludge is dewatered, hygienized and stored. The biog	as captured from this process con-	
tains from 55 to 60% methane; after desulfurization, it is burned in two generators, each with an 
electric power 	capacity 	of 104 kW and a thermal power 	capacity 	of 154 kW. The Municipal 	
Wastewater Treatment Plant also occas	ionally provides additional services in the form of pro-	
cessing and disposal of post	-production waste from the dairy, brewing and distilling, sugar and 	
bakery industries, and disposes of contraband alcohol at the request of tax and customs author-
ities.	 	
The 	Municipal Waste Mechanical and Biological Processing Facility in Stalowa Wola (ZMBPOK) 	
aims primarily to reduce the amount of biodegradable waste sent to the Stalowa Wola landfill, 
managed by MZK’s Waste Disposal Facility. Approximately 60,000 tons of muni	cipal waste arrive 	
at ZMBPOK annually, from which 3 million kWh of electricity and heat are produced after its or-
ganic fraction is separated on the Sorting Line and fermented. Anaerobic stabilization takes place 
in a digester, to which a biogas tank is con	nected, along with a purification and storage module. 	
On the other hand, in another part of ZMBPOK there is an aerobic stabilization module, which 
consists of 6 compost tunnels with an air purification plant and a compost maturation yard. All 
the above pro	cesses also yield a wide range of recycled, secondary materials, the sale of which is 	
offered by ZMBPOK as part of its additional services. These include paper and cardboard, metal 
and plastic packaging, a soil conditioner "Glebowitka" that can be used in 	agriculture and horti-	
culture, as well as a pseudo	-compost intended for the biological reclamation of landfills.	 	
4.1.3	 	Zakład Unieszkodliwiania Odpadów Komunalnych „Orli Staw” (Prażuchy 
Nowe, Wielkopolskie Voivodeship)	 	
The opening of a biogas plant in Prażuchy No	we near the city of Kalisz took place in 2023. Previ-	
ously equipped only with a sorting plant, composting plant and landfill, the “Orli Staw” waste 
treatment plant, which has existed at the site since 2006, has been upgraded with a bio	-waste 	
methane digesti	on plant with a target capacity of up to 30,000 tons per year. This facility handles 	
the municipal waste of more than 300,000 residents from 23 cities and municipalities in the 
Wielkopolska and Łódź provinces. The Municipal Association of Municipalities "C	lean City, Clean 	
Commune", whose members are also the target recipients of the service, is responsible for its 
construction. The cost of the investment was about 150 million PLN, financed partly from the 
Association’s own funds and partly from EU funds.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	48	 	
 
Th	e new plant is one of the first in Poland designed for continuous processing of selectively col-	
lected municipal bio	-waste into biogas. Both garden bio	-waste (cut grass, leaves) and kitchen 	
waste (peelings, expired food, swill, liquid fats) will be accepted	. It is also innovative in terms of 	
the technology used: dry, horizontal, continuous, thermophilic (55°C)	. STRABAG Umwelttechnik 	
is responsible for the design of this new technology called STRABAG LARAN Plug Flow. Annual 
biogas production will reach more than 1 million cubic meters of biogas, and in the long term, 
biomethane production is planned. As of now, b	iogas is burned in a 	560	-kW	 cogeneration unit, 	
producing 4,500 MWh of electricity and a similar amount of heat annually. This makes ZUOK self	-	
sufficient in energy from now on. The obtained electricity will be used entirely on site, whereas 
thermal energy, 	after covering the 	plant's needs, will be resold to external entities. In addition to 	
energy, the fermentation process will also produce post	-ferment 	that	, like the "HUM	-OS" com-	
post currently produced by ZUOK, will be sold as an effective soil conditioner.	 	
4.2	 	Examples from Norway 	 	
Norway differs from most other European countries by having a very limited gas infrastructure. 
This makes 	injection into 	the	 existing natural gas network, which is common in all countries with 	
gas networks, less relevant in Norway. 	In many countries, biogas has also been used for electricity 	
production. In Norway, the combination of low electricity prices and an already high share of 
renewable energy sources has made this application less widespread	. There is a Norwegian mar-	
ket for li	quid and compressed bio	-methane, used as fuel for heavy vehicles such as buses and 	
trailers, but this requires 	upgrading of the biogas.	 	
Upgrading biogas to bio	-methane can be a costly process and requires a minimum amount of 	
biogas produced to be economica	lly viable. In order to produce enough biogas to justify an up-	
grading facility the biogas plant would need a certain amount of substrate to go into production. 
Den Magiske Fabrikken ("the Magical Factory"), a biogas plant in Vestfold County, Norway, uses 
household food waste and animal manure from local farms as substrates in its production. This 
serves as an excellent example of how industrial cooperation can foster profitable biogas and bio	-	
methane production.	 	
Due to few 	designated	 applications of biogas 	in Norway	 it is	 important to 	exploit all resources and 	
by-products of biogas production that can be made into valuable products. 	Veas wastewater 	
treatment plant 	has designed 	its	 business plan 	to ensure that 	all resources derived from biogas 	
production are 	effectively utilized to enhance the plant’s economy	. 	
4.2.1	 	Den magiske fabrikken («The magical fac	tory)	 	
Den magiske fabrikken 	(DMF) 	receives sorted household food waste from the 17 municipalities 	
that own the plant (approximately 1.2 million inhabitants).	 The fo	od waste is delivered to the 	
plant by Vesar, a municipal	 company that 	provides solutions in waste management and recycling	. 	
Vesar also operates the plant’s educational centre, which provides tours of the plant and educa-
tional material for the county’s stud	ents. 	Households collect 	food waste in bags	. Once at the plant 	
the food waste is transported to a grinder that rips the bags open and grinds the food waste. The 
waste is then transported to a pulper where process water is added, and the waste is further

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	49	 	
 
grounded. The mass goes through a sieve plate which removes larger particles, such as plastic, 
pieces of metal and glass. 	 	
The farms in the county deliver animal manure to the biogas facility and receives bio	-fertilizer in 	
return. In 2023 DMF received 78	 000	 tonnes of animal manure and produced approximately 	
150	 000 tonnes bio	-fertilizer used in food production in Vestfold County. 	The manure from cattle 	
and pigs is transported to the biogas plant in a 	truck	 and is pumped into a storage facility. 	At the 	
storage facility, the manure is put in a mixing tank and is then transported to a hydro cyclone that 
removes sand and other heavier particles. 	 	
The food waste and manure are mixed together in a buffer tank and is then sanitized for one hour 
at 70 degr	ees Celsius. The substrate is then distributed to the two digesters 	of the plant. Biofer-	
tilizer is drained from the digesters and goes to storage. Raw biogas is extracted from the top of 
the digesters and transported to the upgrading plant	. As of 2023, the	 upgrading plant produces 	
over 10 million cubic metres of bio	-methane yearly, which equates to approximately 100 giga	-	
watt hours. 	The bio	-methane is	 sold and distributed as compressed biogas (CBG) and liquefied 	
biogas (LBG) by Air Liquide Skagerak AS. Air 	Liquide Skagerak operates a distribution network that 	
supplies gas to both the industrial and transportation sectors.	 	
4.2.2	 	Veas	 wastewater 	treatment plant	 	
Veas is Norway’s largest wastewater treatment facility. 	It clean	s the wastewater from 	over 	
800	 000 citizen	s in 	the surrounding muni	cipalities: 	Oslo, Asker, Bærum, a	nd Nesodden	. An im-	
portant part of Veas’ business plan is to see wastewater as a resource and a raw material	 for 	
industrial use, rather than 	as 	a waste problem. 	Veas’ 	long	-term	 goal is to generate enough 	reve-	
nue	 from the wastewater 	to cover 	the operation of the treatment. 	 	
Veas	’ organization and business plan	 	
Veas was established by the municipalities in 19	76 to build, own and operate the	ir shared 	
wastewater	 treatment plant.	 To 	ensure that the 	fee each resident in the owner municipalities 	
pays Veas to provide these services is fairly 	priced, Veas 	has been operat	ing	 by the full cost prin-	
ciple. 	Full cost is the total cost of producing a 	service	, and t	he total fees 	the municipality charges 	
the 	residents	 for the service	 cannot	 exceed this cost. This means that the 	municipalities	, and 	
thereby Veas,	 cannot 	generate a profit from the water and wastewater services.	 Veas saw this as 	
a barrier 	in the further development of 	their business plan and 	in their goal to fully utilize the 	
water resources. 	 	
In 2022, Veas 	changed their 	business entity type from a	n inter	-municipal co	operation	 operated 	
according to the full cost principle	, to a 	joint	-stock	 company	. Veas AS is the 	holding company	 with 	
three subsidiaries: Veas 	Marked (Veas Market), Veas 	Selvkost (Veas 	Full Cost	), and Veas Næring-	
spark (	Veas Business Park	). Veas Selvkost 	delivers the water and wastewater services to the mu-	
nicipalities by operating the wastewater treatm	ent plant and the 	associated infrastructure.	 Th	is 	
subsidiary is still run 	according to the full cost principle, ensuring as low 	fees 	as possible 	for the 	
residents.	 The main purpose of 	Veas Marke	t is to 	sell products 	obtained	 from the wastewater 	
treatment and contribute to the circular economy. This subsidiary is 	operated on commercial

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	50 	
 
principles and without guarantees from the municipalities	 that own Veas AS	. Veas business 	Park 	
owns 	and manages 	all property	 for Veas AS. 	 	
Liqui	fied	 biogas (LBG)	 	
Veas has produced biogas from 	its	 wastewater resources since 1995	, initially 	generating heat and 	
electricity for internal consumption using a gas engine. 	In 2017, 	the company	 made the decision 	
to 	construct a biogas upgrading plant. T	he upgrading plant was put into operation in 2020, and 	
Veas Market has been responsible for the operation since 2022.	 	
The biogas is transported from the wastewater treatment facility to the upgrading plant where 
the 	CO	2 is removed,	 and b	io-methane	 is produced	. The gas is then liquified, making liquid bio-	
methane (LBM), also referred to as liquid biogas (LBG), which is suitable as fuel for buses and 
trucks.	 Veas Market 	is responsible for selling	 LBG to the market through a distributor. 	 	
Bio	-CO2	 	
In the up	grading plant, 	CO	2 is separated from biomethane. Veas is now assessing how best to 	
exploit CO	2 as a resource and has established a subsidiary of Veas Marked for th	is purpose	, HOOP 	
CO	2. HOOP 	CO	2 is currently looking into 	both carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon cap-	
ture and utilization (CCU) technology. 	 	
Veas Soil	 	
The 	sludge extracted during the 	wastewater 	treatment process contains nutrients that can 	im-	
prove soil quality and be used as fertilizer. 	“Veas soil” is ma	de from sewage sludge that has been 	
stabilized, sanitized,	 and mixed with lime. It also contains organic material, phosphorus, and ni-	
trogen, which can help boost crop yields. Today, Veas soil is used as a fertilizer and soil amend-
ment on grain cultivation 	areas across much of Eastern Norway. The product is produced in ac-	
cordance with fertilizer regulations and is a registered product with the Norwegian Food Safety 
Authority.	 Veas	 produce	s nearly 40	 000 tons of Veas	-soil each year. 	 	
Ammonium sulfate	 	
Ammonium is often present in wastewater 	after	 the decomposition of organic matter. Veas 	uses 	
the ammonium to produce sustainable ammonium sulfate, a chemical compound that can be 
used as raw material 	to produce	 chemical fertilizers or sprayed directly onto	 to fields as a soil 	
improver. Additionally, it can be used to boost the nitrogen content in manure and other types 
of natural fertilizer. 	Removing 	ammonium from the 	waste	water 	through	 simple filtration can be 	
difficult	, necessitating the use of an acid to	 effectively precipitate ammonium sulfate. Previously, 	
Veas used 	an acid with a fossil origin, but now 	Acinor	, a company that 	import	s and sells chemical 	
products,	 prov	ides them with industrial	ly 	recycled 	sulfuric acid, 	further 	improving Veas’ carbon 	
footprint.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO	 area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	51	 	
 
District heating	 	
The 	sewage and wastewater transported from Oslo municipality to Veas 	contribute to 	heat	ing	 	
approximately 13	 000 	apartments. In the tunnel 	that transports wastewater from Oslo to Veas 	
the energy companies 	Oslofjord Varme 	(“Oslofjord :eat”) 	and Hafslund Oslo Celsio extract heat 	
from the wastewater. The sewage water initially maintains a temperature between 10 and 15 
degrees Celsius. In the tunnel between Oslo and the facility in Slemmestad, the wastewater 
pa	sses through a large heat pump system, which extracts some of the heat and redirects it back 	
into the district heating network. Veas 	also use	s heat from the wastewater 	in 	its	 own 	facility. 	 	
4.3	 	Examples from other countries 	 	
Copenhill waste	-to	-energy, Denmark	 	
As mentioned in chapter 	3.4	, social acceptance 	can often be a barrier for 	energy	-related infra-	
structure	, where facilities are often met by “not in my backyard” 	(NI	MBY) 	attitudes. 	The Copenhill 	
waste	-to-energy plant in Copenhagen, Denmark, serves as an illustrative example of how such 	
facilities 	can gain 	widespread	 social 	acceptance and 	even 	take a 	leading role in developing 	a res-	
idential area. 	 	
The Copenhill facilit	y is a 	relatively large 	waste	-to-energy plant that ha	s the	 capacity to convert 	
roughly 560	 000 tonnes of waste each year into electricity and heat. 	Approximately one fourth of 	
the plant’s 	feedstock originates from waste from local households	, with the remainder coming 	
from industrial and commercial 	waste	. 	
The plant 	is located 	in a suburban area of Copenhagen	, just	 200 meters from 	nearest residential 	
building. 	The 	location is very beneficial from an economic point of view. 	It is close 	to the 	feedstock 	
sources	, which 	reduces transportation costs and CO	2 emissions	, but it also exploit	s the existing 	
district heating network 	to save costs. 	However,	 being in	 an area with existing residential build-	
ings and more planned, it was prone to NIMBY	-problems. 	Two important lessons can be gained 	
from the 	project	: inclusive design and 	having a good dialogue 	and inclusion of local communities. 	 	
The architectural tender for the plant stated that the 	facilities	 should be made 	accessible to the 	
public. 	The	 idea was that the plant should 	not be built as an isolated unit, but as an integral part 	
of the community	, with no barriers 	between it	self	 and its surrounding area. 	 	
The winning 	proposal included a multi	-purpose 	facility 	that offers recreational opp	ortuni	ties	 for 	
the public. 	The open design includes a 	rooftop with 	a park	, an artificial ski slope made from plastic	, 	
operational throughout the year	, and a 	rooftop 	bar. 	In addition, t	he side of the building is adorned 	
with an 	80	-meter	-tall	 climbing wall	. The project 	invited 	around 30 local sports organizations to 	
collaborate in the development of these recreational 	areas	, further highlighting its community 	
engagement.

Opportunities fo	r producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	52	 	
 
Figure 	4.1 	The Copenhill power plant.	 	
 	
Source:	 	Max Mestour and Amelie Lo	uys.	 	
Moreover, 	the 	construction plans	 were	 included in 	the 	municipal plan	 such that all information 	
was	 openly available	 for the public to see and provide feedback. 	This transparency and the ensu-	
ing dialogue with the closest residents' association helped in addressing any potential concerns 
from the outset.	 The project also 	put emphasis 	on providing good in	formation to locals about any 	
events that might affect them. 	 	
The Copenhill facilit	y is an exemplary model showing that with thoughtful desi	gn	, inclusive plan-	
ning and transparent communication, 	energy facilities 	can overcome the typical barriers to social 	
acceptance	 and serve communities 	creative ways.	 	
BSR biogas plant in Berlin	-Ruhleben, Germany	 	
Europe is growing in terms of biogas and biomethane production. Germany has the highest num-
ber of biogas plants in Europe (more than 11,000 biogas plants in 2022) 	and the second highest 	
number of biomethane plants behind France (242 biomethane plants). Agricultural substrates 
remain the basis for biogas and biomethane production there, but there are successful efforts to 
use bio	-waste on a larger scale. The main use	 of the produced raw biogas is the generation of 	
electricity in power and CHP plants, 	there are other uses as well	. 	
A comprehensive example of biogas production that fits in with the idea of a circular economy is 
the Berlin municipal waste management compa	ny (Berliner Stadtreinigung, BSR). Located in Ber-	
lin's Ruhleben district, the company digests more than 70,000 tonnes of selectively collected or-
ganic waste from households every year to produce climate	-neutral biogas.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	53	 	
 
The organic waste	-to-energy plant in 	Berlin produces biogas using a dry fermentation process. 	
The choice of process is based on the properties of the available substrates: the collected kitchen 
organic waste has a water content of between 58 and 65 percent.	 	
Once purified, the resulting biogas	 consists of 98% methane, making its chemical composition 	
identical to natural gas and, after appropriate processing, it can be fed into the gas grid. The 
annual production of raw biogas is more than 6,000,000 m	3, resulting in approximately 3,000,000 	
m3 pe	r year of biomethane. Currently, biogas is used to refuel gas	-powered waste	-collecting 	
trucks at the company's own petrol stations (more than 60% of the entire fleet). 	 	
Biogas is also used to produce electricity and heat through combustion. The quantities 	of energy 	
obtained make it possible to supply more than 5% of Berlin households with sustainable energy. 
The resulting steam from combustion is transferred by pipelines to the nearby Reuter power 
plant, where the steam is converted into electricity and the	 heat is fed into the district heating 	
network supplying the city. The indicated local cooperation saves fossil resources (coal) and re-
duces the impact on the climate.	 	
It should be noted that, like any investment, the one in Ruhleben encountered problems. 	The 	
location of the biogas plant close to housing estates and other urban infrastructure was problem-
atic at the planning stage of construction, when public resistance was encountered. Conducting 
an extensive information and education campaign had the desir	ed good effect. At the design, 	
implementation and also operation stage of the project, the role played by residents and proper 
recycling in the whole waste treatment process is emphasised.	 	
It is worth remembering that there is not just one right way to dev	elop the biogas sector in all 	
countries and local markets. The Berlin example shows the multiplicity of directions in which bi-
ogas can be used and the possibilities for cooperation between companies. In addition to the 
production of electricity, it is poss	ible to produce thermal energy, green gases for supply to the 	
grid or liquefaction into bio	-LNG or bio	-CNG, the use of recovered CO	2. 	
4.4	 	Local ideas	 	
There are already several facilities in the MOFTMO where bio	-waste and other substrates suitable 	
for the biog	as plant's 	anaerobic digestion	 process are managed. The existence of such facilities 	
does not exclude the possibility of building new biogas plants. Indeed, the existing biogas plants 
are small and micro installations which 	do not 	make use of the 	full 	biogas potential in the 	area	. 	
As one of the first installations in the 	area	, a biogas plant in Sobawiny (Opoczno municipality) was 	
established in 2014. The privately	-owned agro	-industrial biogas plant operates in the vicinity of a 	
meat 	processing 	factory. 	The main input to the biogas plant is a mixture of substrates: maize 	
silage, slaughterhouse waste and 	expired	 food. The installation allows the plant to meet its elec-	
tricity and heat demand. Surplus electricity is sold to the grid.	 	
Bio	-waste in the 	area	 is also managed in more traditional installations. =n the village of Różanna, 	
located in the municipality of Opoczno, there is a composting plant where biodegradable waste 
from 	for instance	 public greenery and plant waste from municipal markets is composted.	 The	 	
waste is deposited on a composting plate and aerated. The mature compost is sieved and stored 
on the compost maturation plate. The resulting compost is used 	solely 	in slope shaping at the

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	54	 	
 
landfill	. The composting plant is relatively small. The plant p	roduces negligible amounts of biogas 	
- too small for energy storage and combustion. The biogas is therefore currently flared.	 	
In the municipality of Rokiciny, located at the western end of the MOFTMO, there are agricultural 
microbiogas plants at farms in the villages of Łaznowska Wola (22 kW capacity), Kolonia Łaznów 
(33 kW capacity) and Michałów (22 kW capacity). All the install	ations indicated are compact, con-	
tainerised agricultural microbiogas plants 	producing	 biogas from manure. The microbiogas plants 	
are technically and technologically integrated into the on	-farm dairy farming infrastructure. These 	
installations have a measurable environmental effect 	- in addition to the use of renewable energy, 	
the odour nui	sance associated with the resulting manure and the emissions of methane, nitrogen 	
oxides and hydrogen sulphide into the atmosphere are reduced locally. Another advantage of 
agricultural microbiogas plants and the processing of manure is the resulting diges	tate, which is 	
a good and environmentally safe fertiliser with better parameters than the original manure, as it 
does not acidify soils due to the ammonium form of the nitrogen it contains. The electricity and 
heat produced by the combustion of biogas meet	s the farms' own needs, and the surplus elec-	
tricity is fed into the low	-voltage grid and used locally.	 	
Biogas plants are also located in the close vicinity of MOFTMO. There are two biogas plants in the 
rural municipality of Rawa Mazowiecka. The first is a 	typical agricultural biogas plant in Konopnica 	
with a relatively large capacity of 1.99 MW. The main substrate in the plant is apple juice pressing 
residues and maize silage, with other agricultural raw materials completing the mix. So far, the 
plant has g	enerated electricity and heat for its own use and the local market. In 2020, the biogas 	
plant was taken over by a new investor with plans to expand and convert it into a biomethane 
plant. The second example is a municipal biogas plant for sewage sludge, lo	cated in Żydomice as 	
part of the local wastewater treatment plant 	- Rawskie Wodociągi i Kanalizacja Sp. z o.o.. Due to 	
the small amount of sludge, the biogas plant has a small capacity (0.25 MW). Thanks to the co-
generation of electricity and heat produced,	 the energy needs of the treatment plant derived 	
from renewable sources are optimised. The third biogas plant is located in the town of Rawa 
Mazowiecka. This is also an agricultural biogas plant, located on the site of a meat processing 
plant where animal 	by	-products are processed. The 1 MW installation reduces primary energy 	
consumption and increases the plant's energy security.	 	
4.5	 	Conclusion	 	
Success stories	 like the 	Tychy	-Urbanowice Wastewater Treatment Plant	, the two plants in 	
Stalowa Wola	 and the 	biogas pl	ant in Prażuchy Nowe 	show that 	technological	 barriers and infra-	
structure challenges may be overcome	 in Polan	d. 	The plants are economically sustainable and 	
contribute to reaching	 environmental policy goals	. They also perform important social functions, 	
incl	uding ecological and climate education.	 Seemingly "technical" investments are therefore mul-	
tifunctional.	 	
The 	Tychy	-Urbanowice Wastewater Treatment Plant	 and the 	Copenhill waste	-to-energy energy 	
plant in Denmark show that 	a biogas plant can gain widespread social acceptance through deliv-	
ering services 	that 	the public appreciates 	(water park in Tychy, 	ski slope and park in Denmark)	. 	
The Magical Factory in Norway 	and the BSR biogas plant in Germany 	show how 	upgrading to 	
biome	thane can be done in an economically and technologically feasible way	, while the Veas

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	55	 	
 
wastewater treatment plant 	in Norway 	show	s how the business plan can be optim	ized for maxi-	
mum profitability and social impact. Both the Norwegian plants run extensive edu	cation and out-	
reach programs, which may be another learning point. 	Meanwhile the local initiatives and ideas 	
in the MOFTMO show that there are several 	small	- and micro scale biogas units in the area, many 	
of which are 	agricultural biomass facilities or ass	ociated with 	the food industry.	 	
Furthermore, the analysis of the Norwegian experience shows that changes in the energy market 
and increasingly demanding climate conditions are taken into account in planned investments. 
The climate	-friendly aspect is a stro	ng argument in biogas plant investments in Norway.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	56	 	
 	
5	 	B	iogas 	at the Tomas	zow Ma-	
z	owiecki	 wastewater 	treatment 	
plant	 –	 a business case	 	
5.1	 	Biogas production in two phases	 	
The mapping of available feedstock for biogas production	 in chapter	 2.1	 and assessment of biogas 	
potential	 in chapter	 2.4	 indicate that the MOFTMO has a significant potential for biogas produc-	
tion from biomass and bio	-waste. 	The city of Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 is an optimal investment 	
location 	for biogas production	 due to the availability of substrate from the municipal 	and indus-	
trial 	sector.	 The potential substrates are sludge from 	the 	wastewater treatment plant 	in To-	
maszów Maz	owiecki	, municipal bio	-waste (food and kitchen waste	 if separately collected	) and 	
biodegradable industrial waste	. In terms of 	agricultural 	waste	, the 	munic	ipalities	 of 	Rokiciny, 	
Rzeczyca, Ujazd and 	rural municipality of Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 have the 	highest 	potential for 	
biogas production	 from plant and in particular animal biomass	. Due to the regulations that dis-	
tinguish between biogas and agricultural biogas 	outlined in	 chapter	 1, the 	options	 for biogas pro-	
duction in different sectors (munici	pal, industrial, agricultural) should be regarded separately. 	 	
In 	the 	MOFTMO	, the 	local governments 	have signed 	an 	agreement 	aimed at ensuring the sustain-	
able development of the	ir municipalities.	 Actions to promote renewable energy sources, includ-	
ing 	biogas production from biomass and bio	-waste, will contribute to achieving sustainable de-	
velopment goals in the MOFTMO.	 	
To realize	 the biogas potential	, it is important to outline the business case for 	biogas	 production. 	
The subject of this chapter 	is to p	resent the possibilities 	for	 biogas production from the stream 	
of substrates coming from the municipal 	and industrial 	sector of the MOFTMO.	 Two phases will 	
be analysed	. 	
Phase 1: 	Construction of a biogas plant at the wastewater treatment plant in To-	
maszów 	Maz	owiecki	 with	 sewage sludge 	as a	 substrate	 	
The 	Water and Sewage Management Plant	 in Tomaszów 	Mazowiecki	 is preparing to implement 	
an investment consisting of comprehensive modernization of sewage sludge management. This 
will allow for the stabilization o	f sludge in 	anaerobic digestion	, supported by 	a thermal hydrolysis 	
process and the production of electricity and heat from biogas.	 The substrates for biogas produc-	
tion will be sewage sludge generated during wastewater treatment in the plant	, grease trap 	
sludge,	 and sewage sludge delivered from nearby wastewater treatment plants.	 	
The construction of a biogas plant would enable the production of biogas and its use for energy 
production. This would 	allow 	the 	plant to	: 	
 	limit the amount	 of sludge 	generated 	and 	reduc	e the cost of sludge management

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	57	 	
 
 	produc	e electricity and heat from biogas and 	thereby 	reduc	e the cost of energy	 at the plant	 	
 	use digestate 	to produce	 a soil	-improving product	 	
 	reduc	e GHG emissions	 	
Phase 2: 	Expansion of the biogas plant at the wastewater	 treatment plant in To-	
maszów Maz	owiecki	 to	 use biodegradable waste as a supplementary substrate	 	
Expansion of the biogas plant	 will allow	 the 	use	 of 	municipal 	bio	-waste	 (food/kitchen waste) 	and 	
industrial biodegradable waste	 from 	the 	MOFTMO for biogas production. In the 	assessment	, ad-	
dition of 	sludge from the wastewater treatment plants not included in the 	phase	 1 could 	is also	 	
included	. 	
The expansion will 	allow the plant to	: 	
 	produc	e more 	electricity and heat and further 	reduc	e of the cost of energy 	 	
 	support 	mee	ting	 the 	local 	municipalities'	 waste recovery 	and recycling 	targets	 	
 	further 	reduc	e GHG emissions	. 	
5.2	 	Phase 1: Sewage sludge as substrate	 	
5.2.1	 	Sludge quantities and current treat	ment	 	
The wastewater treatment plant 	managed by Water	 and Sewage Management Plant in To-	
maszów Mazowiecki 	is located in the town Tomaszow Mazowiecki in Łódź Voivodeship, in central 	
Poland. The city has a population of 58	.8 thousand	. 	
The wastewater treatment plant was 	modernized	 between 2013 and 2016. 	The mode	rnization of 	
the treatment plant, completed in 2016, enabled the application of biological technology for the 
removal of biogenic compounds, automatic control and steering of the technological process, as 
well as the introduction of a final sludge treatmen	t process based on sludge 	thickening, 	dewater-	
ing	, and 	drying. 	 	
The plant 	was designed for 	a maximum 	hourly 	capacity of 1	,600	 cubic meters of wastewater	. In 	
terms of population 	equivalents, the maximum 	capacity 	is 126,940 PE	, however	, the actual loads 	
reach	 up to 180,000 PE. In 2015	-2022, on average, the amount of incoming wastewater was 3.74 	
million cubic meters per year	 (about 	427 cubic meters per hour)	, of which septic tanks delivered 	
6%	 (mainly from food processing plants)	.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	58 	
 
Figure 	5.1 	Amount of 	dry matter	 of sewage 	sludge	 produced in a ye	ar in WWTP in To-	
maszów Maz	owiecki	 	
 	
Source:	 	AL_PROJEKT (2023).	 	
In recent years between 2100	-2700 Mg of dry matter of sewage sludge have been produced 	an-	
nually (	Figure 	5.1). Until 2020, the generated sewage sludge was dewatered and transferred to 	
an external company for further treatment. Since 2021, the sludge has 	been dewatered and dried 	
at 130 degrees, and a soil improving product has been produced. A sudden increase in gas prices 
in 2022 caused the treatment plant to limit sludge drying and forced it to transfer unprocessed 
sludge directly after dewatering for fu	rther treatment.	 	
The characteristics of sewage sludge generated in the wastewater treatment plant are presented 
in Table 	5.1. 	
Table 	5.1 	Characteristics	 of sludge after thickening	 	
Data unit	 	Content of dry mass [%]	 	Content of dry organic mass 	[%	 	
of dry 	mass	] 	
Primary sludge	 	3.8	 	84.0	 	
Excess	, secondary	 sludge	 	4.9 	82.9	 	
Source:	 	AL_PROJEKT (2023).	 	
5.2.2	 	Current problems and 	possibilities	 	
There are several 	problems in 	the 	wastewater treatment plant operations	 in 	Tomaszow	 Ma-	
zowiecki	: 	
 	a large amount of sludge generated in the wastewater treatment process without the possi-
bility of reducing it in further 	processing before final dewatering and drying	 	
 	high load on the sewage line with delivered concentrated sewage	 	
 	high energy consumption of sludge 	process	ing	 when operating a sludge dryer	 	
 	increasing costs of sludge management	 	
0	
500
1 000
1 500
2 000
2 500
3 000	
2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	
Mg DM/year

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO	 area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	59	 	
 
 	lack of sludge stabilization when	 the sludge dryer is shut down	 	
 	decreasing possibilities for further sludge management	 	
 	lack of 	space	 for storage of dewatered or dried sludge	 	
The construction of a biogas plant could solve the identified problems.	 	
In 	phase 	1 the investment would	 consist 	of 	a modernization of the sewage treatment plant, al-	
lowing for:	 	
 	stabilization of sludge in the methane fermentation process supported by thermal	-pressure 	
hydrolysis and production of electricity and heat from biogas	 	
 	water recovery from treated sewage	 	
 	recovery	 of phosphorus in the form of struvite	 	
The outcome of the 	investment	 will be:	 	
1. Reconstruction and extension of the sludge treatment line as a sludge treatment facility 
with sludge 	sterilization	, biogas production and 	utilization	 (Task 1) and phosphorus reco	very 	
in the form of granulated struvite (Task 2) and treatment and disinfection of treated 
wastewater to recover water for 	industrial 	purposes 	(e.g., washing streets or watering 	
greenery) 	(Task 3),	 	
2. Expansion of the 	command	-and	-control	 system to include equ	ipment for the new sludge 	
line, phosphorus recovery and water recovery facilities,	 	
3. Construction of 	renewable energy	 installations 	(solar panels) 	with connection to the opera-	
tor's electrical grid.	 	
We focus here on item 1 and 2, which are necessary 	component	s of 	a biogas plant. 	By contrast 	
the construction of renewable energy	 installations 	is a separate decision.	 	
5.2.3	 	CAPEX and OPEX	 	
Construction of a biogas 	facility	 at the wastewater treatment plant gives 	several options for how 	
to utilize the biogas and treat the remaining digestate. 	The first 	analysed	 option (1A) 	involves	 	
us	ing	 the biogas to produce electricity and heat using a 	combined heat and power 	(CPH) system. 	
The electricity generated will 	then 	be u	sed on	-site to power the wastewater treatment and biogas 	
production, thereby replacing the electricity currently purchased from the grid. 	Part of the heat 	
is used on	-site. 	The digestate 	that remains as a byproduct of biogas production will be transported 	
to an external company for further treatment.	 In t	he second option (1B)	, a part of the biogas will 	
be used to dry and treat the digestate on	-site	. This also includes producing 	and selling 	a soil	-	
improving product. The 	remaining	 biogas will be used for combi	ned heat and electricity produc-	
tion,	 and the electricity 	and part of the heat 	will be utilised on	-site to 	run the wastewater treat-	
ment and biogas production.	 In t	he third option (1C)	, all biogas produced will be used for	 com-	
bined electricity and heat gener	ation. 	The digestate will still be treated within the wastewater 	
treatment plant, but 	by 	utilising	 gas from the grid. The soil	-improving product resulting from di-	
gestate tre	atment will be sold.

Opportunities fo	r producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	60	 	
 
Table 	5.2 	Options for 	phase 1	 	
Option	 1A 	Option	 1B 	Option	 1C 	
Biogas	 is used to produce 	elec-	
tricity	 and heat	, replacing elec-	
tricity from the grid; 	part of the 	
heat is used 	on	-site	; the diges-	
tate is treated by an external 	
company	. 	
Part of t	he biogas is used to 	dry 	
digestate and produce a soil	-im-	
proving product 	which is later 	
sold	. The remaining biogas is 	
used for electricity 	and heat 	pro-	
duction, 	replacing electricity 	
from the grid	; part of the heat is 	
used on	-site	. 	
Biogas is used for electricity 	and 	
heat 	production, replacing elec-	
tricity from the grid	; part of the 	
heat is used on	-site	. Digestate is 	
dried using 	gas fr	om the grid and 	
the soil	-improving product is 	
sold.	 
 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 	
The investment cost	, which is given in 	Table 	5.3, remains	 constant	 regardless of which 	of the 	
three options the	 wastewater treatment plant	 chooses	. The implementation and design cost 	con-	
sists of 	preparation of the tender	 estimated to 	600	 00	0 PLN 	and 3 million PLN 	in design work. 	
Material and construction cost 	entails all costs associated with the installation of the biogas	 facil-	
ity	 and the storage and treatment of digestate. 	The planned 	biogas 	facility	 will 	be located	 within 	
the boundaries of the 	land 	current	ly belonging to the wastewater treatment plant, including 	un-	
developed land	, such as 	green areas 	and	 paved areas used for manoeuvring or as storage yards.	 	
Development and 	adaptation	 of this land 	will amount to 3 mil	lion PLN.	 The existing 	wastewater 	
treatment 	facilit	y requires	 some 	changes and 	enhancements in order to connect it to the 	biogas 	
facility	. This	 work is estimated to cost 	2.5 million PLN.	 Electrical installations, control and meas-	
urement equipment and autom	ation of the biogas facility 	will cost 	3.5 million PLN, and the tech-	
nological start	-up costs are estimated to be 800	 000 PLN. 	The general contracting costs, such as 	
financial costs and 	guarantees, is set at 11.4 million PLN. 	 	
The total capital expenditure for all options in phase 1 is 	approximately 65.2 million PLN. 	This is 	
significantly higher than the CAPEX presented in chapter 1.4 due to the 	relatively	 high cost of 	
thermal hydrolysis unit 	that 	wastewater treatment plant is p	lanning to 	install	. 	
Table 	5.3 	CAPEX	 for all options in phase 1 (	in 	PLN)	 	 	
Option 	1A, 	1B and 	1C 	
Implementation	 and design cost	 	3 600 000	 	
Material	 and 	construction cost	 	40	 310 000	 	
Reconstruction of existin	g facilities	 and 	development cost	 	5 500 000	 	
Electrical installations and technological costs	 	4 430 000	 	
General contracting costs	 	11	 350 000	 	
Total	 	65 190 000	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on 	AL-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
The 	operational costs vary between the different options for phase 1. We assume that the 	
wastewater treatment plant 	would need the same amount of 	labour	, maintenance and electricity 	
for wastewater treatment regardless of which option they choose. 	The main diff	erence between 	
the options 	lay in the digestate treatment. In option 1A the digestate is treated by an external 	
company for	 estimated	 2.8 million PLN each year. In option 1B the digestate is dried and treated 	
by the wastewater treatment plant, but the cost of this treatment is 	set to as 	the plant	 use	s the 	
biogas 	it produce	s for the process. In option 1C the 	wastewater treatment plant buys gas from 	
the grid to treat the digestate, and the 	estimated 	cost of thi	s gas	 is 260 PLN per MW	h (May 2024)	,

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	61	 	
 
which	 amounts to approximately 1.6 million PLN per year.	 Following these differences in diges-	
tate treatment the operational expense for	 option 1A, 1B, and 1C totals to approximately 7.5 	
million, 	4.7 million and 6.3 mill	ion	 PLN	, respectively. 	 	
Table 	5.4 	OPEX	 for each option in phase 1 (	in 	PLN)	 	 	
Option 	1A 	Option 	1B 	Option 	1C 	
Labo	ur cost biogas facility	 	720 000	 	720 000	 	720 000	 	
Maintenance biogas facility	 	200 000	 	200 00	0 	200 	000	 	
Electricity for WWTP operation	 	3 811 500	 	3 811 500	 	3 811 500	 	
Digestate treatment by external company	 	2 800 000	 	- 	- 	
Digestate	 treatment at the plant	 	- 	- 	1 582 718	 	
Total	 	7 531 500	 	4 731 500	 	6 314 218	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
5.2.4	 	Resource evaluation	 	
In th	is first phase of the project, t	he main substrate 	to be	 used 	for	 biogas production is 	sewage 	
sludge. The sludge is 	categorized as either primary or secondary sludge. 	Primary sludge, 	also 	
known	 as raw slu	dge, 	is produced by 	allowing solids to settle by gravity in the primary 	tank. 	Sec-	
ondary sludge is 	a result of 	the 	biological treatment of 	wastewater and	 is thickened mechanically	. 	
After thickening, the sludge 	will b	e mixed	 and fed into 	the 	biogas	 production 	process	. Also, sew-	
age sludge from neighbouring wastewater treatment plants will be used in biogas production	: 	
approximately	 40% 	will be sourced from 	wastewater treatment plants	 outside MOFTMO	. The 	
final piece of	 substr	ate will be grease trap 	sludge.	 	
The proportion of sewage delivered by slurry tankers to the total volume of sewage flowing into 
the plant is approximately 	6%, which, considering the size of the plant, is a significant figure. This 	
wastewater comes from, among other things, the op	era	tion of food processing plants.	 	
The amounts of individual substrates planned for use in the biogas production process are pre-
sented in 	Table 	5.5. 	
Table 	5.5 	Substrates for the biogas production process	 	
Substrate	 	Amount 	 	Amount [Mg	 dry mass	/year]	 	
Primary sludge	 	30 	783 	cubic	 meters	/year	 	1 170	 	
Excess / s	econdary sludge 	 	37 	053 	cubic	 meters	/year	 	1 810	 	
Grease trap sludge	 	920 	cubic	 meters	/year	 	92	 	
Wastewater delivered by septic 
tanks	 	23 	686 	cubic	 meters	/year	 	474	 	
Sewage sludge from other 
wastewater treatment plants	 	2 511 Mg/year	 	452	 	
Total	 	 	3 998	 	
Source:	 AL-PROJEKT (2023).

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	62	 	
 	
5.2.5	 	Revenues and 	reduced expenses	 	
Tomaszów Mazo	wiecki	 wastewater treatment plant	 is planning	 to 	install	 a combined heat and 	
power (CHP) system in the first phase of their project. The CHP system use	s biogas to produce 	
heat and electricity	 simultaneously.	 The generated electricity and heat 	will be used 	on	-sit	e, for 	
both the wastewater treatment and biogas production.	 	
Electricity and heat	 	
The wastewater treatment plant consume	s 5.5 GWh of electricity annually	. The cost of this elec-	
tricity when purchased from the grid is	 693 PLN per MWh	 (May 2024)	, which totals 	to 3.8 million 	
PLN.	 In the 	biogas production	 process	, as well as 	in 	the	 electricity and heat generation	, additional 	
0.5 	GWh	 will be required 	annually.	 The anticipated electricity production from biogas is 3.1 	GWh	 	
per year, 	which gives 	a net 	electricity production 	of 	2.6 	GWh	 per year	. If the entirety of the pro-	
duced biogas is utili	sed for electricity and heat production, it will cover nearly half of the plant's 	
demand	, saving 1.8 million PLN in energy expenses each year. 	In o	ption 1B	, part of 	the biogas is 	
used to treat digestate, and the 	share	 of biogas utilised for electricity and heat production is 	
thereby lower. 	The total savings in electricity 	expenses for this option is appr	oximately 450	 000 	
PLN per year.	 	
The wastewater treatment plant cu	rrently utilizes electricity for heating purposes and 	as of now 	
there 	is no opportunity to tran	sfer the heat to a 	district heating system. 	If opportunities to utilize 	
excess 	heat on	-site or in a district heating system arise in the future, there will be 	an 	additional 	
potential to either sell the heat or reduce energy expenses for the wastewater treatment plant.	 	
Digestate	 treatment	 	
The 	current wastewater treatment process 	generates approximately 12	 500 	Mg of digestate 	each 	
year	. The digestate is transporte	d to an external company 	for further 	treat	ment	, which costs the 	
wastewater treatment plant 	5 million PLN 	yearly	. Using the sludge that remains as a byproduct 	
of wastewater treatment for biogas production 	reduces the organic dry matter significantly	 (IEA 	
Bioenergy, 2015)	. In phase 1 	of the project	, the amount of 	digestate 	generated in	 the biogas 	
production process is estimated to 7000 Mg.	 By reducing the volume of 	digestate	, the wastewater 	
treatment plant 	lowers	 cost related to treatment, 	storage, and transportation of 	digestate	. The 	
exact cost reduction 	depends on whether the wastewater treatment plant chooses option A, B, 	
or C. 	As stated in	 chapter	 5.2.3	, option 1A still 	entails 	the digestate bein	g treated by an external 	
company, but the 	volume of digestate is significantly reduced, 	which lowers the price to 2.8 mil-	
lion PLN annually. 	Option 1B 	has the cost of digestate tr	eatment set to zero, as the treatment is 	
based on biogas produced at the plant. However, there is an indirect cost, as the share of biogas 
used for electricity and heat production is lower	. In option 1C the plant 	treats	 the digestate them-	
selves	 at a cost o	f 1.6 million PLN each year.	 Treating the digestate 	on	-site gives the wastewater 	
treatment plant t	he opportunity to sell the resulting 	soil	-improving product. It is 	assumed 	that 	
the product can be sold 	for 25 PLN/Mg, generating	 a yearly income of 57	 500 PLN.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	63	 	
 
Accepting	 sludge from neighboring waste	water treatment plants	 	
Establishing 	a biogas 	facility	 at 	Tomaszów Mazowiecki wastewater treatment plant 	makes it pos-	
sible to accept sludge from other plants in the area	, to be used as f	eedstock in the biogas produc-	
tion process. 	It is estimated that 	the plant 	will be able to accept an additional 2	 500 Mg	 of sludge 	
each 	year. 	If t	he gate fee for delivering sludge	 is set at 200 PLN per 	Mg	, 2	 500 Mg	 generate	s an 	
income of 500	 000 PLN per year	. Surrounding waste treatment plants charge	 a gate fee of 	be-	
tween 	389 and 626 PLN per Mg	 for accepting sludge, so 	there might be an opportunity for the	 	
wastewater treatment plant 	to increase 	its	 income by charging a higher	 gate fee. 	 	
Yearly income 	 	
Table 	5.6 gives an overview of the annual 	income and reduced expenses for	 each option in phase 	
1. Option 1C has the highest yearly income, of 2.	4 million PLN, consisting of income from treating 	
sludge from neighboring wastewater treatment plants, income from selling a soil	-improvement 	
product, and reduced electricity expenses a	s a result of biogas production. 	In 	addition,	 there is 	
an upside if the gate fee becomes higher. 	The 	second	-best	 option is 1A, with a yearly income of 	
2.3 million PLN. Since the digestate is treated by an external company this option does not include 	
incom	e from selling the soil	-improving product. Option 1B has the same income sources as 1C, 	
but the reduced electricity expenses are significantly lower, resulting in the lowest yearly income 
of 1 million PLN.	 	
Table 	5.6 	Annual income 	and reduced expenses 	for each option	 in phase 1	 (in PLN)	 	 	
Option 1A	 	Option 1B	 	Option 1C	 	
Income from treating sludge from the neighbouring 
wastewater treatment plants	 	
500	 000	 	500	 000	 	500	 000	 	
Income from 	selling the 	soil improvement 	product	 	- 	57 500	 	57	 500	 	
Reduced electricity expenses	 	1 818 065	 	456 570	 	1 818 065	 	
Sum income	 	2 318 065	 	1 002 844	 	2 375 565	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
5.2.6	 	Profitability	 	
Table 	5.7 summarizes 	Table 	5.4 which gives yearly income and 	Table 	5.6 which gives the yearly 	
costs for each option in phase 1 and the baseline. 	The investment costs for t	he three different 	
options in phase 1 are the same	; 65.2 million PLN. Since the variable costs and income d	iffer, 	
these are the decisive components for which option is the most profitable.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	64	 	
 
Table 	5.7 	Sum 	costs, income and annual cash flow for each option	 in phase 1	 (in million 	
PLN)	 	 	
Baseline	 	Option 1A	 	Option 1B	 	Option 1C	 	
Total investment cost	 	- 	65.19	 	65.19	 	65.19	 	
Total variable cost	 	8.81	 	7.53	 	4.73	 	6.31	 	
Total income	 	- 	2.29	 	1.00	 	2.35	 	
Annual cash flow	 	- 8.81	 	- 5.24	 	- 3.73	 	- 3.97	 	
Annual cash flow compared to baseline	 	- 	3.57	 	5.1	 	4.8	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
Based on the overview in 	Table 	5.7, we see that of the three investment options in Phase 1, option 	
1B is the best, closely followed by option 	1C, while option 	1A is by far the least profitable option. 	
Even 	though	 all the options have negative annual income flow (i.e., not taking the investment 	
costs into consideration), it might still be reasonable to im	plement some of these options, if they 	
are a better solution than the current situation. Thus, we should compare the various options to 
the baseline, 	where sludge is treated by an external company	 and without biogas production.	 	
In addition to the i	nvestmen	t costs 	and a	nnual cash flow	, we should also consider the project’s 	
lifespan and the discount rate.	 	
The role of the discount rate	 	
To make an investment	, the investor requires a 	certain rate of return on his funds, also called a 	
discount rate. 	Whe	n there is	 some uncertainty	 about the income and cost of the project, 	e.g.	, risk 	
of higher investment cost	, technological 	difficult	ies, 	low prices, regulatory uncertainty	, in short, 	
there is a risk that the investor may lose some or all of his money, the investor usually requires a 
higher 	expected rate of return	. How much higher depends on 	the risk factors, but also on 	his own 	
knowledge and skill	 to understand the project,	 his aversion to risk, and how diversifi	ed his invest-	
ment portfolio is.	 	
For this report we calculate	 the net present value 	at different discount rates. All discount rates 	
are “real” 	as opposed to nominal, as we don’t consider inflation. 	Had we included inf	lation of e.g., 	
3%	, the cash flows of 	Table 	5.7 would have increased 3% annually and the 	real 	interest rates of 	
Table 	5.8 and onwards would have mean	t nominal interest rates that were 3% higher. 	 	
Net present value 	 	
The net present value (NPV) includes 	all 	variable 	costs and income, and 	investment cost	s for 	op-	
tion 1A, 1B and 1C	. As can be seen in 	Table 	5.8, the net present value is negative for all 	options, 	
including the baseline.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	65	 	
 
Table 	5.8 	NVP for various discount rates 	when projects lifespan is 	20 years	 (in million 	
PLN)	 	 	
Baseline	 	Option 1A	 	Option 1B	 	Option 1C	 	
10 %	 	-75.02	 
 	
-109	.83 	 	-96	.93 	 	-98	.98 	 	
8 %	 	-86.51	 
 	
-116	.67 	 	-101	.80 	 	-104	.16 	 	
6 %	 	-101.07	 	-125	.33 	 	-107	.96 	 	-110	.71 	 	
4 %	 	-119.75	 	-136	.45 	 	-115	.86 	 	-119	.13 	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
Table 	5.9 shows the 	net present value	 for all options compared to the baseline. 	Option 1A has a 	
lower net present value	 than the baseline for all discount rates	, which means that this option is 	
less profitable than the current situation. 	Both option 1B and 1C has a higher net present value 	
than the baseline 	when we set the discount rate to 4 percent. 	Option 1B is the 	obvious best option 	
with a 	net present value 	3.89 	million PLN higher than the 	baseline. 	 	
Table 	5.9 	NVP for various discount rates when projects lifespan is 20 years	, compared 	
to baseline	 (in million PLN	) 	 	
Base	line	 	Option 1A	 	Option 1B	 	Option 1C	 	
10 %	 	- 
 	
-34	.82 	 	-21	.92 	 	-23	.96 	 	
8 %	 	- 
 	
-30	.16 	 	-15	.29 	 	-17	.64 	 	
6 %	 	- 	-24	.27 	 	-6.89 	 	-9.65 	 	
4 %	 	- 	-16	.70 	 	 3.89 	 	 0.62 	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
Project	’s lifetime	 	
Table 	5.10	 below summarizes the minimum duration in years when we assume a discount rate of 	
6 %. Option 1A will never be a better option. Option 1B becomes profitable	 at a 	6 % 	discount rate	 	
if the proje	ct’s lifetime is at least 26 years and Option 1C if the duration is at least 29 years.	 	
Table 	5.10	 	Project’s minimum duration for options in Phase 1 to be more profitable than 
the baseline	 	 	
Baseline	 	Option 1A	 	Option 1B	 	Option 1C	 	
Project’s minimum 
duration in years	 	
- 
 	Never	 	26	 	29	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
If the discount rate were to be slightly higher, the project would have to last considerably longer 
for the other options to be more profitable than 	the 	baseline. For example, if the 	discount rate is 	
10%, none of the options in phase 1 are more profitable 	than baseline even if the project’s dura-	
tion is 100 years.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	66 	
 
Internal rate of return 	 	
Table 	5.11	 summarizes how low the discount rate must be for the other options to y	ield a positive 	
return compared to the current situation. 	 	
Table 	5.11	 	Internal rate of return for 	the 	options in Phase 1	 	 	
Option 1A	 	Option 1B	 	Option 1C	 	
IRR (%)	 	0.09	 	4.66	 	4.10	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
For option 1B to be a more profitable option than the baseline, the discount rate needs to be no 
higher	 than 4.66 %. While for Option 1C the discount rate must be 	no higher	 than 4.10 %. We see 	
that 	option 1	A ha	s an internal 	rate of return of 0.09 %, indicating that the discount rate cannot 	
be higher than that, i.e., it is never a better option 	than	 the baseline	 in the real world.	 	
Increased 	costs or income	 	
If we only increase the costs, and keep incomes constant, option 1B 	con	tinue to be 	the best of 	
the investment options. When we compare option 1B to the baseline, we can assess what the 
internal rate of return (IRR) must be 	given	 a certain percentage increase of the investment costs.	 	
Table 	5.12	 	Internal rate of return (IRR) for 	option	 1B if costs increase, compared to base-	
line	 	
Increase	d 	
Cost	 	0 % 	3 % 	4 % 	5 % 	7.5 	% 	10	 % 	15	 % 	20 	% 	
IRR	 (%)	 	
Option	 1B 	4.66	 	4.3	2 	4.21	 	4.10	 	3.83	 	3.58	 	3.09	 	2.63	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and 	IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
As seen in 	Table 	5.12	 a percentage point increase in variable costs entails approx. a decimal de-	
crease in internal rate of return for option 1B. 	If costs	 where to increase with 	5 %, the IRR com-	
pared to base	line	 would be 4	.1%. 	
Table 	5.13	 	Internal rate of return (IRR) for option 1B if income is increased, compared to 
the baseline	 	
Increase	 	
Invest. Cost	 	0 % 	3 % 	4 % 	5 % 	7.5 	% 	10	 % 	15	 % 	20 	% 	
IRR	 (%)	 	
Option	 1B 	4.66	 	4.73	 	4.75	 	4.77	 	4.83	 	4.89	 	5.00	 	5.11	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
In Table 	5.13	, we see that increasing t	he income for option 1B only marginally improves the 	in-	
ternal rate of return	. A 15 % increase in inc	ome entails an internal rate of return of 5.0 %	, wh	ile 	
a 20 % increase in i	ncome 	gives a	n internal rate of return 	of 	5.11 %.	 	
5.3	 	Phase 2	 – Municipal and industrial waste	 	
In 	the second 	phase, the investment would consist of 	expanding the	 biogas plant	, allowing 	for:

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO	 area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	67	 	
 
 	accepting municipal bio	-waste	 	
 	accepting industrial bio	-waste	 	
5.3.1	 	CAPEX and OPEX	 	
Phase 2 of the project at 	Tomaszów Mazowiecki	 wastewater treatment plant i	nvolves 	municipal 	
and	, in some cases	, industrial 	bio	-waste as substrate for biogas production.	 For this phase of the 	
project, we have included two options 	2A and 2B, 	and several scenarios for option 2A. In option 	
2A 	municipal bio	-waste 	is included as substrate for biogas production, 	and 	the scenarios account 	
for 	various levels	 of 	available feedstock	. Scenario 1 	shows cal	culations 	based on the assumption 	
that 	municipalities 	implement separate collection	 of 	food/kitchen 	waste	, and	 all food/kitchen 	
waste 	(with	 the 	current level of collection	) can be used in production. The remaining scenarios 	
represent 	various levels	 of the theoretical potential of municipal bio	-waste	 (see 	table	 2.2)	. In op-	
tion 2B 	industrial 	bio	-waste	 is added in addition 	to 	the 	food and kit	chen waste from municipali-	
ties.	 	
Table 	5.14	 	Options 	and scenarios 	for phase 2	 	
Option	 2A 	Option	 2B 	
Scenario 1	 	
Scenario 2	 	
Scenario 3	 	
Scenario 4	 	
Addition of food and kitchen waste 	as substrate	 	
Addition of 	food and kitchen waste as substrate (25% of potential)	 	
Addition of food and kitchen waste as substrate 	(50% of potential)	 	
Addition of food and kitchen waste as substrate (	75% of potential)	 	
Addition of food, 
kitchen 	(75% of po-	
tential) 	and indus-	
trial 	bio	-waste	 in 	
the AD process	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
Table 	5.15	 gives the 	capital investments for each option in phase 2. 	Adding municipal 	and indus-	
trial 	bio	-waste	 to the substrate mix means that the plant will have to 	invest in additional pre	-	
treatment facilities. The municipal waste arrives 	at the plant in bags, and will need to be removed 	
from the bags, sorted and grinded before it can be transported to the bio	gas digesters. 	Industrial 	
bio	-waste	 also requires pre	-trea	tment. 	This investment will need to be 	made	 across all options 	
and scenarios. 	The 	pre	-treatment facility is estimated to cost 1 million PLN, which comes in addi-	
tion to the 65.2 million invested in the biogas facility in phase 1. As the 	volume of feedstock 	used 	
in production increases	, the 	plant will need additional digesters in the biogas facility. 	In option 	
2A1, 2A2 and 2A3	, we estimate	 one	 additional digester is needed, while 	two	 additional digesters 	
are needed for option 2A	4 and 2B. The capital expense 	amount	s to 69 million PLN for 	option	s 	
2A1, 2A2 and 2A3 and 71 million PLN for option	s 2A4 and 2B.	 If the 	feedstock increase is higher 	
than expected 	or there are other 	variables that lead to the need for another digester this will lead 	
to a	 3.9 percent 	increase in investment cost for options 	2A1, 2A2 and 2A3 and a 10.9 percent 	
increase in investment costs for options 2A4 and 2B.

Opportunities fo	r producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	68	 	
 
Table 	5.15	 	CAPEX	 for each option in phase 2	 (in PLN)	 	 	
Option 2A	1, 2A2 and 2A3	 	Option 2	A4 and 	2B 	
Phase 1 investment	 	65	 190 000	 	65	 190 000	 	
Pre	-treatment facility for municipal bio	-waste	 	1 000 000	 	1 000 000	 	
Additional digesters	 	2 800 000	 	5 600 000	 	
Total 	capital expenses	 	68 990 000	 	71 190 000	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
Table 	5.16	 contains the yearly operational expenses for all the options and scenarios in phase 2. 	
We have assumed the same 	labour	 and main	tenance cost as in phase 1. If the expansion of 	feed-	
stock acceptance in phase 2 leads to 	50 percent higher 	labour	 or maintenance costs this will 	in-	
crease the variable costs by 8.9 percent. In phase 2 of the project	, the digestate will be treated 	
using biogas 	and there are therefore no directs costs associated with this process. 	 	
Table 	5.16	 	OPEX	 for all options in phase 2	 (in PLN)	 	 	
All options in 	phase 2	 	
Labo	ur cost 	biogas facility	 	720 000	 	
Maintenance biogas facility	 	200 000	 	
Electricity for WWTP operation	 	3 811 500	 	
Total	 operational expenses	 	4 731 500	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
5.3.2	 	Resource evaluation 	 	
In the phase 2	, municipal 	bio	-waste 	(food and kitchen waste) 	from MOFTMO would be 	used in 	
biogas production (	Resource evaluation of MOFTMO	), industrial bio	-waste from MOFTMO, and 	
sewage sludge	 from wastewater treatment plants not included in the phase 1	. The amounts of 	
individual substrates 	that could be 	use	d in the biogas production process are presented in 	Table 	
5.17	. 	
Table 	5.17	 	Substrates for the biogas production process	 in phase 2	 	
Substrate	 	Amount	 [Mg/year]	 	
Municipal bio	-waste	 (food and kitchen waste)	 	7 587	 	
Industrial bio	-waste (	food	 products that are 	expired 	or unsuitable 	
for consumption	, code 16 03 80)	 	1 450	 	
Sewage sludge from other wastewater treatment plants	 	289	 	
Total	 	 	
Source:	 own calculations	 based on Polish 	BDO	 	
5.3.3	 	Revenue 	and reduced expenses 	 	
In 	phase 2 of the project	, Tomaszów Mazowiecki wastewater treatment plant will still 	accept 	
sludge from 	neighbouring	 wastewater treatment plants and use this in the biogas production. 	
The volume of sludge accepted is assumed to be the same as in phase 1 and t	he income from this	 	
activity therefore remains 	at 	500	 000 PLN per year	, if we assume a gate fee of 	200	 PLN per Mg	.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	69	 	
 
The annual income 	will increase if the wastewater treatment plant decides to charge a higher fee.	 	
By accepting municipal 	bio	-waste	, the plant	 helps solve a waste problem for the municipality and 	
can charge a gate fee for the waste. 	This gate fee is set at 300 PLN/Mg.	 The gate fee for municipal 	
bio	-waste	 at regional 	neighbouring 	waste treatment plants ranges from 389 to 522 PLN per Mg. 	
Therefore	, the wastewater treatment plant could potentially charge a higher gate fee than 300 	
PLN, thereby increasing their income. 	The amount of municipal waste 	collected 	varies between 	
the options, from least in 	opti	on 2A1 to most in option 2A4 and 	2B. The income	 from gate fees 	
therefore varies in the same way between the options. In option 2B the plant also accepts indus-
trial 	bio	-waste	, for	 which they also can 	charge	 a gate fee, and thereby 	this option	 entails an addi-	
tional income of 435	 000 PLN/year. 	As each opt	ion involves the plant treating the digestate 	itself	, 	
all options have an additional income from 	selling soil	-improving product	. T	he exact income again 	
depends on the amount of feedstock that goes into production. 	For all options in phase 2 	part of 	
the produced biogas is utilized for the treatment of digestate. 	The remaining biogas is used to 	
produce electricity and heat, which is used within the wastewater treatment plant. 	By producing 	
its	 own electricity, the plant can reduce the amount 	it buy	s from the grid, and thereby reduce 	its	 	
electricity	 expenses. 	The net electricity production varies between 1.35 	GWh	 per year for option 	
2A1 and 	4.36 	GWh	 for option 2B. 	Similarly,	 the estimated 	reduction in electricity expenses vary 	
between approximatel	y 900	 000 and 3	 million PLN	 each year.	 	
Table 	5.18	 	Annual income	 and reduced expenses	 for each option in phase 2 (in PLN)	 	 	
Option 2A1	 	Option 2A2	 	Option 2A3	 	Option 2A4	 	Option 2B	 	
Income from treating sludge 
from the neighbouring 
wastewater treatment 
plants	 	
500	 000	 	500	 000	 	500	 000	 	500 000	 	500 000	 	
Income from treating 	bio	-	
waste	 	
177 428	 	758 705	 	1 517 409	 	2 276 114	 	2 276 114	 	
Income from treating indus-
trial bio	-waste	 	
- 	- 	- 	- 	435 000	 	
Income from selling the soil 
improvement product	 	
58 699	 	64 019	 	70 856	 	77 692	 	98 431	 	
Reduced electricity expenses	 	932 117	 	1 298 379	 	1 841 167	 	2 454 380	 	3 020 570	 	
Sum income	 and reduced ex-	
penses	 	
1 668 244	 	2 621	 103	 	3 929 432	 	5 308 186	 	6 330 115	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
Table 	5.18	 shows that the total annual income increases with the amount of feedstock, making 	
option 2B, which has the highest feedstock volume, the best option. While this represents the 
theoretical possibility, 	phase 2	 of the project 	would need	 an assessment of what	 is practically 	
achievable.	 	
5.3.4	 	Profitability 	 	
Table 	5.19	 summarizes 	Table 	5.18	 which gives yearly income and	 Table 	5.16	 which gives the yearly 	
costs for each option in phase 2 and the baseline. The investment costs for 	options in phase 2 	
varies depending on the amount of substrate that goes into biogas product	ion. 	The profitability 	
of the options in phase 2 therefore depends on 	both the investment cost and annual cash flow.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	70	 	
 
Table 	5.19	 	Sum costs, income and annual cash flow for each option	 in phase 2	 (in million 	
PL	N)	 	
 	Baseline	 	Option	 	
2A	1 	
Option	 	
2A	2 	
Option	 	
2A	3 	
Option	 	
2A	4 	Option	 2B 	
Total Investment Costs	 	- 	68	.99	 	68	.99	 	68	.99	 	71	.79	 	71	.79	 	
Total Variable Costs	 	8.81	 	4.73	 	4.73	 	4.73	 	4.73	 	4.73	 	
Total Other Income	 	- 	1.23 	1.53 	1.95	 	2.41 	3.15 	
Annual Cash Flow	 	- 8.81	 	-3.50	 	-3.20	 	-2.78	 	-2.32	 	-1.58	 	
Annual cash flow com-
pared to baseline	 	
- 	5.31	 	5.61	 	6.03	 	6.49	 	7.23	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
Based on the overview given in 	Table 	5.19	, option 2B 	is the most profitable compared to the 	
baseline. The additional investment costs entailed	, due to 	the 	higher volume of substrate	, are	 	
outweighed by the income it generates. 	All the	 options have a negative annual cash flow, meaning 	
that the investment cost combined with the annual operational expenses is higher than the an-
nual income.	 Even though all the options in phase 2 have a negative annual cash flow the invest-	
ment might be 	reas	onable	 as they 	are better than the current situation. O	ption 2B is the most 	
profi	table compared to the baseline.	 	
Net present value	 	
When calculating the net present value (NPV) for both the baseline and all options in phases 1 
and 2, we assume a discount ra	te of 6 percent and a project lifetime of 20 years. 	As seen in 	Table 	
5.20	, all 	options in 	both phase 1 and 	phase 2 hav	e a negative net present value.	 	
Table 	5.20	 	NPV in 	million PLN 	 	
 	Baseline	 	Phase 1	 	Phase 2	 	
 	Base	line	 	Option 
1A 	
Option 
1B 	
Option	 	
1C 	
Option 
2A1	 	
Option 
2A2	 	
Option 
2A3	 	
Option 
2A4	 	
Option 
2B 	
NPV	 	-101.07 	-125	.33 	-107	.96 	-110	.71 	-109	.15 	-105	.71 	-100	.88 	-98.44 	-89.96 	
Source:	 Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	 	
Table 	5.21	 gives the NPV for each option in both phase 1 and p	hase 2 compared to the baseline. 	
When 	assuming a discount rate of 6 percent and a project lifetime of 20 years	, all 	options in phase 	
1 ha	ve a 	lower NPV than the baseline.	 Looking at phase 2, the options become better as the 	
volume of feedstock increases. Option	s 2A1 and 2A2 still ha	ve	 a lower NPV than the baseline, and 	
would 	therefore, with the assumptions we make, not be profitable.	 Option	 2A3, 2A4 and 2B 	are	 	
all profitable investments, with an increasing NPV and 2B being the best option with a net pr	esent 	
value of 11 million PLN.	 	
Table 	5.21	 	NPV 	compared to baseline (in million PLN)	 	
 	Baseline	 	Phase 1	 	Phase 2	 	
 	Base	line	 	Option 
1A 	
Option 
1B 	
Option	 	
1C 	
Option 
2A1	 	
Option 
2A2	 	
Option 
2A3	 	
Option 
2A4	 	
Option 
2B 	
NPV	 	- 	-24.27 	-6.89 	-9.65 	-8.09 	-4.65 	0.19 	2.63 	11.10 	
Source:	 Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	71	 	
 
Table 	5.22	 depicts the 	NPV for the options in phase 2 for various discount rates compared to 	
baseline	 when projects lifespan is 20 years	. 	
Table 	5.22	 	NVP for various discount rates when projects lifespan is 20 years, compared 
to baseline	 (in million PLN	) 	
 	Phase 2	 	 	
Option 2A1	 	Option 2A2	 	Option 2A3	 	Option 2A4	 	Option 2B	 	
12 %	 	-29	.33 	 	-27	.09 	 	-23	.94 	 	-23	.33 	 	-17	.81 	 	
10 %	 	-23	.78 	 	-21	.23 	 	-17	.64 	 	-16	.55 	 	-10	.26 	 	
8 %	 	-16	.86 	 	-13	.91 	 	-9.77 	 	-8.09 	 	-0.83 	 	
6 %	 	-8.09 	 	-4.65 	 	 0.19 	 	 2.63 	 	 11	.10 	 	
4 %	 	 3.17 	 	 7.25 	 	 12	.98 	 	 16	.39 	 	 26	.43 	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	. 	
Project	’s lifetime	 	
Table 	5.23	 below	, summarizes the minimum duration in years when we assume a discount rate 	
of 6 %. We see that 	Option	 2A3	, 2A4	, and 2	B are all better options than 	the baseline	 if the pro-	
ject’s duration is 20 years. For Phase 2A	1 to be a better option, the project’s lifespan must be at 	
least 26 years, while for Phase 2	A2	 the duration must be at least 23 years. 	 	
Table 	5.23	 	Project’s 	minimum duration for options in Phase 1 and Phase 2 to be more 	
profitable than the baseline	 	
 	Phase 1	 	Phase 2	 	
Option	 	1A 	1B 	1C 	2A1 	2A2 	2A3 	2A4 	2B 	
Project’s minimum 	 	
duration in years	 	Never	 	26 	29 	26 	23 	20 	19 	16 	
Source:	 Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023). 	When the discount rate is 6 % and all costs and in-	
comes are constant.	 	
Internal rate of return	 	
Table 	5.24	 summarizes the internal 	rate of return for each option in phase 1 and phase 2 when 	
compared to the baseline. 	The internal rate of return indicates the maximum 	discount rate that 	
can be 	assumed and the project still being a b	etter option than the baseline.	 	
Table 	5.24	 	Internal rate of return for options in Phase 1 and Phase 2 when compared to 
baseline	 	
 	Phase 1 	 	Phase 2	 	
Option	 	1A 	1B 	1C 	2A1 	2A2 	2A3 	2A4 	2B 	
IRR	 (%)	 	0.09	 	4.66	 	4.10	 	4.51	 	5.15	 	6.03	 	6.44	 	7.84	 	
Source:	 Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	. When project	’s lifespan is 20 years, and all costs 	
and incomes are constant

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	72	 	
 
Increased 	investment 	cost	s 	
Table 	5.25	 shows 	the maximum allowable cost increase for each option in phase 2 that would still 	
render the option 	more favorable than the baseline.	 As seen in the table below, option 2A1 and 	
2A	2 will never be more profitable than the baseline.	 Option 2A3 currently makes about the same 	
profit as the baseline	 (e.g., the same loss at 	a 6% discount rate	, compare 	Table 	5.20	), but if costs 	
increase slightly, it could become less profitable than the baseline. Option 2A	4 has a slightly 	
higher 	margin, and 2B seems 	to be the safest option.	 	
Above we noted that a	n additional digester will increase the cost of option 2A4 a	nd 2B by close 	
to 11 percent. Option 2B will remain p	rofitable even if this happens.	 	
Table 	5.25	 	Increased investment costs (in %) compared to the baseline	 	
 	Phase 2	 	
Option	 	2A1 	2A2 	2A3 	2A4 	2B 	
% Increase	 	Never	 	Never	 	0.03	 	3.7	 	15.5	 	
Source:	 Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	. When the 	project's	 lifespan is 20 years, and all 	other 	
costs and incomes are 	held 	constant	. 	
5.4	 	Minimum grant for 	a 	10	-12 percent	 real	 rate of return	 	
While the 	internal rate	s of return of the best options in phase 1 and phase 2	 are significant, they 	
may be still 	appearing	 low from the perspective of a private investor. 	In social investments such 	
as a biogas plant it is 	reasonable for the public sector (at the local, national a	nd/or EU level) to 	
contribute a grant 	covering a part of the investment cost. 	A grant may 	release private funds 	that 	
“leverage	s” the	 public contribution, while securing for the private sector an expected rate of re-	
turn that 	motivates for investment. The gr	ant may 	take on different appearances	. An upfront 	
grant is one option. A 	concessionary loan is another option, with 	the	 present value of 	the rate of 	
return	 differential making up the grant. 	When there are several potential operators of a biogas 	
plant	, the 	public sector may host an auction to see who requires the lowest 	grant	. When the 	
biogas plant is able to sell electricity	, the 	grant element may take the form of a feed	-in-tariff or 	
fee	d-in-premium	 (see section 	1.2	 for Polish 	regulations). The 	Tomasz	ów Maz	owiecki	 biogas plant 	
would 	not sell electricity on a net 	basis but	 may do	 so on a gross basis.	 	
For our purposes we calculate the 	grant element as an upfront grant necessary for a 	private rate 	
of return of 	10 and 12 per cent (real). 	Table 	5.26	 shows what the minimum grant for the two best 	
options	 in phase 1 and 2 must be for them to yield a positive return when compared to baseline 	
and the projects lifespan is 20 years.	 	
Table 	5.26	 	Minimum grant for the two best options in phase 1 and 2 to be profitabl	e (in 	
million PLN	) 	
 	Phase 1	 	Phase 2	 	 	
Option 1B	 	Option 1C	 	Option 2A4	 	Option 2B

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	73	 	
 
 	Phase 1	 	Phase 2	 	
12 %	 	27	.22 	 	29	.02 	 	23	.33 	 	17	.81 	 	
10 %	 	21.92	 	23.96	 	16	.55 	 	10	.26 	 	
Source:	 	Vista Analyse and IOS	-PIB	 based on AL	-PROJEKT (2023)	. Minimum grant when compared to baseline and 	
the 	projects lifespan is 20 years.	 	
Note from the 	table that 	a grant for phase 1 should be in the 22	-29 million PLN range to secure 	
an expected private return of 	10	-12 percent. 	The corresponding grant for phase 2 should be in 	
the 	range of 10	-23 million PLN. 	 	
In other words, the 	grant for phase 	2 is significantly lower than the grant for phase 1	. This is 	
another way of saying that the 	profitability of phase 2 is	 significantly 	higher than phase 1.	 	
Another way of putting it is that the 	addition	 of municipal and possibly industrial bio	-waste in 	
phase 2 	compared to phase 1, in other words the 	change	 from phase 1 to phase 2 is	 profitable	 in 	
its own right.	 A comparison of the internal rates	 of return in 	phase 1 and 2 tells us the same: 	The	 	
internal	 rate of return is higher in phase 2 than in phase 1	, hence the addition 	of municipal and 	
industrial 	bio	-waste	 is profitable in its own right.	 	
5.5	 	External benefits	 of biogas production at 	Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 	
Biogas production in the anaerobic digestion process offers many environmental benefits. One 
of the primary benefits is the capture of methane (C:₄) that would otherwise be released into 
the atmosphere. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, with a global war	ming potential (GWP) 28	-	
36 times that of carbon dioxide (CO₂) over 100 years. By capturing and utilizing methane from 
biomass and 	bio	-waste	, anaerobic digestion prevents its escape into the atmosphere, mitigating 	
its impact on climate change. It is especia	lly important in the agricultural sector where livestock 	
manure is a significant source of methane emissions. Processing manure in AD plants reduces 
emissions from traditional manure management practices such as open lagoons or piles.	 	
Another benefit is th	e offsetting of fossil fuel use. The methane captured during anaerobic diges-	
tion is converted into biogas, which can be used to generate electricity and heat. Biogas is a re-
newable energy which can directly replace fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natur	al gas, leading 	
to a reduction in CO₂ emissions from energy production.	 	
The by	-product of the anaerobic digestion process, digestate, is rich in nutrients and can be used 	
as a biofertilizer supporting sustainable agricultural practices. The use of digestat	e recycles nutri-	
ents back into the soil, reducing the need for synthetic fertilizers, whose production is energy	-	
intensive and associated with high CO₂ emissions. Digestate enhances soil structure and increases 
organic matter. It also improves water retent	ion, nutrient availability, and carbon sequestration 	
in soils.	 	
In this chapter, we analyse the benefits of biogas production from sewage sludge and municipal 
bio	-waste (food/kitchen waste) in terms of GHG and amm	onia (NH3) emission reduction.	 	
The following	 analysis presents estimates of greenhouse gases and ammonia emissions from pro-	
cesses involved in the biogas production in a projected biogas plant in the wastewater treatment 
plant in Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 and its further use. Analyses were conducted for th	ree phases of 	
facili	ty and management development:

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	74 	
 
 	Baseline 	– current situation. Based on data from 2021	-2022 regarding the amount of sludge 	
generated and sludge treatment considering periodical deacti	vations of the drying facility.	 	
 	Phase 1 	– building the 	biogas plant. In biogas production, the sludge and grease trap waste 	
from wastewater treatment plant in Tomaszów Maz	owiecki	 and sludge from neighbouring 	
wastewater plants are used. Biogas is used to produce electricity and heat; electricity replaces 
the el	ectricity from the grid; part of the heat is used on	-site: 	 	
– 	Option 1A. The digestate that remains as a byproduct of biogas production is use	d in ag-	
riculture without drying;	 	
– 	Option 1B. The digestate is processed on	-site by drying using part of the produced 	bio-	
gas, remaining biogas is used to produce electricity and heat; the biofertilizer/soil im-
proving product is used in agriculture.	 	
 	Phase 2 	– expansion of biogas plant. In biogas production, in addition to substrates used in 	
Phase 1, sludge from remaining n	eighbouring wastewater plants and separately collected 	
food/kitchen waste from the municipal waste stream are used as co	-substrates. Like in phase 	
1, biogas is used to produce electricity and heat; electricity replaces the electricity from the 
grid; part o	f the heat is used on	-site. The digestate is processed on	-site by drying using part 	
of the produced biogas, remaining biogas is used to produce electricity and heat and biofer-
tilizer/soil improving product is used in agriculture:	 	
– 	Option 2A Scenario 1. The 	municipalities collect separately food/kitchen 	waste,	 and all 	
food/kitchen waste (with the current level of collect	ion) is used in biogas plant;	 	
– 	Option 2A Scenario 4. It is assumed that the separate collection of food/kitchen waste 
increases to 75% of theo	retical potential and all is used in biogas plant.	 	
The presented options and scenarios correspond to the ones described in Chapter 5.2 and 5.3.	 	
Estimations of GHG emissions are based on methodology of IPCC (2006) and IPCC (2019). Identi-
fied gas emission pr	ocesses were assigned to dedicated subcategories from Sector 1.A. Fuel com-	
bustion activities and 5. Waste management. Methodology provides emission factors and IPCC 
Waste Model is used for estimation of emissions from substrate storage, which compiled with	 	
case specific activity data deliver estimates of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous 
oxide (N2O) emissions.	 	
Estimations of NH	3 emissions are based on methodology described in EIG (2023), subcategory 	
5.B.1 Biological treatment of waste.	 	
Values	 of activity data are based on the following assumptions:	 	
 	due to the deactivation of the sludge drying facility, 50% of sludge generated in the baseline 
phase is treated outside WWTP by an external company by composting and 50% is dried on	-	
sit	e and then us	ed in agriculture;	 	
 	average product (dried sludge in baseline situation and digestate or bio	-fertiliser/soil improv-	
ing product in phases 1 and	 2) storage duration is 4 days;	 	
 	100% of the generated product (dried sludge in baseline situation and digestate or 	bio	-ferti-	
liser/soil improving product in phases 1 and 2) is distributed to the 	market and used in agri-	
culture	; 	
 	100% of the electric energy produced from biogas combu	stion will be utilized on	-site;	 	
 	in phases 1 and 2, the average route of product transport will be similar to the average route 
of transported 	substrates (30 km);

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO	 area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	75	 	
 
 	in options and scenarios where digestate is dried on	-site, the produced biogas is primarily 	
used in the drying process and fro	m the remaining biogas energy is generated which then is 	
used in the wastewater treatment process, replacing th	e electric energy from the grid;	 	
 	the biofilter efficiency is taken from EIG (2023).	 	
During the analyses, the following ten processes were assumed	 to be the sources of GHG emis-	
sions	: 	
 	Substrates supply (wastewater, sludge,	 food/kitchen waste transpor	t); 	
 	Pre	-treatment of food/kitchen waste;	 	
 	Wastewater treatm	ent (without sludge treatment);	 	
 	Sludge treatment	 outside the WWTP by composting;	 	
 	Phosphorus re	covery from sludge;	 	
 	Thermal hy	drolysis of pre	-treated sludge;	 	
 	Anaerobic digestion in biogas facility with energy recovery (combustion of biogas in cogener-
ation 	engine);	 	
 	Treatment of sludge and digestate by dry	ing with natural gas or biogas;	 	
 	Product s	torage	 in an open area in WWTP;	 	
 	Product (dried sludge in baseline situation and bio	-fertiliser/soil improvement product in 	
phases 1 and 2) distribution to the market (transport). 	 	
In case of NH	3, the processes no 4 and 7 are the sources of emissions.	 	
Estimates o	f carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and ammonia emissions from separate pro-	
cesses and emission sources in phase 1 are presented in Table 5.2	7 and in phase 2 in Table 5.2	8. 	
Recalculation to carbon dioxide equivalent is based on Global Warming Potential	 AR5 values, re-	
leased by IPCC (201	3). Activity data and emission estimates results were cross	-checked with data 	
collected in the KOBiZE National database on greenhouse gases and other substances emissions 
and NIR (2024).	 	
Table 	5.27	 	Estimations of GHG and NH	3 emissions in phase 1 and comparison to baseline	 	
Gas	 	Baseline	 	
Phase 1	 	
Option 1A	 	
Reduction	 	
Phase 1	 	
Option 1B	 	
Reduction	 	
CO	2 [Mg] 	 	2 588.8	 	1 713.9	 	34%	 	2 730.4	 	-5%	 	
CH	4 [Mg] 	 	610.3	 	153.9	 	75%	 	255.8	 	58%	 	
N2O [Mg] 	 	184.4	 	27.0	 	85%	 	30.7	 	83%	 	
Total GHG [Mg CO	2 	
eq]	 	3 383.5	 	1 894.8	 	44%	 	3 016.9	 	11%	 	
Total NH	3 [Mg]	 	3.31	 	0.89	 	73%	 	0.89	 	73%	 	
Source: 	 	IOS	-PIB.

Opportunities fo	r producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	76	 	
 
Table 	5.28	 	Estimations of GHG and NH	3 emissions in phase 	2 and comparison to baseline	 	
Gas	 	Baseline	 	
Phase 2	 	
Option 2A 
Scenario 1	 	
Reduction	 	
Phase 2	 	
Option 2A 
Scenario 4	 	
Reduction	 	
CO	2 [Mg] 	 	2 588.8	 	2 607.8	 	-1%	 	2 507.1	 	3%	 	
CH	4 [Mg] 	 	610.3	 	257.2	 	58%	 	308.7	 	49%	 	
N2O [Mg] 	 	184.4	 	29.6	 	84%	 	27.3	 	85%	 	
Total GHG [Mg CO	2 	
eq]	 	3 383.5	 	2 894.5	 	14%	 	2843.2	 	16%	 	
Total NH	3 [Mg]	 	3.31	 	0.90	 	73%	 	1.25	 	62%	 	
Source: IOS	-PIB.	 	
The 	construction of a biogas plant and the use of sludge as substrates in each of the analysed 	
phases and options leads to a reduction in total GHG and NH	3 emissions. The biggest reduction 	
can be seen in phase 1 option 1A when the sludge, instead of being comp	osted, is used as a 	
substrate in the anaerobic digestion process, electricity produced from biogas replaces the elec-
tricity from the grid, and generated digestate is used in agriculture without drying. The reduction 
in GHG emissions (	1 488.7 Mg CO	2 eq, 	44%	 compared to baseline) is driven mostly by replacing 	
almost half of the high	-emission energy from fossil fuels with energy from biogas. In the case of 	
NH	3 emission, the 73% reduction compared to the baseline is achieved by managing sludge in a 	
closed anaer	obic digestion process instead of open composting.	 	
In option 1B, the reductions in GHG are much smaller (11% compared to baseline), due to the 
energy	-intensive process of drying the digestate to produce soil	-improving product. In phase 2, 	
when the biogas p	roduction is higher and it could be possible to replace a bigger share of the 	
electricity from the grid with energy from biogas, the reductions in GHG are higher than in option 
1B 	– 14% and 16% in option 2A scenario 1 and option 2A scenario 4, respectively	. 	
In Table 5.2	9, the estimates of emission of GHG and NH	3 and possible reduction in phase 2 for 	
situations without digestate drying, are presented.	 	
Table 	5.29	 	Estimations of GHG and NH3 emissions in phase 2 and comparison to base-
line, without digestate drying 	 	
Gas	 	Baseline	 	
Phase 2	 	
Option 2A 
Scenario 1	 	
Reduction	 	
Phase 2	 	
Option 2A 
Scenario 4	 	
Reduction	 	
CO	2 [Mg] 	 	2 588.8	 	1 598.9	 	38%	 	1 158.6	 	55%	 	
CH	4 [Mg] 	 	610.3	 	154.5	 	75%	 	165.3	 	73%	 	
N2O [Mg] 	 	184.4	 	26.0	 	86%	 	22.5	 	88%	 	
Total GHG [Mg CO	2 	
eq]	 	3 383.5	 	1 779.4	 	47%	 	1 346.4	 	60%	 	
Total NH	3 [Mg]	 	3.31	 	0.90	 	73%	 	1.25	 	62%	 	
Source: IOS	-PIB.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	77	 	
 
The situation in which the digestate could be managed without the need for drying would allow 
to increase in the GHG reductions compared to the baseline from 14% and 16% (Table 5.26) to	 	
47% and 60% when increasing the amount of biogas produced.	 	
The electricity sector is covered by EU ETS, hence the price of purchased electricity should include 
payment for 	CO	2-emissions. Electricity constitutes a main share of energy cost savings (section 	
5.2.5	). CO	2 and 	CO	2 equivalents associated with heat may be inside or outside of ET	S depending 	
on circumstances. CH	4 and N	2O are outside of the EU ETS.	 	
For this report, we assume that half of 	the 	CO	2-equivalent emissions are excluded from the cost	-	
savings reported above. The EU ETS price currently is about €80 per ton, but it shows an in	creas-	
ing trend in parallel with an 	ever	-stricter	 EU ceiling on emissions. :ere we assume €100/ton dur-	
ing 	the 	operation of the pla	nt. €100 translates to 430 PLN.	 	
Combining 750 tons of 	unaccounted	-for	 emission reductions and 430 PLN per ton we estimate 	
about 0.3 million PLN as the external value of 	CO	2 emission, that is, the value that is unaccounted 	
for in the cost savings reported above. In a social analysis this figure should be added to the gen-
uine	 cost savings outlined above.	 	
Besides	 the impact on 	CO	2, CH	4 and N	2O emissions the project will contribute to increased energy 	
security and a robust energy system.	 Reducing negative climate impacts is a value in itself. In the 	
case of public investments, t	his should also be significant, irrespective of the formal conditions 	
that translate into economic performance of the investment.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	78	 	
 	
6	 	Conclusions	 	
Based on the analysis we make the following observations:	 	
 	The MOFTMO has significant potential for agricultural 	biogas production, partly realized by 	
already functioning biogas plants. The mapping of the agricultural biogas potential indicates 
that in almost every municipality at least one 0,5 MW biogas plant could operate. Due to 
the fact, that the prevailing in th	e area farms are small with limited animal population, co-	
operation between stakeholders from the agricultural sector is needed. One of the ways in 
which the cooperation in agricultural sector could be established is energy cooperative. The 
cooperatives wou	ld enable the exploitation of the economy of scale existing in the biogas 	
production sector. The cooperatives could also use support from the functioning in Poland 
support system which favours the agricultural sector.	 	
 	The biogas potential of the municipal 	sector is much smaller than that of the agricultural 	
sector. Moreover, biogas production facilities using substrates from the municipal sector 
(wastewater sludge, organic fraction of municipal waste), due to the required pre	-treatment 	
the feedstock require	s, tend to incur higher capital and operational costs than other facili-	
ties. 	 	
 	In MOFTMO, the investment in biogas production in a municipal wastewater treatment 
plant is possible in Tomaszów Mazowiecki where the biggest WWTP in the area is located. 
Investm	ent in biogas plant could be an important step for WWTP on the path to achieving 	
energy self	-sufficiency. Using in the biogas plant the municipal sludge generated in WWTP 	
with the addition of grease trap sludge, wastewater from the agricultural industry, a	nd 	
sludge from neighbouring WWTP, could produce energy to cover ca. 50% of WWTP energy 
needs. The analysis indicates that without co	-fermentation (addition of other substrates be-	
sides wastewater sludge), the biogas plants located within WWTPs won’t allow t	he WWTP 	
to become energy self	-sufficient. This observation means that available grants/loans for the 	
municipal sector should not reduce the support by limiting the substrates accepted to one 
stream (eg. only agricultural, only sludge, only organic fraction	 of municipal waste) as some-	
times is the case. 	 	
 	The results of the economic analysis conducted, although simplified and depending on as-
sumptions made, indicate that also profitability of biogas production at Tomaszow Ma-
zowiecki could increase significantly	 when municipal waste or industrial waste is included as 	
a substrate. The possibility of charging waste gate fees for treating external waste provides 
the biogas plant with additional income. There is an investment cost required to pre	-treat 	
municipal or i	ndustrial waste. However, the additional income from gate fees and higher bi-	
ogas production resulting in greater energy savings make this option profitable which is also 
supported by the example of the biogas plant at the wastewater treatment plant in the 	Re-	
gional Water and Sewage Management Center in Tychy.	 	
 	In energy management of biogas plants, the possibility of using, and preferably selling, the 
excess heat produced in cogeneration (CHP) impacts the profitability of the investment. 
Finding use for the e	xcess heat can improve both profitability and social acceptance of the 	
installation. It may also reduce environmental and climatic impacts as unutilized excess heat 
just warms the air. One may consider including the full use of heat as a condition in 
loan/	grant agreements. However, in the case of biogas plants in the municipal sector, the

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	79	 	
 	
use of excess heat is often impeded by the location of installations 	– usually in distance from 	
possible points of use.	 	
 	The need for cooperation is especially crucial in t	he municipal sector. The option in which 	
sludge from wastewater treatment is co	-digested with other substrates requires coopera-	
tion with the possible co	-substrate providers. The exploitation of excess heat generated dur-	
ing energy production in cogeneration	 calls for cooperation with potential heat recipients. It 	
is also necessary to find markets for the digestate making cooperation with, preferably local, 
digestate utilizers a must. The stakeholders in the municipal sector could possibly cooperate 
as an ene	rgy cluster, exploiting the support offered by the new regulation in this area. The 	
development of a network structure around biogas plant investments could contribute to 
the growing importance of biogas in the region’s energy economy.	 	
 	How the digestate is	 treated, both in legal (as a bio	-fertiliser or as a waste) and technologi-	
cal terms (does it need energy	-intensive treatment before use) has an impact on the profit-	
ability of biogas plants. This is brought out clearly both in Phase 1 and Phase 2 at the To-
maszow Mazowiecki wastewater treatment plant. It is necessary to improve the regulations 
and conditions for using digestate in agriculture. 	 	
 	Biogas production in the anaerobic digestion process offers many environmental benefits 
mitigating the impact of was	te management on the environment and climate change. The 	
important benefit 	– capturing the methane released in the process 	– is especially relevant 	
for the agricultural sector where livestock manure is a significant source of methane emis-
sions. Processing 	manure in AD plants reduces emissions from traditional manure manage-	
ment practices such as open lagoons or piles. Another benefit is the offsetting of fossil fuel 
use. Electricity and heat generated from biogas can replace fossil fuels such as coal, oil, a	nd 	
natural gas, leading to a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from energy production. The 
use of digestate as a biofertilizer supports sustainable agricultural practices leading to recy-
cling nutrients back into the soil, reducing the need for syntheti	c fertilizers, enhancing soil 	
structure and increasing organic matter.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	80	 	
 
References	 	
Bachmann, N. (2015) Sustainable biogas production in municipal wastewater treatment plants. 	
IEA Bioenergy Task 37 report. 	 	
Budzianowski, W.M. (2016) A review of potential inn	ovations for production, conditioning and 	
utilization of biogas with multiple	-criteria assessment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy 	
Reviews 54, p. 1148	–1171, 	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.	10.054	 	
European Biogas Association (2023) European Biogas Association Statistical Report 2023, Brus-	
sels.	 	
Guidehouse (2022). Biomethane production potentials in the EU. A Gas for Climate report. 	
https://gasforclimate2050.eu/wp	-content/uploads/2023/12/Guidehouse_GfC_report_de-	
sign_final_v3.pdf	 	
Holewa	-Rataj, J. Kukulska	-Zając, E. (2022) Biogaz rolniczy w Polsce 	– produkcja i możliwości wy-	
korzystan	ia / Agricultural biogas in Poland 	– production and possible applications. 	Nafta	-	
Gaz, 12, p. 872	–877, 	https://doi.org/10.18668/NG.2022.12.03	 	
Meld. St. 13 (2020	-2021). 	Klimaplan for 2021	-2030. 	The Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Envi-	
ronment. 	https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.	-st.	-13	-	
20202021/id2827405/	 	
Krasucka E., Oniszk	-Popławska A. (201	3) Recykling organiczny i odzysk energii z segregowanych u 	
źródła bioodpadów pochodzenia komunalnego. Przewodnik przedsiębiorcy. Technologie 
przetwarzania selektywnie zbieranych bioodpadów pochodzenia komunalnego 	– fermenta-	
cja metanowa. 	Projekt “Naukowcy d	la gospodarki Mazowsza”.	 	
Kwaśny H., Banach M., Kowalski Z. (2012). Przegląd technologii produkcji biogazu różnego pocho-	
dzenia. Czasopismo Techniczne (2	-Ch/2012 (17): 83	-102. 	 	
Kwaśny H., Balcerzak W., Rezka P. (2016). Biogaz i charakterystyka wybranych meto	d jego odsiar-	
czania. 	Czasopismo =nżynierii Lądowej, Środowiska i Architektury, 63(2): 129	-141.	 	
EIG 	(2023	) EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook 2023.	 	
IPCC 	(2006	) 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Prepared by the Na-	
tional Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Eggleston H.S., Buendia L., Miwa K., Ngara 
T. and Tanabe K. (eds). 	Published: IGES, Japan.	 	
IPCC 	(2019	) 2019 Refinement to the 2006	 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Invento-	
ries, Calvo Buendia, E., Tanabe, K., Kranjc, A., Baasansuren, J., Fukuda, M., Ngarize, S., 
Osako, A., Pyrozhenko, Y., Shermanau, P. and Federici, S. (eds). Published: IPCC, Switzerland.	 	
IPCC 	(2013	) Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to 	
the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, 
T.F., D. Qin, G.	-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia,	 V. Bex and 	
P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New 
York, NY, USA, 1535 pp.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	81	 	
 
N=R (2024) Poland’s National =nventory Report 2024. Greenhouse gas inventory 1988	-2022. Sub-	
mission under the UN FCCC and its Kyoto Proto	col. Warsaw, 2024.	 	
Favoino E., Giavini M. (2020) Bio	-waste generation in the EU: Current capture levels and future 	
potential. Bio	-based Industries Consortium (BIC).	 	
Statistics Poland, Bank Danych Lokalnych: 	https://bdl.stat.gov.pl/bdl/start	 	
Normatywy produkcji rolniczej: 	https://poznan.cdr.gov.pl/normatywy/wstep.html	 	
Kuś H., Madej A., Kopiński H. (2006) Bilans słomy w ujęciu regionalnym, St	udia i Raporty IUNG	-PIB 	
Puławy, 3.	 	
ARiMR (The Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture) Database: 	https://re-	
jestrupraw.arimr.gov.pl/	 	
Jacyszyn 	H. (2021) ‘The Biogas Sector in Poland as 	Compared to Other European Countries’, Energy 	
Policy Studies, 2021, nr 1(7), pp. 27	-40.	 	
Hasiulewicz M., Haniszewska D. A. (2013) ‘Potencjalne możliwości rozwoju biogazowni na przykła-	
dzie województwa zachodniopomorskiego’, =nżynieria Rolnicza, 2(1), pp. 91	-102.	 	
Harosz Z. (2016) ‘Potencjał techniczny słomy w Polsce i efekty środowiskowe jej alternatywnego 	
wykorzystania’, Roczniki Naukowe Stowarzyszenia Ekonomistów Rolnictwa i Agrobiznesu, 
18(1), pp. 84	-89.	 	
Niekurzak M. (2022) ‘Analiza możliwości rozwoju i wyk	orzystania potencjału biogazu rolniczego 	
na cele energetyczne w Polsce’, Nauka 	– Technika 	– Technologia, 2, pp. 135	-148.	 	
Podgórska M., Narloch P. (2022) ‘Przegląd metod oczyszczania biogazu do biometanu’, Rynek 	
Energii	 Nr 6(163), pp 16	-23.	 	
Kasinath	, A., Mü	ller, W., Schneider, =., Gerke, F., & Bockreis, A. (2015) ’Waste Separation Press 	
(WSP): A mechanical pretreatment option for organic waste from source separation’, Waste 
Management, 39, pp. 71	-77, 	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.02.024	 	
Kasinath, A., Fudala	-Ksiazek, S., Szopinska, M., Bylinski, H., Artichowicz, W., Remiszewska	-	
Skwarek, A., & Luczkiewicz, A. (2021) ‘Biomass in biogas production: Pretreatment and codi-
gestion’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 150, 111509, 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111509	 	
Kowalczyk	-Huśko A. (2013) ‘Biogazownie szansą dla rolnictwa i srodowiska’, Fundacja na rzecz Roz-	
woju Polskiego Rolnictwa	, p. 91.	 	
Kowalczyk	-Huśko A., 	Dach J. (	2022) ‘Biogazownie jako element dochodzenia do neutralności 	emi-	
syjnej rolnictwa’	, Biogaz w Polsce	 Raport 2022	, Magazyn Biomasa, pp. 	41	-45.	 	
Grosser, A., Neczaj, E., Singh, B., Almås, Å., Brattebø, :., & Kacprzak, M. (2017) ‘Anaerobic diges-	
tion of sewage sludge with grease trap sludge and municipal solid waste as co	-substrates', 	
Environmental Research, 155, 	pp. 249	-260. 	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.02.007

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	82 	
 
=OŚ	-P=B (2022) Morfologia odpadów komunalnych wytwarzanych w Polsce w systemie gminnym, 
https://ios.edu.pl/wp	-content/uploads/2022/08/ios	-pib	-morfologia	-odpadow	-komunal-	
nych	-wytwarzanych	-w-polsce	-w-systemie	-gminnym.pdf	 	
Polish database on products, packaging and waste management (Polish BDO), 	https://rejestr	-	
bdo.mos.gov.pl/	 	
Curkowski A., Mroczkowski P., Oniszk	-Popławska A., Wiśniewski G. (2009) 	Biogaz rolniczy 	– pro-	
dukcja	 i wykorzystanie	. Mazowiecka Agencja Energetyczna, Warszawa.	 	
Krasucka E., Oniszk	-Popławska A. (2013) 	Recykling organiczny i odzysk energii z selektywnie zbie-	
ranych bioodpadów pochodzenia komunalnego. Technologie przetwarzania selektywnie 
zbieranych bioodpa	daów pochodzenia komunalnego 	– fermentacja metanowa.	 Warszawa.	 	
AL	-PROJEKT (2023) 	Koncepcja. Przebudowa ciągu przetwarzania osadów na oczyszczalni ścieków 	
w Tomaszowie Mazowieckim z odzyskiem energii, surowców mineralnych oraz wody w ra-
mach realizacji proje	ktu gospodarki o obiegu zamkniętym.	 Tomaszów Maz	owiecki.

Opportunities for producing biogas in the MOFTMO	 area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	83	 	
 
Appendices	 	
 	
A	 	Methane production potential 
from selected subtrates	 	
Table 	A.1 	Methane production potential from selected substrates	 	
Data unit	 	Content of dry mass [%]	 	Content of dry organic 	
mass [%]	 	
Methane produc-
tion from dry or-
ganic matter [ cubic 
meters/Mg d.o.m]	 	
Wastes from baking in-	
dustry	 	87.7	 	97.1	 	403.4	 	
Sludge from municipal 
wastewater treatment 	
plant	(*) 	4.4	 	83.4	 	212.8	 	
Biodegradable 	munici-	
pal waste	 	60.3	 	55.0	 	396.8	 	
75	-390	(**)	 	
Food and kitchen waste	 	18.9	 	
15	-25	(**)	 	
71.9	 	
85	-94	(**)	 	
530.0	 	
90	-305	(**)	 	
Plant and grass clip-
pings (urban greenery)	 	23.2	 	88.2	 	489.7	 	
310	-408	(**)	 	
Straw	 	87.5	 	87.0	 	387.5	 	
Hay	 	87.8	 	89.6	 	417.9	 	
Corn silage	 	32.6	 	90.8	 	317.6	 	
Cattle manure	 	23.7	 	76.4	 	249.4	 	
Cattle slurry	 	9.5	 	77.4	 	225.5	 	
Pig manure	 	23.8	 	79.9	 	228.0	 	
Pig slurry	 	6.6	 	76.1	 	301.0	 	
Poultry manure	 	30.3	 	72.7	 	230.0	 	
Poultry slurry	 	15.0	 	75.6	 	320.0	 	
Source:	 Curkowski et al, 2009; except 	(*) AL-PROJEKT, 2023, 	(**) Krasucka E. Oniszk	-Popławska A. (2013).

Opportunities fo	r producing biogas in the MOFTMO area of Poland	 	
 
 	
Vista Analyse	 | 2024/23	 	84	 	
 
 	
 
 
 	
Vista Analyse AS	 	
Meltzers gate 4	 	
0257 Oslo	 	
 
post@vista	-analyse.no	 	
vista	-analyse.no