PSE Community.org

The World Community for Chemical Process Systems Engineering Education and Research

Proceedings of ESCAPE 36ISSN: 2818-4734
Volume: 5 (2026)
Table of Contents
LAPSE:2026.0382
Published Article
LAPSE:2026.0382
SEMPRE-BIO project: comparison of three innovative scaled up and optimised technologies for biomethane production and its purification
Filippo Bisotti, Matteo Gilardi, Bernd Wittgens
June 12, 2026
Abstract
This work presents the scale-up and detailed analysis, including comparison of relevant key performance indicators (KPIs) and energy analysis, of three innovative technologies for producing biomethane and its subsequent upgrading. The SEMPRE-BIO project tested and validated three different innovative technologies and pilots within the Horizon Europe framework. The three pilots are in Spain (biomethanation of biogas from wastewater treatment fermentation), France (biomethanation of syngas from biomass gasification), and Belgium (purification of biogas from manure anaerobic digestion). The three case studies will be presented and discussed. The analysis will dive into the layout of the optimised process layout of the scale-up plants as well as an exhaustive comparison, presenting advantages, shortcomings and bottlenecks of each technology, accounting for the main KPIs, i.e., electricity and steam demand, consumables including cooling water and others specific to the technologies.
Record ID
LAPSE:2026.0382
Keywords
Biogas, Biomethanation, Biomethane, Carbon circularity, Energy transition, Gasification, Waste valorisation
Subject
Modelling and Simulations
Suggested Citation
Bisotti F, Gilardi M, Wittgens B. SEMPRE-BIO project: comparison of three innovative scaled up and optimised technologies for biomethane production and its purification. Systems and Control Transactions 5:1414-1421 (2026) https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.185821
Author Affiliations
Bisotti F: SINTEF Industry - Process Technology - P.O. Box 4760 Torgarden, 7465, Trondheim, Norway
Gilardi M: SINTEF Industry - Process Technology - P.O. Box 4760 Torgarden, 7465, Trondheim, Norway
Wittgens B: SINTEF Industry - Process Technology - P.O. Box 4760 Torgarden, 7465, Trondheim, Norway
[Login] to see author email addresses.
Journal Name
Systems and Control Transactions
Volume
5
First Page
1414
Last Page
1421
Year
2026
Publication Date
2026-06-12
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.185821
Version Comments
Original Submission
Other Meta
PII: 1414-1421-603-SCT-5-2026, Publication Type: Journal Article
Record Map
Published Article

LAPSE:2026.0382
This Record
External Link

https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.185821
Publisher Version
Download
Files
Download 1v1.pdf (1.1 MB)
Jun 12, 2026
Main Article
[Full Details]
License
CC BY-SA 4.0
[details]
Meta
Record Statistics
Record Views
176
Version History
[v1] (Original Submission)
Jun 12, 2026
 
Verified by curator on
Jun 12, 2026
This Version Number
v1
Citations
LAPSE:2026.0382
Most Recent
LAPSE:2026.0382v1
This Version
URL Here
https://psecommunity.org/LAPSE:2026.0382
 
Record Owner
PSE Press
Links to Related Works
Directly Related to This Work
https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.185821
Publisher Version
References Cited
  1. IEA. An introduction to biogas and biomethane. https://www.iea.org/reports/outlook-for-biogas-and-biomethane-prospects-for-organic-growth/an-introduction-to-biogas-and-biomethane
  2. IEA. Outlook for biogas and biomethane. https://www.iea.org/reports/outlook-for-biogas-and-biomethane
  3. Kougias PG, Angelidaki I. Biogas and its opportunities-a review. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 12: (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-018-1037-8
  4. Deng R, Wu J, Huang Z, Feng Z, Hu W, Tang Y, Tan H, Zhang H, Zairov R, Pan Z. Biogas to chemicals: a review of the state-of-the-art conversion processes. Biomass Conv. Bioref. 15:14653-14673 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-024-06343-1
  5. EBA. Statistical Report 2025. https://www.europeanbiogas.eu/news/eba-statistical-report-2025/
  6. Werkneh AA. Biogas impurities: environmental and health implications, removal technologies and future perspectives. Heliyon 8:e10929 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10929
  7. Swinbourn R, Li C, Wang F. A comprehensive review on biomethane production from biogas separation and its techno?economic assessments. ChemSusChem 17: (2024) https://doi.org/10.1002/cssc.202400779
  8. Jønson BD, Tsapekos P, Tahir Ashraf M, Jeppesen M, Ejbye Schmidt J, Bastidas-Oyanedel JR. Pilot-scale study of biomethanation in biological trickle bed reactors converting impure CO2 from a full-scale biogas plant. Bioresource Technology 365:128160 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.128160
  9. Grimalt-Alemany A, Skiadas IV, Gavala HN. Syngas biomethanation: state-of-the-art review and perspectives. Biofuels Bioprod Bioref 12:139-158 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1826
  10. Krishania M, Kumar V, Vijay VK, Malik A. Analysis of different techniques used for improvement of biomethanation process: A review. Fuel 106:1-9 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2012.12.007
  11. Jusoh N, Adibah Tengku Hassan TN, Suhaimi NH, Mubashir M. Hydrogen sulfide removal from biogas: an overview of technologies emphasizing membrane separation. Separation and Purification Technology 373:133466 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2025.133466
  12. Ancona MA, Antonioni G, Branchini L, De Pascale A, Melino F, Orlandini V, Antonucci V, Ferraro M. Renewable energy storage system based on a power-to-gas conversion process. Energy Procedia 101:854-861 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.11.108
  13. Abad D, Vega F, Navarrete B, Delgado A, Nieto E. Modeling and simulation of an integrated power-to-methanol approach via high temperature electrolysis and partial oxy-combustion technology. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 46:34128-34147 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.04.029
  14. Li C, Zhu X, Angelidaki I. Carbon monoxide conversion and syngas biomethanation mediated by different microbial consortia. Bioresource Technology 314:123739 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123739
  15. Bisotti F, Gilardi M, De Carli P, Mercier Y, Wittgens B. A Novel Semi-rigorous Model for Biomass Pyrolysis and Gasification, Chem. Eng. Trans., 119: 241-246 (2025) https://doi.org/10.3303/CET25119041
  16. AmsterCHEM. https://www.cocosimulator.org
  17. Sinaei Nobandegani M, Yu L, Hedlund J. Zeolite membrane process for industrial CO2/CH4 separation. Chemical Engineering Journal 446:137223 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2022.137223
  18. Berrada A, Sanjari MJ, El Mrabet R. Techno-economic assessment of hydrogen production: comparative analysis of electrolyser technologies in a hybrid pv/wind system. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 141:193-211 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2025.05.384
  19. Elrhoul D, Naveiro M, Romero Gómez M. Thermo-economic comparison between three different electrolysis technologies powered by a conventional organic rankine cycle for the green hydrogen production onboard liquefied natural gas carriers. JMSE 12:1287 (2024) https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12081287
  20. Cerone N, Zimbardi F, Contuzzi L, Stri?gas N, Eimontas J, Zito GD. Production of hydrogen-rich syngas from biomass gasification by double step steam catalytic tar reforming. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 95:1215-1221 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.07.290
  21. Daugaard DE, Brown RC. Enthalpy for pyrolysis for several types of biomass. Energy Fuels 17:934-939 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1021/ef020260x
  22. Jabraeelzadeh A, Gharehghani A, Ahbabi Saray J, Mahmoudzadeh Andwari A, Borhani TN. Techno-economic analysis of biogas upgrading through amine scrubbing: a comparative study of different single amines. Fuel 381:133662 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2024.133662
(0.1 seconds)

[0.1 s]