Design of an Alternative Energy Plant for a

Poultry Farm in Davao City

Horace G. Baria
Department of Mechanical Engineering, UP Diliman
hgbaria@up.edu.ph

Abstract — A poultry farm in Davao City was selected, and a grid-tied plant was designed to accommodate its
energy needs with the minimum of capital expense. Among available energy sources for a typical Davao City poultry
farm, poultry manure was selected due to its ready availability and the low capital cost required to construct a
biogas-fueled plant. Among a sample of five (5) poultry farms in Davao City, Morning Sun Poultry Farm was
selected for having the highest potential population of poultry, and was calculated to have an average power
requirement of 45.4 kW. The designed biogas plant has a digester volume of 997.2 m³, and was projected to produce
538.9 m³ of biogas per day (138.8 kW). The generator set is a 75 kVA PowerLink GXE60-6NG, with 36% full-load
efficiency. Together, the digester and generator can continuously produce a maximum of 49.97 kW when operating.

Keywords: renewable, energy, biogas, poultry

I. Introduction

Between poultry and livestock, poultry raising involves a great deal more electric energy

compared to animal feed to carry out (E. M. Barber et al. 1989). This is due in large part to high

heating requirements, necessary for brooding chicks (Department of Agriculture - Cagayan

Valley Region 2004).

Poultry farm heating is generally carried out through electric heating lamps or gas heating

lamps (Department of Agriculture - Cagayan Valley Region 2004). Electricity and LPG in Davao

City cost Php 13.6883 (DASURECO 2022) and approx. Php 7.11 (Department of Energy 2022),

respectively. Thus, for a farm operating on a consumption of around 50 kW annual average,

operating on pure electricity would amount to Php 5.5M per annum, while operating gas burners

would amount to around Php 3M per annum. There are, therefore, significant savings to be made

1
if in-house energy production could be made to supplement consumption in any way, and in the

best case, completely accommodate it.

As poultry farms have free access to a feedstock of poultry manure, they also have an

opportunity to take advantage of this potential energy source. This paper aims to design an

economical plant that can best benefit a poultry farm operator and satisfy their farm's energy

needs when operating. To this end, all decisions made here were driven by the assumption that it

would be the poultry farm operator who would be financing the project: capital cost must be kept

under Php10M, while the project should achieve break-even on savings within five (5) years. A

least benefit-cost ratio of 3.0 was considered ideal.

II. Methodology

2.1. Fuel and Conversion Technology Selection

Although biogas from poultry manure is an obvious choice, it is necessary to account for

other possibilities. After inspecting satellite images via Google Maps, it was determined that

most farms in Davao City only have access to wind, solar, and manure resources.

Conventional fuels, such as coal, natural gas, and diesel fuels, were immediately rejected as

either the equipment necessary to convert these into electricity were too expensive (coal and

natural gas), or generation with the fuel is more expensive compared to grid electricity

(Php13.6883 (DASURECO 2022)); at Php 64.03 per liter (Department of Energy 2023 Jan 10)

and 37.184 MJ/L (Rentar Fuel Catalyst 2018), electricity from diesel would cost Php 15.50 per

kWh, assuming 40% conversion efficiency.

2
 This left conversion technologies for poultry manure, wind, and solar resources for

consideration under the ff. criteria: 1) land requirements, 2) day-night availability, and 3) capital

cost. In the end, biogas conversion of poultry manure was selected. Please see "3.1. Fuel and

Conversion Technology Selection" for details.

2.2. Site Selection

A sample of five (5) poultry farms were taken from an area northwest of the urbanized city

proper, near the geometric center of the area recognized as Davao City. Google Maps was used to

find the poultry farms (in January 2023), and directly adjacent farms were avoided for inclusion.

Table 1. Poultry farm selection candidates

Total housing area

Name (sqm) Free area (sqm)
RNF Poultry Farm 9022 19132
Solar Unico Breeder Farm 5688.9 6427
Morning Sun Poultry Farm 18720 7650
Prime Poultry Breeder Farm 2124 2666
Kahayag Farms 6412.32 5618

A multi-attribute utility scoring model was used to select a site for which a biogas plant would

be designed. All multi-attribute utility models in this paper were performed in this manner:

Each attribute array (column) is normalized to values between 0 and 1, corresponding to the

"worst" and "best" values of that array; when the minimum value is considered "best"

("min-is-best"), the minimum value is normalized to 1; for "max-is-best," the maximum value is

normalized to 1. After normalization, fractional weights (which sum to one (1)), which encode

3
arbitrary preference, are multiplied element-wise to their corresponding attribute arrays. Adding

the weighted values of each candidate's record (row) results in their final utility score.

For site selection, only two attributes were considered: total farm housing area, and total free

area. Total farm housing area considers the total floor area visible from satellite images, which

could be reasonably assumed to be poultry housing sheds. Total free area is the total area of what

could reasonably be assumed as the full extent of the farm's property, sans existing structures and

obvious developments.

These attributes were assigned weights of 60% (housing area) and 40% (free area). It was also

desired for both to be maximized, firstly to have a large population from which to draw biogas

feedstock, and secondly so that any new biogas plant may fit on the existing property, forgoing

expense for new land.

2.3. Biogas System Design

Figure 1. Biogas system diagram. This paper’s concerns are highlighted green.

4
 The system chiefly consists of a mixer, digester, effluent treatment, gas holder (usually part of

the same physical structure as the digester), H2S scrubber, generator, and a grid interconnection

with a net metering scheme.

The system was designed with grid interconnection in mind. Off-grid systems are more

expensive, with the implied additional battery storage systems and redundant generators driving

up capital cost (Grid-Tied vs. Off-Grid Solar 2020 Jul 8). Moreover, biogas production is

unstable, fluctuating wildly with temperature and the biochemical composition of the feedstock

(International Renewable Energy Agency 2016). Grid interconnection also allows the grid to

handle power peaking profiles, which a poultry farm ought to have; heating is more necessary at

night than in the day, skewing consumption in that direction.

The system was designed with the ff. steps:

1. Site requirement calculation

2. Digester design and feasibility validation

3. Generation selection

4. Digester redesign

2.4. Site Power Requirements

2.4.1. Assumptions

There were several critical assumptions made to calculate site power requirements:

1. The farm has both chicks and adults in its poultry population.

2. Chicks constitute 1/3 of the poultry population.

3. The area allotted to layers and broilers in the population is equal.

5
 4. Floor area is underutilized (Assumed area usage factor: 0.7)

5. Heating lamps do not run all the time. (Assumed usage factor: 0.2).

6. Heating lamps are electric.

7. Non-heating electricity consumption can be calculated as 15% of heating consumption.

(Value estimated from an unpublished presentation; unreferenced, see “Notes”).

2.4.2. Heating Requirement Power Estimation

A commercially-available heating lamp (Chishtiya Poultry Services) was found and its specs

were used to estimate an average heating power coverage. The 2 kW lamp was reported to cover

200 ft² (18.58 m²), which comes out to 9.29 m²/kW.

Multiple assumptions have to be made at this point, lacking information on actual farm

operations, to estimate the floor area that must be heated. The utilized floor area was assumed to

be 0.7 times the available floor area of housing. The space requirements for layers are different

to those for broilers; for simplicity, the utilized floor area was assumed equally halved between

them:

𝐴𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑙 = 𝐴𝐿 + 𝐴𝐵 , where 𝐴𝐿 = 𝐴𝐵
(Eq. 1)
Each sub-area AL and AB were further partitioned into sub-allotments for young chicks, old

chicks, and adults:

𝐴𝐿 = 𝐴𝐿,𝑌𝐶 + 𝐴𝐿,𝑂𝐶 + 𝐴𝐿,𝐴

(Eq. 2a)

𝐴𝐵 = 𝐴𝐵,𝑌𝐶 + 𝐴𝐵,𝑂𝐶 + 𝐴𝐵,𝐴

(Eq. 2b)

6
 The area allotments for old chicks were considered to be roughly twice that as for young

chicks, and the remaining area after finding both allotments for young and old chicks were

allotted to adults. This can be expressed with:

𝐴𝐿 = 𝐴𝐿𝑋 + 𝐴𝐿(2𝑋) + 𝐴𝐿(1 − 3𝑋)

(Eq. 3)
where X is the area allotment fraction for young chicks. Each term is equivalent to the

sub-allotments in Eq. 2a as 𝐴𝐿𝑋 = 𝐴𝐿,𝑌𝐶 , 𝐴𝐿(2𝑋) = 𝐴𝐿,𝑂𝐶 , and 𝐴𝐿(1 − 3𝑋) = 𝐴𝐿,𝐴 . The

interpretation is the same for Eq. 2b.

With the areas AL and AB known, it was necessary to initially assume an allotment X for the

young chicks. However, since it was additionally assumed that chicks consisted one-third (⅓) of

the overall poultry population, and chicks were known to occupy less space than adults, the

actual area allotment fraction would be considerably less than one-third.

In order to meet this assumption, the area allotment for young chicks was adjusted; from the

given areas, and with space requirements known, it is possible to estimate the total chick and

adult population contained in those areas. The young chick area allotment X was then manually

adjusted until the ratio of chicks to the total population fell between 30% and 33.3%, finally

stopping at 𝑋 = 0. 05 .

7
 Table 2. Poultry demographic calculation based on space requirements and area allotments.

OUTPUT
INPUT PARAMETER VALUE UNIT VALUE UNIT
PARAMETER
Layer space requirement (day-old 0.009677
to four weeks) 4 sqm/chick Total layers 229886 heads
Layer space requirement (4–8 0.019354
weeks) 8 sqm/chick Young chicks 47393 chicks
Layer space requirement (9+ 0.035483
weeks) 8 sqm/adult Old chicks 23696 chicks
Broiler space requirement 0.027870
(day-old to three weeks) 912 sqm/chick Adults 158797 adults
Broiler space requirement (3–4 0.046451
weeks) 52 sqm/chick Total broilers 86982 heads
Broiler space requirement (5+ 0.092903
weeks) 04 sqm/adult Young chicks 16456 chicks
Layers allotted area 6552 sqm Old chicks 9874 chicks
(Layer) Young chicks area 458.64 sqm Adults 60652 adults
(Layer) Old chicks area 458.64 sqm Total heads 316868 heads
(Layer) Adults area 5634.72 sqm Total layer chicks 71089 chicks
Broilers allotted area 6552 sqm Total broiler chicks 26330 chicks
(Broiler) Young chicks area 458.64 sqm Total adults 219449 adults
(Broiler) Old chicks area 458.64 sqm Total chicks 97419 chicks
(Broiler) Adults area 5634.72 sqm - - -
Total allotted for chicks 1834.56 sqm - - -

Finally, the heated floor area was taken to be the total area for all the chicks, since these are

the only part of the poultry population for whom heating is important (Department of Agriculture

- Cagayan Valley Region 2004). Incidentally, the ratio of the area allotted to chicks vs. the total

floor area of housing visible from satellite image was found to be 0.105 ≈ 0.1.

Hence, the heating requirement can be estimated with:

8
 (Eq. 4)
where 0.1 is the estimated area allotment of chicks (as earlier), 9.29 is the heating lamp coverage

(in m²/kW), and A is the total floor area in m², and P h is given in kW.

2.4.3. Total Power Requirement Estimation

Using an earlier estimation of poultry farm power consumption (see “2.4.1. Assumptions”,

no.7), the total power requirement can be estimated from a farm's total floor area as:

𝑃𝑡𝑜𝑡 = 1. 15𝑃ℎ
(Eq. 5a)
0.1𝐴
or 𝑃𝑡𝑜𝑡 ≈ 1. 15( 9.29 ) = 0. 0124𝐴
(Eq. 5b)
2.5. Digester Design

2.5.1. Overview

Figure 2. An example “fixed dome” digester. Image source:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/42/ChinaBiogas.jpg/640px-ChinaBio
gas.jpg

9
 The digester design consists of a hollow cylindrical masonry (CHB) structure, waterproofed

both internally and externally, then, instead of a masonry roof, which is difficult to construct, it is

covered with two layers of flexible HDPE plastic sheets. As biogas is generated from the

fermentation chamber, it will collect and inflate the HDPE layer. Majority of the structure is

below ground. As biogas collects in the gas holder, slurry is pushed out of the outlet; a concrete

collar around the inlet ensures the slurry is trapped there, and so all overflow is hence only from

the outlet. The biogas’s pneumatic action causes a hydraulic level difference between the slurry

in the inlet/outlet and the slurry in the fermentation chamber.

This design was chosen so that local labor could be easily tapped and directed for its

construction, which is fundamentally a large-scale concrete septic tank.

Note that the HDPE layer should be protected against kinetic strikes and thermal damage with

a cap of hard material like plywood or sheet steel, but it is not strictly necessary for the operation

of the digester; the actual form of its protection was left to the preference of the farm operator.

2.5.2. Design Parameters

The parameters for estimating the necessary dimensions of the digester are:

● Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT, in days; assumed at 40 days)

● Influent intake (m³/day)

● Geometric ratios

○ Fermentation chamber-to-gas holder volumes ratio

○ Diameter-to-height ratio

10
 For calculating influent intake, please see the subsequent sub-sections, "Effect of HRT on

Per-capita Biogas Yield", "Estimating Required Biogas Production", and "Estimating Influent

Intake."

The scale of digesters is typically described in terms of the volume of the whole structure in

cubic meters (m³). The total volume is understood as the sum of the slurry/fermentation

chamber's and gas holder/chamber's volumes. It is thus necessary to assume a ratio between the

slurry chamber and the gas holder; there is no fixed rule, but ratios from 1:1 to 5:1 have been

encountered. (Ludwig Sasse 1988)

The digester total volume can be estimated with:

(Eq. 6)
where HRT is the hydraulic retention time (in days), I is the influent intake rate (in m³/day), and

Rv is the ratio of the volumes of the fermentation chamber to the gas holder (dimensionless).

HRT was set to 40 days, and Rv to 4; please see subsection “Estimating Influent Intake” for that

parameter. This equation can be applied to any digester geometry.

Meanwhile, for this design’s right circular cylinder, the diameter can be found with this

formula:

(Eq. 7)

11
 Finally, using the relation 𝑅𝑣 = 𝑉𝑓/𝑉𝑔 = 𝐻𝑓/𝐻𝑔 , which is true for any cylinder, the heights

of the gas holder, fermentation chamber, and the overall of the digester can be found with:

(Eq. 8a)

𝐻𝑓 = 𝑅𝑣𝐻𝑔
(Eq. 8b)

𝐻 = 𝐻𝑓 + 𝐻𝑔
(Eq. 8c)
It is important to keep track of the height of the fermentation chamber, in particular. This

design requires the waterline of the slurry to be below ground level so that the difference

between the slurry waterline and the outlet waterline creates a hydraulic head, which is the

determiner of gas pressure.

Although the design assumes a right circular cylinder, the actual case is that the double HDPE

sheets will inflate as biogas is generated, and so the actual volume of the gas holder will change.

When fully inflated, the actual gas holder volume can be approximated by describing a spherical

cap on top of a right circular cylinder (in terms of previously-solved parameters):

(Eq. 9)

2.5.3. Effect of HRT on Per-capita Biogas Yield

The digester's required influent intake cannot be calculated without knowing the per-capita

biogas yield.

12
 Biogas production (in m³/day) from a control mass of manure/organic slurry is dependent on

Hydraulic Retention Time, or HRT, which is the average number of days that a control mass of

slurry spends in the digester before it eventually migrates to the digester's outlet.

The higher the HRT, the more biogas is yielded from a control mass. For most manure types,

an HRT of 60 days (Sajjad 2002) is enough to extract 100% of all potential biogas yield, while

an HRT of 15±5 days will extract 50% of the potential biogas yield, the exact HRT value wildly

depending on manure type. It is for this reason that HRT values typically range from 40 to 60

days, but even so, 5 days is not unheard of (Sarah House 2011).

Increasing HRT by D days will mean that the overall digester volume must also expand to

accommodate D days' worth more of slurry (at constant influent intake).

Sajjad quotes a biogas yield of 0.00776 to 0.0112 m³ per head of poultry per day, which was

understood to be data collected at a typical HRT; it was assumed that this data was applied at an

HRT of 60 days. By assuming 50% biogas yield at an HRT of 15 days, and a maximum yield of

0.0112 m³ per head of poultry per day at an HRT of 60 days, a piecewise linear equation was

constructed to approximate the biogas yield Y (in m³ per head of poultry per day) at a particular

HRT (in days) as:

(Eq. 10)
2.5.4. Estimating Required Biogas Production

To estimate the required biogas production (PB , in kW), the ff. equation was used:

13
 (Eq. 11)

where Ptot is the total site power requirement, fr is the reserve factor (assumed 0.1), η𝑒 is the

generator’s electrical conversion efficiency (initially assumed as 0.4), and PF is the generator’s

power factor (assumed as 0.95, due to the site consumption being mostly from resistive loads).

3
𝑚 3600
To convert PB in kW to PB in m³/day, use 𝑃𝐵[ 𝑑𝑎𝑦 ] = 𝑃𝐵[𝑘𝑊] × 22500
(Eq. 11b), where

22500 is an assumed heating value of biogas, 22500 kJ/m³.

2.5.5. Estimating Influent Intake

To estimate the digester's influent intake (in m³/day), the ff. equation was used:

(Eq. 12)

Where 𝑃𝐵 is biogas production in m³/day, 𝑎 is the unit animal discharge (taken to be 0.08

kg/adult/day (Tańczuk et al. 2019)), 𝑐𝑇𝑆 is the total solids concentration of poultry manure (

𝑐𝑇𝑆 = 0. 20 (R. W. Melse PhD and F.E. de Buisonjé BSc 2020)), 𝑌 is the per-capita biogas yield

in m³/day/adult, and 𝑐'𝑇𝑆 is the required total solids concentration (0.08, per recommendation of

Sajjad).

The equation already encapsulates the calculation of the number of heads-poultry required to

deliver the necessary animal waste, the total amount of animal waste they produce, the amount of

water necessary to add to dilute the total solids concetration to the required amount, and finally,

the volume of the resulting slurry.

14
2.6. Generator Selection

Generator selection was carried out using multi-attribute utility scoring, with attributes being

"Prime Power Rating (kVA)" and "efficiency". A weight of 60% was assigned to Prime Power

Rating. Initial selection of candidates looked only for generators which were rated for prime

power, were rated between 60 kVA (close to site requirement) and 160 kVA (est. maximum

before generator will be loaded under 30%), and were fueled by natural gas.

The ff. candidates were found:

Table 3. Generator set candidates.

Rating (kVA, prime

Brand/Model/Name Efficiency
power)
PowerLink GXE60-6NG 75 0.36
PowerLink GXE110-6NG 137.5 0.37
PowerLink GE66-NG 82.5 0.384
Generac SG064/PG058 72 0.234

2.7. H2S Scrubber Sizing

The acquisition, or design and construction, of an H2S scrubber is outside of the scope of this

paper. Nevertheless, it is important enough to be briefly discussed.

Biogas is composed of 60–90% methane, trace amounts (up to 0.5%) of hydrogen sulfide

(H2S), and the rest, carbon dioxide. Most problematic is H2S, which can drastically shorten the

life of generator components, and so it is necessary to remove it from the biogas before it enters

the generator.
15
 One simple and robust technology is the "iron sponge," which reacts H2S with iron oxide,

forming iron sulfide. Exposing iron sulfide to atmospheric oxygen recovers the iron oxide, and

the sulfur is deposited as elemental sulfur. Hence, the original media is considered reusable,

albeit practically only several times. (John Poe Taylor 2003)

A simple H2S scrubber can be constructed by fitting a barrel with gas inlet and outlet ports,

and then filling it with rusted iron, with the aim to maximize surface area. Using rusted 0000

grade steel wool is known to have a noticeable improvement over using rusted iron shavings, but

appropriate sizing is necessary to be able to adequately process the large volumes of biogas

moving through the scrubber. (Stephanie Lansing and Gary Felton 2018)

Residence Time (RT) is the average amount of iron oxide contact time that a volume of gas

experiences as it moves through the scrubber. RT values range from 1 to 15 minutes. (Stephanie

Lansing and Gary Felton 2018)

Hence, the ff. equation estimates the required scrubber volume (m³), given some desired

Residence Time (RT, in seconds) for a gas flow 𝑉˙𝑔 (in m³/s):

𝑉𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑏𝑏𝑒𝑟 = 𝑉˙𝑔(𝑅𝑇)
(Eq. 13)
When using poor-quality media, such as coarse, rusted iron scrap and filings, maximizing RT

is a must to make up for lower scrubbing rates; as of writing, a cursory internet search did not

reveal any Philippine company dealing in commercial H2S scrubbing at an agricultural biogas

plant scale, and so it is expected that the operator must improvise one and take this fact into

account, and conservatively maximize RT to 900 seconds.

16
2.8. Economic Analysis

2.8.1. Project Lifetime

Compared to a simple masonry structure, the generator was expected to fail first; hence, the

plant lifetime was assumed at 15 years, which is similar to the lifetime of a diesel plant (Castalia

Strategic Advisors 2015).

2.8.2. Capital Costs

The total capital cost of the project was simplified and taken to be the cost of construction of

the biogas digester, plus the cost of the generator set and its installation.

The cost of construction of the biogas digester was estimated using quotes taken from

philconprices.com (2019), particularly from “Average Cost of Septic Tank Construction

Philippines”, “Masonry Works Prices Philippines”, “Philippine Manpower and Equipment

Productivity Ratio”, “Construction Labor Rates in the Philippines December 2019”, and

“Embankment Price List Philippines”. Using these prices, costs of labor, excavation, masonry

bricklaying, foundation laying, and waterproofing were estimated as a function of the dimensions

of the digester (surface areas, volumes, diameter, and height), which did demonstrate non-linear

behavior as the surface area-to-volume ratio of the digester changed when the parameters were

hand-tuned. The cost of HDPE sheeting was added separately (Alibaba.com).

Table 4. Variables and assumptions accounted for digester construction.

DIMENSIONS
Disk area 269.2712443 m^2
Circumference 58.17011476 m
Total height 3.70 m

17
 Excavation surface area 470.689898 m^2
Number of digesters 1 digesters
Chambers inner wall surface area 484.6882398 m^2
Excavation volume 932.37 m^3
COSTING

Concrete masonry unit (40cm x 20cm x 4in.) price ₱12.00 PHP/pc

Concrete masonry unit (40cm x 20cm x 6in.) price ₱18.00 PHP/pc

HDPE waterproofing membrane ₱195.25 PHP/sqm
Concrete foundation price ₱8,445.38 PHP/m^3
Wall price ₱571.43 PHP/sqm
Cementitious waterproofing price 36 PHP/sqm
Average labor cost 700 PHP/day/person
Excavation cost ₱340.39 PHP/m^3
PRODUCTIVITY
CHB bricklaying time 8 m^2/day
Excavation time (machine) 0.5 man-hrs/m^3
ASSUMPTIONS
Concrete foundation thickness 6 in.
Construction crew size 20 persons
Excavation machines 2 machines
Assumed excavation machine rental cost ₱100,000.00 PHP/machine

The cost of the generator set was estimated using four (4) price quotes provided by Davao

City Industrial Supply and Services (2019), for 10, 25, 25, and 125 kVA ratings. Although an

exact quote for all power ratings could not be acquired, it was determined that the quote prices

2
(Q, in PHP) made a very good linear fit (𝑅 = 0. 9916) with the power rating 𝑃𝑔𝑒𝑛 (in kVA).

The fitted equation was:

𝑄 = 4570. 42747021724 · 𝑃𝑔𝑒𝑛 + 212543. 798177996

(Eq. 14)
18
 Lacking further information, installation service cost was assumed as a flat rate of

Php100,000.

2.8.3. Operating Costs

The ff. operating costs were accounted: wages, water, maintenance, and logistics.

Wages were accounted by an “operator wage” and “consultant wage”: four (4) operators at

Php300,000 per year, and one (1) visiting biogas specialist/consultant at Php150,000 per year.

All together, wages account for Php1.4M per year.

Water was estimated with Php30 per cubic meter. Maintenance was estimated with 3% of total

capital cost (in this case, around Php90,000) per year. Logistics, which includes the cost of

moving feedstock to the digester, was estimated at Php100 per day in moving equipment fuel

costs.

Differing inflation rates were applied to each one; water: 6%; wages: 4%; logistics: 7%; and

maintenance: 7%. These were applied arbitrarily, to reflect faster-rising prices in products

compared to labor.

A discount factor of 5% was used to get the year-on-year present values.

2.8.4. Net Metering

Tying the plant to the grid would allow the grid to make up for deficiencies in unstable biogas

production. With the plant being rated below 100 kW, it is also a candidate for Net Metering;

excess production during daytime, when the farm would tend not to use its heating lamps, could

be sold back into the local distribution grid for credits. (Department of Energy Philippines n.d.)

19
 For simplicity, feed-in tariffs and other financial considerations were omitted from

consideration. As such, when the plant produces in excess, the credit earned was assumed to be

equal in value to the consumer cost of grid electricity.

III. Results and Discussion

3.1. Biogas System Overview

Figure 3. Final biogas system parameters.

20
 Figure 4. Final digester dimensions (drawn as close to scale as possible).

After selecting a generator and determining digester parameters, the above system diagram

summarizes the resultant parameters of the biogas plant.

The designed digester is large, at 997 m³ and a diameter of around 18.5 m. This much,

however, is well within the range of digesters cataloged by Ludwig Sasse (1988). It requires 5.1

metric tons of new manure feedstock daily, with 7.7 metric tons of water mixed in. It is expected

to produce 538.92 m³-biogas/day, for which a conservative 5.6 m³ H2S scrubber is necessary for

a residence time of 15 mins.

The selected generator (PowerLink GXE60-6NG) is oversized; the digester’s maximum

continuous production (538.92 m³/day, or 138.8 kW) will only be able to run the generator at

70–80% load. Even so, the digester itself is also oversized (138.8 kW x 36% = 49.97 kW)

compared to the site requirements (45.41 kW), and so is expected to amply supply the site.

21
 Figure 5. PowerLink GXE60-6NG: 75 kVA prime power rating, 36% efficiency (likely

full-load).

It should be noted that the consumption profile of a poultry farm was assumed to peak during

nighttime, when temperatures drop and heating becomes more necessary. If all heating lamps

were used during peak, peak consumption could reach 197.48 kW, which would outstrip the

designed plant’s own capacity. It was for this reason that a grid-tied interconnection was

considered necessary—besides grid-tied plants being regarded as far cheaper in capital cost than

completely off-grid systems (Grid-Tied vs. Off-Grid Solar 2020 Jul 8).

At an assumed capacity factor of 0.67, the plant is expected to generate 418,466.93 kWh/year,

while the farm is expected to consume 398,148.89 kWh/year.

Note that it is possible to raise the biogas production of the digester without changing its

physical design. By increasing the influent intake rate, the rate of manure being processed would
22
also increase, raising biogas production, but also necessarily decreasing hydraulic retention time,

and thus decreasing the biochemical conversion efficiency of the digester (m³/kg, biogas to slurry

influent). This biogas production increase will be of marginally decreasing utility, as well; the

higher the influent intake, the more labor and/or equipment is necessary, and the more water

must be used; operating costs would rise.

On the other hand, this “trick” is beneficial to make up for any differences in practical

application vs. theoretical calculations, especially since biogas production is affected by

temperature fluctuations, feedstock composition, etc. If the plant designed here were to

underproduce in actual practice, all the operator would have to do is granularly increase the

feedstock intake until the average production matches requirements.

3.2. Capital and Operating Costs

Figure 6. Generator vs. digester capital costs.

The digester was estimated to cost ₱2,854,031.77 to construct (including labor), while the

generator was estimated to cost ₱655,325.86 (including installation).

23
 Figure 7. First year operating expenses. This makeup was not predicted to appreciably change

throughout the plant’s lifetime.

In the first year, the operating cost of the plant was estimated at ₱1,616,664.96, of which

86.8% was associated with labor.

3.3. Cost-Benefit

Surprisingly, the plant was projected to pay back in less than one (1) year.

Figure 8. Savings offset expenditures within one year.

24
 Thanks to the Net Metering scheme, the plant was expected to be able to earn Php4.17M in

credits. Together with plant lifetime savings of Php44.67M, the plant nets a benefit of

Php48.84M.

Table 5. Economic analysis summary.

Cost of Pure Grid Electricity (NPV) ₱70,334,399.04

Cost of Biogas over Project Lifetime (NPV) ₱25,665,637.20
Savings ₱44,668,761.85
Net Metering Credits ₱4,171,790.54
Total Benefit ₱48,840,552.38
Savings Rate 69.44%
BC Ratio (Savings vs. Capital Expenditure) 13.92

In reality, however, Net Metering credits are not transferable (Department of Energy

Philippines n.d.); the farm operator would not necessarily earn disposable cash, and so it would

make little sense for the farm operator to perpetually accumulate credits. In the first place, the

plant was oversized in order to accommodate the fact that biogas production is variable, and

could potentially drop below the site’s requirement.

It is more likely that the farm operator will willingly spend their accumulated credits and

underuse the plant, if only also to save on operating costs. In such a case, there would ideally be

zero credits by the end of the year, and only Php44.67M in benefit. This will come to a

benefit-cost ratio of 12.73 instead of 13.92—still quite high.

25
IV. Conclusion and Recommendations

A biogas power plant was designed with a 997 m³ digester and 75 kVA natural gas generator

to supply Morning Sun Poultry Farm’s 45 kW requirement. It was found to be exceptionally

economical and attractive, ideally presenting a payback period of less than one (1) year, and

offering savings more than ten times that of the capital expense.

This design, however, omitted further details of the H2S scrubber, which is absolutely critical

to the life of the generator. There is also the fundamental issue that the design heavily relied on a

grid interconnection to handle peaking, not to mention that the usage factor of the heating lamps

was simply assumed with no solid grounds. Were the plant capacity requirement to go beyond

100 kW, it would legally no longer be a candidate for the Department of Energy’s net metering

scheme; the farm/plant operator would have to make for other grid interconnection

arrangements, which they may potentially have to fund out-of-pocket, or they would otherwise

have to resort to an off-grid system.

Another area unexplored in this paper is cogeneration. Heating lamps come as either gas or

electric, and it is entirely possible to make more efficient use of biogas if it were fed straight into

gas burners rather than an electric generator. However, the site which this paper selected was

exceptionally large, to the point that, by own estimation, the selected site would have consumed

twelve (12) 11-kg LPG cylinders per day. This was assumed too labor-intensive to manage;

meanwhile, electrical infrastructure appeared far less demanding in operation, and was assumed

more likely to be used by operators of hectare-scale farms. Introducing a biogas cogeneration

scheme to hectare-scale farms, transporting biogas for hundreds of meters towards hundreds of

different points in a safe and scalable manner, would be a challenge.

26
 Several shortcuts were taken to make the economic analysis. The financial effects of feed-in

tariffs were unaccounted, and many critical affairs, such as the maintenance costs of both the

digester and generator, or differing inflation rates for each plant input, were summarily assumed

as percentages of the capital cost, or given some arbitrarily-erratic value from the norm. The cost

of consultancy, as well, was not known. The cost of construction, including labor and materials,

should always be deferred to the locale of interest for accuracy—which this paper failed to do.

At the least, the generator cost estimation was grounded in prices offered by a Davao City

company, and the selected generator was of a brand known to be carried by that company, but

whether that specific model was available was left unknown.

By far, what might be most difficult for the future designer is to find a biogas-compatible

generator. It may ease them to consider finding a source of diesel-to-natural gas or diesel-to-LPG

conversion kits, which will allow a broader scope of diesel generators to be included among

generator candidates.

Notes

1. The author previously estimated the power consumption profile of a poultry farm in an

unpublished presentation titled “Demand Quantification and Power Plant Capacity –

Davao City” (May 2022).

27
References

Alibaba.com. 1.5mm Hdpe Waterproofing Membrane For Landfill Project In Philippines - Buy
Hdpe Waterproofing Membrane,Hdpe Waterproofing Membrane,Hdpe Waterproofing
Membrane Product. Alibaba.com. [accessed 2023 Jan 16].
https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/1-5mm-HDPE-Waterproofing-Membrane-for_160015
4090971.html.
Castalia Strategic Advisors (last). 2015. Generation Cost Benchmarking. [accessed 2021 Nov 5].
http://www.erc.gov.ph/Files/Render/media/CASCON_GENCOSTBEN_FINAL.pdf.
Chishtiya Poultry Services. Electric Brooder, Chishmo 1000 Basic. indiamart.com. [accessed
2023 Jan 16].
https://www.indiamart.com/proddetail/electric-brooder-chishmo-1000-basic-1829468830.html
.
DASURECO. 2022. December 2022. [accessed 2023 Jan 14].
https://dasureco.com/december-2022/.
Davao City Industrial Supply and Services. 2019. For sale: Power GENERATOR (diesel,
gasoline, & gas). Facebook. [accessed 2023 Jan 4].
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid02RuAMEB7bXaBHsBdGsvHo4
b4JNGwsmeKsDaW4AeGqqNFAngWdBsNoYVLjMoGWjyNFl&id=123780495011222.
Department of Agriculture - Cagayan Valley Region. 2004. Tips on Poultry Raising Introduction.
[accessed 2022 Apr 13].
https://cagayanvalley.da.gov.ph/?smd_process_download=1&download_id=509.
Department of Energy. 2022. Prevailing Retail Prices of 2.7 Kg. to 11 Kg. Household LPG in
Mindanao as of December 06, 2022. [accessed 2023 Jan 14].
https://www.doe.gov.ph/sites/default/files/pdf/price_watch/lpg_min_2022-dec-06-09.pdf.
Department of Energy. 2023 Jan 10. Mindanao Prevailing Retail Pump Price (As of: January 10,
2023).
https://www.doe.gov.ph/sites/default/files/pdf/price_watch/petro_min_2023-jan-10.pdf.
Department of Energy Philippines. Net Metering Home. [accessed 2023 Jan 16].
https://www.doe.gov.ph/net-metering-home?withshield=1.
E. M. Barber, H. L. Classen, P. A. Thacker. 1989. Energy Use in the Production and Housing of
Poultry and Swine — An Overview. Can J Anim Sci. 69:7–21.
energypedia. 2016 Apr. Electricity Generation from Biogas. energypedia. [accessed 2023 Jan
16]. https://energypedia.info/wiki/Electricity_Generation_from_Biogas.
Grid-Tied vs. Off-Grid Solar: Which is Right for You? 2020 Jul 8. Unbound Sol. [accessed 2023
Jan 16]. https://unboundsolar.com/blog/grid-tied-vs-off-grid-solar.

28
International Renewable Energy Agency. 2016. Measuring small-scale biogas capacity and
production. Abu Dhabi: International Renewable Energy Agency.
John Poe Taylor. 2003. Removal of Hydrogen Sulfide from Biogas. [accessed 2023 Jan 5].
https://web.archive.org/web/20100626014530/http://www.cowpower.cornell.edu/project_docs
/Thesis_jpt7.pdf.
Ludwig Sasse. 1988. Biogas Plants. [accessed 2023 Jan 2].
https://www.susana.org/_resources/documents/default/2-1799-biogasplants.pdf.
R. W. Melse PhD, F.E. de Buisonjé BSc. 2020. Manure Treatment and Utilisation Options.
[accessed 2023 Jan 16].
https://www.wur.nl/en/show/Manure-treatment-and-utilisation-options.htm.
Rentar Fuel Catalyst. 2018. Why Diesel Engines are More Fuel Efficient than Gasoline Engines.
Fuel Catal. [accessed 2023 Jan 16].
https://rentar.com/diesel-engines-fuel-efficient-gasoline-engines/.
sajjad. 2002. Design of Biogas Plant. [accessed 2022 Dec 12].
https://sswm.info/sites/default/files/reference_attachments/BRC%20ny%20Design%20Biogas
%20Plant.pdf.
Sarah House. 2011. Design, construction and maintenance of a biogas generator. [accessed 2023
Jan 2].
https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10546/136537/tbn21-biogas-gener
ators-24062011-en.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y.
Stephanie Lansing, Gary Felton. 2018. Hydrogen Sulfide (H 2 S) Removal at a Northeastern
Dairy Farm Digester using Iron Oxide: Case Study. Department of Environmental Science
and Technology, University of Maryland. [accessed 2023 Jan 5].
https://enst.umd.edu/sites/enst.umd.edu/files/files/documents/Extension/Case-Study_H2S-Re
moval-Iron-Oxide_UMD.pdf.
Tańczuk M, Junga R, Kolasa-Wiecek A, Niemiec P. 2019. Assessment of the Energy Potential of
Chicken Manure in Poland. Energies. 12:1244. doi:10.3390/en12071244.

29