Your Biomethane Development Pathway, VIC

Action plan

Confidence 0%

First: Validate actual manure recovery volumes and moisture content against the 500-cow housing assumption.

Next: Screen the candidate routes by comparing the cost of gas network injection versus on-site electricity/heat cogeneration.

Then: Engage with EPA Victoria [VIC-2] to confirm the regulatory pathway for digestate management and organic processing permissions.

Decision gate: Commercial viability must be confirmed via a formal CAPEX/OPEX assessment before selecting the final conversion technology.

Developing this pathway in VIC

Confidence 0%

Victoria currently hosts 7 matching renewable gas pathways, though most are landfill gas operations (e.g., Claytons, Hallam Road). Small-scale agricultural anaerobic digestion is represented by projects such as Lilydale (Yarra Valley Water). The Victorian market context is defined by high gas demand but stringent regulatory oversight regarding waste processing and digestate application.

Confirm VIC EPA permission tier

• Why it matters for you: Small-scale organic processing may fall under different permission categories (A07a vs A07b) which impacts timeline and cost.
• Evidence needed: Finalised design throughput and feedstock classification as per [VIC-2].
• Next action: Initiate a pre-referral meeting with EPA Victoria to determine if an A07b permission is sufficient.
• Who confirms it: EPA Victoria.

Evaluate gas network proximity

• Why it matters for you: Electricity and gas connections are different infrastructure; injection capacity is not guaranteed by volume.
• Evidence needed: Distance to nearest gas transmission or distribution main and network capacity map.
• Next action: Submit an enquiry to the relevant network operator using [VIC-6] as a procedural guide.
• Who confirms it: Australian Gas Infrastructure Group (AGIG) or relevant Victorian distributor.

Objective and Selected Scenario

Confidence 0%

The declared objective is to investigate the development of a biomethane plant using manure from 500 fully housed dairy cows in Victoria. The selected scenario focuses on biomethane production, with a modelled output of 441 Nm³/day (indicative gross A$60,623/yr). However, the model also identifies a significant potential in dry-equivalent digestate (1.9 t/day, modelled at A$390,094/yr) and recoverable CO2 (534 kg/day, modelled at A$151,157/yr). As plant type, site, and network injection points remain unresolved, these figures represent deterministic engine outputs rather than verified production. Commercial viability not established; the next task is the completion of a site-specific infrastructure and utility assessment.

Commercialisation screen

Confidence 0%

Commercial viability not established. The next task is the development of a CAPEX and OPEX budget. The modelled gross revenue of A$60,623/yr for biomethane is based on an illustrative benchmark of 9.99 AUD/GJ HHV and does not include certificates (RECs) or capital funding. Note that electricity MW is never gas volume or injection capacity; the modelled 1,208 kWh/day represents a different infrastructure pathway. Recoverable CO2 sales (A$151,157/yr) are assumed and must not be inferred from mass alone without a verified buyer for food-grade or industrial gas. Offtake terms for all products remain unknown. Development should focus on whether local use (heat/electricity) provides a higher return than gas delivery when including connection costs.

Your next pathway decisions

Confidence 0%

The primary feedstock is Collected animal manure. Unlike generic organics, dairy manure requires specific handling to manage grit and varying moisture content. While the model suggests a biomethane route, the 'candidate route' for this scale must be compared against electricity (1,208 kWh/day) and biogas (750 Nm³/day) for on-site use, as gas injection infrastructure costs often outweigh small-scale outputs.

Assess manure collection efficiency

• Why it matters for you: Tonnage alone does not establish available feedstock; actual recoverable mass depends on housing design and wash-down frequency.
• Evidence needed: Audited 12-month manure recovery logs (wet tonnes) and total solids (TS) percentage.
• Next action: Conduct a feedstock characterisation study to verify biomethane potential (BMP) against the modelled baseline.
• Who confirms it: Independent laboratory and site operations manager.

Screen digestate value vs gas offtake

• Why it matters for you: The modelled digestate value exceeds the biomethane revenue by over 500%, making it the primary driver of the business case.
• Evidence needed: Local soil nutrient requirements and potential for certified fertiliser registration.
• Next action: Perform a local market scan for digestate displacement of synthetic fertilisers.
• Who confirms it: Agronomist and local agricultural suppliers.

Frequently asked questions

Is the A$60,623 biomethane revenue a guaranteed return?

No. This is a deterministic model output based on illustrative benchmarks (9.99 AUD/GJ). Actual revenue depends on verified production and negotiated offtake terms.

Can I sell the 534 kg/day of CO2 immediately?

No. Recoverable mass does not equal sales. Commercial viability for CO2 requires a verified buyer and gas purification equipment not included in the base case.

Does the animal count guarantee the feedstock supply?

No. Herd size alone does not establish available feedstock; actual recovery depends on housing and collection systems.

Are connection costs included in the model?

No. Electricity and gas connection costs are site-specific and must be assessed separately from the production model.

Sources & References

www.energy.vic.gov.au

www.epa.vic.gov.au

www.epa.vic.gov.au

www.epa.vic.gov.au

www.epa.vic.gov.au

www.agig.com.au