Table of Contents

<aside>

</aside>

<aside>

The Quick Summary

The Math on Biogas & What it Takes to Build a Profitable CBG Plant in India—here’s the financial breakdown for entrepreneurs looking to enter the space.

🔥 The ₹2,00,000 Crore Bet

The Indian government is pushing for 5,000 CBG plants under SATAT—but can these projects actually turn a profit?

🚀 Big incentives are on the table

✔️ Guaranteed buyback at ₹46-60/kg

✔️ ₹500-1000/ton tipping fees from municipalities

✔️ Capital subsidies & tax breaks

⚠️ But here’s the reality

❌ Most small plants never break even

❌ State-level execution is inconsistent

❌ Long payback periods deter private investors

💰 Who’s actually making money in CBG?

✅ 50+ TPD plants with economies of scale

✅ Locked-in waste supply contracts (no feedstock = no gas)

✅ Diversified revenue streams → CBG + fertiliser + tipping fees + carbon credits

✅ Existing gas distribution networks (solving last-mile delivery)

✅ Efficient cost structures (₹25-30/kg production cost)

📈 Revenue Streams: Where’s the Money?

1️⃣ CBG Sales: The main revenue source. SATAT-backed OMC contracts provide price stability at ₹46-60/kg.

2️⃣ Tipping Fees: Large plants get ₹500-1000/ton from municipalities to process waste (major revenue boost).

3️⃣ Organic Fertiliser Sales: Digestate converted to compost, adding ₹500-2000/ton in revenue.

4️⃣ Carbon Credits: Future potential—CBG reduces methane emissions, making plants eligible for carbon credit revenue.

💰 Financial Projections & Breakeven Analysis

💡 Key Takeaways

✅ Small plants struggle unless they get subsidies or tap into premium/niche markets.

✅ Mid-sized (50 TPD) plants can work but need tipping fees or subsidies for strong ROI.

✅ Large-scale (500 TPD) plants dominate with faster payback, better margins, and diversified revenue.

</aside>

<aside>

Technology Comparison

Anaerobic Digestion Technology by Scale

• Small CBG plants (~5 TPD feedstock) typically use wet anaerobic digestion in Continuously Stirred Tank Reactors (CSTRs).
• This “wet” AD process handles slurries (~10–15% solids), requires dilution and continuous mixing, but achieves high gas yields due to optimal contact between microbes and organics.
• Medium plants (~50 TPD) also use CSTRs (often multiple tanks) to accommodate larger volumes, maintaining controlled heating and mixing for stable biogas production.
• In contrast, large facilities (~500 TPD) often adopt dry fermentation (high-solids AD) or plug-flow digesters, which handle solid-rich feed (≥20–40% solids).
• Dry AD can process stacked organic solids (e.g. crop residues, municipal waste) in batch or sequential batch mode with less water and simpler infrastructure (fewer agitators and pumps). However, dry systems are only partially mixed and restarted each batch, so methane yields per ton are often somewhat lower than in continuously mixed wet systems.

Efficiency and Methane Yields

• Wet CSTR digesters generally achieve higher conversion efficiency of volatile solids to biogas than dry batch systems.
• In optimised CSTRs (mesophilic ~35°C, ~20–30 day retention), food waste can yield methane close to its biochemical potential – large full-scale wet digesters have achieved ~487–496 m³ CH₄ per tonne of volatile solids (VS) destroyed, approaching lab BMP results. This translates to roughly 100–150 m³ of biogas (60% CH₄) per ton of typical food waste feed in practice.
• Dry fermentation at large scale may yield a bit less gas per ton because some organic matter remains as fibrous residue/compost (e.g. the 550 TPD Indore plant produces ~17,000 kg of CBG plus ~100 T of compost daily).
• Still, with proper pre-treatment (e.g. shredding, moisture control) and longer batch cycles, dry AD can attain respectable yields (perhaps ~70–85% of the methane output of wet digestion).

Energy Efficiency

• Smaller CSTR plants expend more energy proportionally on heating and mixing (typical parasitic load 10–30% of energy output).
• Larger dry systems have lower relative energy usage for mixing (feed is static in chambers), using as little as ~5% of produced energy for operations in some designs.
• Dry systems also avoid extensive wastewater handling, reducing process water treatment needs.
• Overall, at 5–50 TPD scale, wet CSTRs maximise biogas per ton but require more process control, whereas at ~500 TPD, high-solids digesters sacrifice some yield for simpler handling of bulk solids.

Capital and Operating Costs

• There are trade-offs in cost structures. CSTR-based plants need robust material handling (pumps, agitators) and gas-tight heated tanks, which contribute to higher CAPEX per ton at small scale.
• Dry AD plants use simpler garages or concrete digesters loaded by loaders, with fewer moving parts – advantageous as scale grows.
• For example, a 5 TPD wet digester might consist of a single heated tank with mechanical mixers and an upgrading unit, incurring higher cost per m³ of gas output than a 500 TPD dry plant composed of multiple fermentation boxes.
• Large plants enjoy economies of scale in equipment procurement (e.g. cost per m³ digester volume drops) but require more infrastructure for feedstock preprocessing and biogas upgrading.
• In practice, reported CAPEX shows strong scale economies: a small 5 TPD CBG plant may cost on the order of ₹1 crore per ton-feed (~₹5 crore total), whereas a large 500 TPD project (Indore’s 550 TPD plant) cost about $18.8 million (₹140+ crore) – roughly ₹0.25 crore per ton.
• Operationally, larger plants tend to have lower unit operating cost as well (labor and maintenance spread over more output), though they face additional logistics expenses for handling huge feedstock volumes. </aside>

<aside>

Feedstock Analysis and Gas Production Estimates

Feedstock Types by Scale

• All three plant sizes are assumed to digest primarily food waste (e.g. source-separated kitchen and market waste) as the base feedstock.
• At 5 TPD, the feed might consist solely of local food scraps (e.g. from hotels or a community) to keep the supply chain simple.
• A 50 TPD plant can intake a wider range of organics – predominantly municipal food waste and possibly some agro-residues (crop wastes, vegetable market rejects) or industrial organic waste (food/beverage processing residues, dairy or slaughterhouse waste) to reach the needed volume.
• At 500 TPD, a mix of feedstocks is essential: in addition to city food waste, significant agricultural residues (like rice straw, cane press mud) and industrial bio-wastes are co-digested. This diversifies feed supply and provides sufficient biomass, since relying on 500 T of food waste alone might be infeasible in one location. Co-digestion also balances nutrients (e.g. adding cow manure or agro-waste can dilute the high nitrogen in food waste, aiding stability).

Gas Yield Estimates

• Food waste is a highly biodegradable substrate with a high methane potential. The theoretical biogas yield of food waste can be on the order of 0.65 m³ per kg of total solids (≈646 m³/ton dry) under ideal conditions , with methane ~60% of that.
• In practice, a large fraction of this potential is achieved – food waste’s high biodegradability means well-operated digesters can realize 80%+ of theoretical yield.
• For example, 1 ton of wet food waste (~20–30% TS) might produce on the order of 150–200 m³ of biogas (≈90–120 m³ CH₄) in a CSTR, whereas a batch dry digester might yield slightly less, say ~100–150 m³ biogas/ton if some solids remain undigested. Table 1 summarises indicative biogas yields:
• Food waste yields the most biogas per ton due to its high content of easily degradable carbohydrates, proteins, and fats. Its theoretical methane yield can be >0.3–0.4 m³ CH₄ per kg wet waste.
• In practice ~100 m³ CH₄/ton wet is achievable in a stable digester, as shown by commercial plants matching lab benchmarks.
• Agro-residues like straw have substantial energy content but much is locked in cellulose/lignin; a theoretical 270–300 m³ biogas/ton (dry) is often cited, but without special treatment only a portion is realised (some of the straw ends up as digestate fibre).
• For instance, one study reports ~270 m³ biogas/ton for rice straw in an AD system , whereas with steam-explosion pretreatment yields can rise to ~430 m³/ton.
• Industrial wastes (e.g. brewery grain, molasses waste) can be very biogas-rich or dilute; they are usually measured in methane per COD. Co-feeding such high-energy liquids with fibrous biomass can increase total gas output and improve digestion of the fibrous fraction (synergistic effects).

Gas Production at Each Plant

• Based on the above yields, a 5 TPD plant (all food waste) would generate roughly 750–1000 m³/day of biogas, equivalent to ~450–600 m³/day methane.
• This could produce about 300–400 kg of CBG per day (since ~1.2 m³ CH₄ ≈ 1 kg at STP). A 50 TPD plant (assuming mostly food waste) would proportionally yield ~10× more: on the order of 7,500–10,000 m³ biogas per day (~4,500–6,000 m³ CH₄), or about 3.5–4.5 tons of CBG output daily.
• For the 500 TPD plant with mixed feedstock, total gas output might not scale linearly – inclusion of crop residues and the practical challenges of such volume can lower the per-ton average.
• If we assume an average of ~150 m³ biogas/ton (accounting for some lower-yield material), the 500 TPD plant would generate on the order of 75,000 m³ of biogas per day (~45,000 m³ CH₄). That equates to roughly 30–35 tons of CBG per day.
• Notably, the Indore 550 TPD MSW-to-CBG plant produces about 17–18 TPD of CBG , alongside a large fraction of residue converted to compost. This lower gas output (only ~30 m³ biogas per wet ton) reflects that Indore’s feed is municipal waste – even with good segregation, not all organics fully convert to gas (some fraction is composted).
• The theoretical vs. actual comparison highlights this gap: real-world large plants may reach only ~50% of the biochemical potential of mixed MSW feed because of physical contaminants or lignin content. Thus, when scaling up, practical gas yields per ton can drop, and proper feedstock management (segregation, pre-treatment) is key to minimising this gap. </aside>

<aside>

</aside>

<aside>

</aside>

<aside>

</aside>

<aside>

</aside>