Beschreibung:
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Anaerobic digestion to produce biogas is an important decentralised renewable energy technology. Production varies extensively between different countries and within countries, as biogas production is heavily dependent on local and regional feedstocks. In Germany, distinct regional differences can be observed. Therefore, understanding the kinds of biogas systems operating within a region is crucial to determine their greenhouse gas (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">GHG</jats:styled-content>) mitigation potential and carbon neutrality. This is the first study to conduct an integrated life cycle assessment of biogas configurations in the landscape (biogas plants and their biomass catchments) for an entire region. <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RELCA</jats:styled-content> a ‘<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RE</jats:styled-content>gional Life Cycle inventory Assessment’ approach was used to model the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">GHG</jats:styled-content> mitigation potential of 425 biogas plants in the region of Central Germany (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CG</jats:styled-content>), aggregated to nine biogas clusters, based on feedstock mix (e.g. animal manures and energy crops) and installed capacity. <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">GHG</jats:styled-content> emission profiles were generated to compare and to identify the role of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">GHG</jats:styled-content> credits and size of installed capacity on the mitigation performance of the regional biogas clusters. We found that smaller scaled slurry dominant clusters had significantly better <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">GHG</jats:styled-content> mitigation performance (−0.1 to −0.2 kg CO<jats:sub>2eq</jats:sub> kWh<jats:sub>el</jats:sub><jats:sup>−1</jats:sup>), than larger energy crop dominant (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">EC</jats:styled-content><jats:sub>dom</jats:sub>) clusters (0.04–0.16 kg CO<jats:sub>2eq</jats:sub> kWh<jats:sub>el</jats:sub><jats:sup>−1</jats:sup>), due to lower cultivation emissions and larger credits for avoided slurry storage. Thus, for the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CG</jats:styled-content> region larger <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">EC</jats:styled-content><jats:sub>dom</jats:sub> clusters should be targeted first, to support <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">GHG</jats:styled-content> mitigation improvements to the overall future electricity supplied by the regional biogas systems. With the addition of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">GHG</jats:styled-content> credits, the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CG</jats:styled-content> region is producing biogas with <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">GHG</jats:styled-content> savings (−0.15 kg CO<jats:sub>2eq</jats:sub> kWh<jats:sub>el</jats:sub><jats:sup>−1</jats:sup>, interquartile range: 0.095 kg CO<jats:sub>2eq</jats:sub> kWh<jats:sub>el</jats:sub><jats:sup>−1</jats:sup>). This infers that biogas production, as a waste management strategy for animal manures, could have important ramifications for future policy setting and national inventory accounting.</jats:p>