Decarbonisation Technology August 2026 Issue

Capex, while the utility absorbs ongoing operational and maintenance expenses (EBA, 2026) . • Strict ‘shallow’ connection models (The Producer-Pays Approach): Conversely, jurisdictions like the Czech Republic and Lithuania mandate that developers bear 100% of the financial burden for pipelines and blending stations. According to EBA Grid Integration Frameworks, fully self- funded developers are typically exempt from downstream injection fees, whereas utility- funded infrastructure is recovered via regulated per-MWh injection tariffs charged to the producer. Finally, capacity constraints often require downstream grid reinforcements, such as reverse-flow compressors to push gas from distribution to transmission lines. Modern regulatory designs are increasingly shifting away from a ‘first connector pays’ penalty toward multi-developer cost pooling and socialised network expansion tariffs to improve project bankability. Taken together, these constraints indicate that biomethane scale-up is not limited by resource availability but by system integration complexity. Cost reduction and deployment acceleration depend less on breakthrough technologies and more on coordinated improvements across logistics networks, policy frameworks, and infrastructure development. In this context, biomethane should be viewed as an infrastructure-dependent renewable fuel whose scalability is determined primarily by institutional alignment, market design, and spatial planning efficiency, rather than by feedstock availability alone. Conclusion Historically, biomethane has been viewed primarily as a decarbonisation tool, valued for its ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support circular economy principles through the utilisation of agricultural residues, organic waste streams, and wastewater sludge. Its contribution was largely assessed through an environmental lens, as a renewable substitute for fossil natural gas. However, recent geopolitical tensions, energy market disruptions, and rising concerns over

energy security have significantly expanded this role. Biomethane and Bio-CNG are increasingly recognised not only as low-carbon fuels but also as strategic energy security assets that enable domestic production, diversify supply sources, enhance system resilience, and reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels. In this context, biomethane directly addresses the dual challenge of decarbonisation and energy sovereignty. Technically, biomethane is already a mature and deployable solution. It is compatible with existing gas infrastructure, supported by established upgrading technologies, and increasingly integrated into industrial, residential, and transport systems without requiring major infrastructural transformation. This positions it uniquely among renewable energy carriers. “ Modern regulatory designs are increasingly shifting away from a ‘first connector pays’ penalty toward multi- developer cost pooling and socialised network expansion tariffs to improve project bankability ” Despite this readiness, scalability remains constrained by feedstock logistics, economic competitiveness, regulatory fragmentation, and investment conditions. Nevertheless, global and regional developments demonstrate that where policy, infrastructure, and market design are aligned, rapid expansion is achievable. Ultimately, biomethane is transitioning from a niche environmental solution into a core component of future energy systems. The central question is no longer its technical viability, but the speed and coordination with which stakeholders can unlock its full potential as a strategic pillar of both energy transition and energy security.

VIEW REFERENCES

Dr Vahide Nuran Mutlu vahide.mutlu@socar.com.tr Dr Aysel Zahidova aysel.zahidova@socar.com.tr