
BMP testingBy-products of the agri-food industry
Grape pomace (marc) — BMP: 6 studies, weighted mean 221 m³ CH₄/t VS
Grape pomace consists of skins, seeds and remains of pulp after pressing; it contains polyphenols and lignin from the seeds, and the results from a small number of records vary widely.
Photo davitydave / Wikimedia Commons, licence CC BY 2.0, source file; changes: cropping
- Weighted mean
- 221m³ CH₄/t VS
- Range
- 116–360m³ CH₄/t VS
- Records
- 6studies
- Publications
- 5sources
- Temperatures
- 35 °C, 40 °C, 55 °Cof the test
Methane in biogas
Medium methane content · ≈ 5.4 kWh/m³ of biogas
estimate from the substrate type The collected studies contain no measurement. The interval follows from the approximate composition (protein from total nitrogen (N 2.3 % DM × 6.25)) and the yields of compound groups according to FNR.
Rating for biogas plants
not rated — editorial rating for biogas plants
Not rated: the dry matter in the data refers to a sample dried for the test, not to the material as delivered. We calculate the rating when the dry matter and volatile solids of the material are known.
Add to the co-digestion calculator CSV data
BMP curves from 6 studies
Weighted mean Individual records
Dashed lines are a model curve (first-order kinetics, B(t) = B₀·(1 − e−kt)); the end point comes from the publication. All curves are model curves.
Cumulative methane production over the test [m³ CH₄/t VS]. The thick line is the weighted mean of all records (221); dots mark the end values given in the publications. Point at the chart to read values; click a legend item to hide or show a record.
Records and sources
Download CSV| Source | BMP m³ CH₄/t VS | Temperature | Sample | Curve |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kassongo et al. (2021) DOI | 144 | 35 °C · mesophilic | grape marc | end point (model curve) |
| Da Ros et al. (2016) · 1 DOI | 347 | 55 °C · thermophilic | fresh grape marcs | end point (model curve) |
| Da Ros et al. (2016) · 2 DOI | 360 | 55 °C · thermophilic | fermented grape marcs | end point (model curve) |
| Dinuccio et al. (2010) DOI | 116 | 40 °C · mesophilic | Grape marcs | end point (model curve) |
| Gunaseelan (2004) DOI | 283 | 35 °C · mesophilic | gRape vine pressings | end point (model curve) |
| Kouas et al. (2017) DOI | 208 | 35 °C · mesophilic | Grape marcs | end point (model curve) |
| Weighted mean | 221 | arithmetic mean 243, SD 103 | ||
Typical composition
- Dry matter (DM)
- 61.4% (range 61.4–61.4)
- Volatile solids (VS)
- 92 % DM (range 90.7–93.2)
- Nitrogen
- 2.3 % DM
Median and range of the determinations reported in the publications behind this substrate's BMP records (read from: MY-D); dry matter: 1 determination, volatile solids: 2 determinations. DM from a single determination – indicative value.
Sources: Dinuccio et al. (2010); Gunaseelan (2004).
The composition of the raw material varies between batches — for plant calculations use an analysis of your own sample. The calculator inserts typical values automatically.
Process properties
Low confidence: the description is based on general characteristics of the substrate group, not on studies of this material. Treat it as a hint to be verified.
Advantages
- Methane potential in the Substraty.pl BMP dataset: weighted mean 220.9 m³ CH₄/t VS (SD 103.2; 6 records, 5 sources).
- A mix of skins, seeds and stalks of variable potential.
Drawbacks and risks
- Tannins and polyphenols bind proteins and inhibit microorganisms (Chen et al. 2008).
- Fresh pomace acidifies.
Co-digestion — what to combine it with, what to watch out for
- combines well
substrates: high alkalinity (buffer) — e.g. Cattle manure, Pig slurry, Cattle slurry, Duck slurry, Rumen and digestive tract content
Slurry supplies N and alkalinity, balancing the high C/N of the material.[1][2]
Dosing
No source threshold.
Introduce gradually, starting with a small dose and monitoring the process (e.g. FOS/TAC, pH, gas composition).
Practical requirements
- Shred: shredding increases the surface available for degradation and speeds it up, but does not necessarily raise the final gas yield (FNR 2010, Ch. 3 “Triturado”).
Sources of the process data
- Hagos et al. (2017). Anaerobic co-digestion process for biogas production: progress, challenges and perspectives. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
- Weiland, P. (2010) Biogas production: current state and perspectives. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
- Chen, Cheng, Creamer (2008). Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: A review. Bioresour. Technol.
- Hendriks, Zeeman (2009). Pretreatments to enhance the digestibility of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour. Technol.
- FNR (2010). Guía sobre el Biogás – Desde la producción hasta el uso (hiszp. wydanie „Leitfaden Biogas”, GIZ 2013)
The co-digestion calculator will assess a specific mixture containing this substrate.
What it is and where it comes from
Grape pomace arises after the must is pressed and makes up a significant part of the mass of the grapes processed. For white wines the pomace is obtained before fermentation and contains more sugar, whereas for red wines it ferments together with the must, so it is already fermented. In Mediterranean countries the pomace is distilled, and in Poland, where winemaking is small, the stream is small and local.
Properties relevant to digestion
Pomace consists of skins, seeds and stalks in various proportions. It contains cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin (especially in the seeds), fat in the seeds, protein, and polyphenols and tannins. Fresh pomace still contains soluble sugars, whereas fermented pomace is stripped of them and contains ethanol and acids. Tannins and polyphenols bind proteins and may inhibit microorganisms. Seeds are hard and poorly degradable without grinding. The risks are acidification in the case of fresh pomace and a higher concentration of phenols.
How to read the spread of results
The set contains several records from several sources, with a large spread of results. They include fresh and fermented pomace, a 42-day batch test and conditions of 35, 40 and 55 °C. The skin-to-seed ratio, variety, degree of fermentation, the method of drying and storage, particle size and inoculum all have an effect. The spread therefore reflects the real heterogeneity of the material.
In biogas plant practice
Pomace can be added to co-digestion after grinding, in a small share, with slurry or other wastes. Owing to seasonality it has to be stored, usually ensiled, because fresh pomace moulds quickly. Alternative uses (seed oil, polyphenol extraction, compost, feed) compete with the biogas plant. Waste from wineries is waste or a by-product depending on how it is used, which must be taken into account in the documentation.
Because of the high variability, it is worth determining the dry matter, sugar and ethanol content of each batch and assuming that fresh and fermented pomace require different dosing, because the former acidifies the feed faster, while the latter brings in acids and alcohol.
The high polyphenol content is a subject of research into their extraction before digestion, which improves the yield but raises the cost of the whole process.
Methodology in brief
BMP is the amount of methane obtained from volatile solids (VS) in a batch test, given in m³ CH₄ per tonne of VS (numerically the same as NmL CH₄/g VS in the publications) and converted to normal conditions (0 °C, 101.325 kPa). The weighted mean gives each publication a total weight of 1, split equally between its results for the substrate — a paper testing twenty varieties does not outweigh a paper with a single sample. In inter-laboratory programmes the unit is the laboratory (total weight 1), and within it the weight of a test grows with the number of bottles (replicates). Results after pretreatment (e.g. thermal, chemical, enzymatic) are shown separately and are not included in the mean.
Solid lines are curves measured in the tests. Where a publication gives only the final result, we draw a first-order kinetic model, B(t) = B₀·(1 − e−kt): only the end point comes from the publication, and the shape of the curve serves purely as visualisation — do not read the production on a particular day from it. For this substrate k = 0.091 d−1 was assumed (no kinetic data for the group – the median of all available rate constants k (93 values) was used).
The statistics describe the spread of published results — a descriptive compilation, not a meta-analysis or a guarantee of plant yield.
Bibliography
- Kassongo, J.; Shahsavari, E.; Ball, A.S. (2021). Dynamic Effect of Operational Regulation on the Mesophilic BioMethanation of Grape Marc. Molecules 26(21), 6692. DOI: 10.3390/molecules26216692 DOI
- Da Ros, C.; Cavinato, C.; Bolzonella, D.; Pavan, P. (2016). Renewable energy from thermophilic anaerobic digestion of winery residue: Preliminary evidence from batch and continuous lab-scale trials. Biomass and Bioenergy 91, 150–159. DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.05.017 DOI
- Dinuccio, E.; Balsari, P.; Gioelli, F.; Menardo, S. (2010). Evaluation of the biogas productivity potential of some Italian agro-industrial biomasses. Bioresource Technology 101(10), 3780–3783. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2009.12.113 DOI
- Gunaseelan, V. (2004). Biochemical methane potential of fruits and vegetable solid waste feedstocks. Biomass and Bioenergy 26(4), 389–399. DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2003.08.006 DOI
- Kouas, M.; Torrijos, M.; Sousbie, P.; Steyer, J.P.; Sayadi, S.; Harmand, J. (2017). Robust assessment of both biochemical methane potential and degradation kinetics of solid residues in successive batches. Waste Management 70, 59–70. DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2017.09.001 DOI
All sources of the site: bibliography.





