Academic Bibliography

 Search 200 years of publications by Ghent University researchers.
Advanced search
2 files | 7.86 MB
Add to list
  1. Search results
  2. Assessing renewable energy installati...

Assessing renewable energy installations in pig farms from a financial and environmental perspective : a case study in the EU

Manon Everaert (UGent) , Jarissa Maselyne, Robin Tassenoy (UGent) , Jera Van Nieuwenhuyse (UGent) and Steven Lecompte (UGent)
(2026) RENEWABLE ENERGY. 256(part E).
Author
Organization
Project
Abstract
Livestock farms rely heavily on fossil fuels to achieve a suitable indoor climate. Only 4 % of this on-farm energy demand is currently provided by renewable energy sources (RES). In order to reach the European Union's ambitious Fit-for-55 climate goals, a higher renewable energy integration is crucial. This work aims to assess the financial and environmental effects of RES integration on an individual livestock farm. Therefore, a methodology is presented that allows the selection of different combinations of RES technologies and sizes, based on technical, financial and environmental considerations, accompanied by a sensitivity analysis on the implemented assumptions. As a case study, 92,650 different scenarios containing various renewable energy sources and different sizes are simulated on a pig barn in Belgium. The RES technologies selected are (thermal) photovoltaic panels, solar collectors, small wind turbines, heat pumps, electrochemical batteries and a thermal storage tank. Within the explored solution space, 84 % of the scenarios have a lower life cycle cost (LCC) and all of them result in lower – down to 85 % – fuel-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. If the investment cost is, for example, limited to five times the cost of the reference scenario – a natural gas boiler for € 5500 – an installation of 100 m2 photovoltaic (PV) panels in combination with a 60 kWth boiler is most effective at reducing the LCC (10 % reduction in LCC, 6 % fuel-related GHG emission reduction) while a combination of two heat pumps of (12 + 48 kWth) and 25 m2 PV reduce the most fuel-related GHG emissions (46 % GHG reduction, but increasing the LCC by 5 %). For a limitation of 10 times the investment cost, a minimum LCC is obtained with 500 m2 PV and 60 kWth boiler (24 % reduction in LCC, 15 % fuel-related GHG emission reduction), while fuel-related GHG emissions are most effectively reduced by an installation of 200 m2 PV, two heat pumps (12 + 48 kWth), a 5000 L thermal storage tank, and 5 kWh battery (56 % fuel-related GHG reduction, 11 % reduction in LCC). Sensitivity analyses indicate that these optima are highly dependent on the emission factor of the electricity grid, as well as the (projected) electricity and gas prices.
Keywords
Energy simulation, Renewable energy, Livestock, Pig farm, OPTIMIZATION, SYSTEM

Downloads

  • Download
    (...).pdf
    • full text (Published version)
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 6.45 MB
  • Download
    (...).pdf
    • supplementary material
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.41 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Everaert, Manon, et al. “Assessing Renewable Energy Installations in Pig Farms from a Financial and Environmental Perspective : A Case Study in the EU.” RENEWABLE ENERGY, vol. 256, no. part E, 2026, doi:10.1016/j.renene.2025.124291.
APA
Everaert, M., Maselyne, J., Tassenoy, R., Van Nieuwenhuyse, J., & Lecompte, S. (2026). Assessing renewable energy installations in pig farms from a financial and environmental perspective : a case study in the EU. RENEWABLE ENERGY, 256(part E). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2025.124291
Chicago author-date
Everaert, Manon, Jarissa Maselyne, Robin Tassenoy, Jera Van Nieuwenhuyse, and Steven Lecompte. 2026. “Assessing Renewable Energy Installations in Pig Farms from a Financial and Environmental Perspective : A Case Study in the EU.” RENEWABLE ENERGY 256 (part E). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2025.124291.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Everaert, Manon, Jarissa Maselyne, Robin Tassenoy, Jera Van Nieuwenhuyse, and Steven Lecompte. 2026. “Assessing Renewable Energy Installations in Pig Farms from a Financial and Environmental Perspective : A Case Study in the EU.” RENEWABLE ENERGY 256 (part E). doi:10.1016/j.renene.2025.124291.
Vancouver
1.
Everaert M, Maselyne J, Tassenoy R, Van Nieuwenhuyse J, Lecompte S. Assessing renewable energy installations in pig farms from a financial and environmental perspective : a case study in the EU. RENEWABLE ENERGY. 2026;256(part E).
IEEE
[1]
M. Everaert, J. Maselyne, R. Tassenoy, J. Van Nieuwenhuyse, and S. Lecompte, “Assessing renewable energy installations in pig farms from a financial and environmental perspective : a case study in the EU,” RENEWABLE ENERGY, vol. 256, no. part E, 2026.
@article{01K4D11758BZXD4MHX55SF1R7E,
  abstract     = {{Livestock farms rely heavily on fossil fuels to achieve a suitable indoor climate. Only 4 % of this on-farm energy demand is currently provided by renewable energy sources (RES). In order to reach the European Union's ambitious Fit-for-55 climate goals, a higher renewable energy integration is crucial. This work aims to assess the financial and environmental effects of RES integration on an individual livestock farm. Therefore, a methodology is presented that allows the selection of different combinations of RES technologies and sizes, based on technical, financial and environmental considerations, accompanied by a sensitivity analysis on the implemented assumptions. As a case study, 92,650 different scenarios containing various renewable energy sources and different sizes are simulated on a pig barn in Belgium. The RES technologies selected are (thermal) photovoltaic panels, solar collectors, small wind turbines, heat pumps, electrochemical batteries and a thermal storage tank. Within the explored solution space, 84 % of the scenarios have a lower life cycle cost (LCC) and all of them result in lower – down to 85 % – fuel-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. If the investment cost is, for example, limited to five times the cost of the reference scenario – a natural gas boiler for € 5500 – an installation of 100 m2 photovoltaic (PV) panels in combination with a 60 kWth boiler is most effective at reducing the LCC (10 % reduction in LCC, 6 % fuel-related GHG emission reduction) while a combination of two heat pumps of (12 + 48 kWth) and 25 m2 PV reduce the most fuel-related GHG emissions (46 % GHG reduction, but increasing the LCC by 5 %). For a limitation of 10 times the investment cost, a minimum LCC is obtained with 500 m2 PV and 60 kWth boiler (24 % reduction in LCC, 15 % fuel-related GHG emission reduction), while fuel-related GHG emissions are most effectively reduced by an installation of 200 m2 PV, two heat pumps (12 + 48 kWth), a 5000 L thermal storage tank, and 5 kWh battery (56 % fuel-related GHG reduction, 11 % reduction in LCC). Sensitivity analyses indicate that these optima are highly dependent on the emission factor of the electricity grid, as well as the (projected) electricity and gas prices.}},
  articleno    = {{124291}},
  author       = {{Everaert, Manon and Maselyne, Jarissa and Tassenoy, Robin and Van Nieuwenhuyse, Jera and Lecompte, Steven}},
  issn         = {{0960-1481}},
  journal      = {{RENEWABLE ENERGY}},
  keywords     = {{Energy simulation,Renewable energy,Livestock,Pig farm,OPTIMIZATION,SYSTEM}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{part E}},
  pages        = {{11}},
  title        = {{Assessing renewable energy installations in pig farms from a financial and environmental perspective : a case study in the EU}},
  url          = {{http://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2025.124291}},
  volume       = {{256}},
  year         = {{2026}},
}
Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: