Renewable Natural Gas Strategy: Can the Project Deliver?

An RNG project can have a credible technology package and still have an unproven production forecast. Before approving an investment or improvement plan, ask which volumes the evidence supports, what must change to deliver more, and who is responsible. A strong renewable natural gas strategy connects those answers to the revenue model.

The RNG Coalition reported 604 operating North American facilities in July 2026. In August, OPAL Fuels described pursuing additional production at existing facilities with limited capital investment, alongside new construction. Expansion and operating improvement are happening together.

For an individual project, the useful question is whether the next increment of production is demonstrated, achievable through a funded change, or still an assumption.

A Renewable Natural Gas Strategy Starts With Evidence

Gas purity, methane recovery, and annual delivered volume answer different questions. Meeting a gas specification during a performance test does not establish how much compliant product a facility can deliver throughout the year. EPA’s RNG technical resources address treatment, delivery, and end-use requirements.

For an operating asset, reconcile production records with delivery meters and downtime logs. For a proposed facility, separate relevant reference-plant evidence from untested assumptions about the site’s feedstock and configuration. Use consistent measurement boundaries and periods, without deducting downtime twice from annual totals.

LEC Project Experience: Comparing RNG Scenarios

For an international manufacturer evaluating RNG within its LNG value chain, LEC Partners assessed feedstock availability and developed a model connecting biogas conversion, purification, location, incentives, and greenhouse gas impacts. The client received a tool for comparing feed mixtures and project scenarios, rather than a single fixed forecast. Read the RNG economic-modeling case study.

Find the Constraint Before Funding the Fix

For anaerobic digestion, retention time, organic loading, mixing, and biological stability affect production. EPA’s operator guidebook connects these operating fundamentals with gas quality, maintenance, and uptime. A larger upgrader is not the answer to every shortfall.

Separate lost production by cause: insufficient feedstock, biological upset, equipment failure, planned cleaning, off-specification gas, or unavailable delivery capacity. Then evaluate the intervention that addresses the actual constraint.

For landfill projects, distinguish gas generation from collection performance. EPA’s landfill project handbook addresses resource modeling and collection-system operation as separate tasks. Extra treatment capacity cannot create gas that never reaches the plant.

Before adding an improvement to the base case, identify its cost, outage requirement, responsible party, and acceptance test. Check whether feedstock and infrastructure agreements support the forecast period. Maintenance should reflect equipment condition and overhaul needs, not just a convenient annual percentage. A proposal to improve uptime should explain which recurring outage it prevents and how the result will be measured.

The opportunity may be better use of existing capacity. Demonstrate it before counting it.

The Buyer Determines More Than the Sales Price

EPA identifies transportation fuel, thermal use, electricity generation, and industrial feedstock among RNG’s potential end uses. Those routes should not be treated as interchangeable revenue assumptions.

There is an industrial example: Vanguard Renewables reported in April 2026 that its AstraZeneca partnership delivered approximately 33 GWh of RNG in 2025. That documents a specific supply relationship, not a standard price or contract structure for other projects.

Ask what the buyer requires: physical delivery, environmental attributes, or both. Confirm specifications, delivery arrangements, attribute ownership, and supporting records. Under the RFS, RIN separation for RNG requires documentation of qualifying transportation use; pipeline injection alone does not complete that requirement.

The policy inputs also need updating. EPA finalized 2026 and 2027 RFS standards in March 2026. Separately, the IRS issued Notice 2026-53 on September 8, providing the 2026 Section 45Z emissions-rate table and guidance addressing manure-derived fuels. The notice is distinct from the broader proposed regulations.

Test production, commodity prices, attribute values, and eligibility assumptions separately. A higher projected credit price does not resolve an unsupported volume forecast.

The Gas Balance and the Carbon Case Need to Agree

RNG’s environmental performance requires its own evidence. The IEA’s 2025 biogas and biomethane assessment identifies methane leakage, digestate storage, and upgrading off-gas management as important lifecycle considerations.

Trace methane through product, process fuel, flaring, off-gas, and losses. Reconcile measurements before interpreting an unexplained balance difference as leakage. Then check that the lifecycle assessment uses the applicable boundary, baseline, energy inputs, and verified operating assumptions.

A gas balance is not a complete lifecycle assessment. But inconsistent operating data should not support a precise carbon claim.

LEC Partners’ Experience: Connecting Evidence to Decisions

Evaluating an Anaerobic Digester Investment

In a published engagement, LEC Partners reviewed an anaerobic digestion company for an investment firm. The work included visits to two facilities, review of technical capabilities and construction progress, gas-cleanup costs, operating-expense projections, and a red-flag report. Read the anaerobic digester due-diligence case study.

The purpose is not to label every uncertainty a problem. It is to distinguish demonstrated performance, evidence still needed, and changes that require funding. That is how a renewable natural gas strategy becomes a practical basis for the next decision.