[Lapg] biogas bonanaza

[Wesley Roe and Marjorie Lakin Erickson]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	[SANET-MG] biogas bonanaza
Date: 	Tue, 21 Jun 2005 15:14:17 -0400
From: 	jcummins <jcummins at UWO.CA>
Reply-To: 	Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group 
<SANET-MG at LISTS.IFAS.UFL.EDU>
To: 	SANET-MG at LISTS.IFAS.UFL.EDU



http://www.i-sis.org.uk/BiogasBonanza.phpISIS Press Release 20/06/05
Biogas Bonanza for Third World Development
Biogas, a by-product of farmyard waste-treatment, has emerged as a major 
boon for Third World countries, bringing health, social, environmental, and 
financial benefits Dr. Mae-Wan Ho

Sources for this report are available in the ISIS members site. Full 
details here

Biogas energy, readily available, cheap and decentralized
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 1997 Report, Energy After 
Rio: Prospects and Challenges [1] identified community biogas plants as one 
of the most useful decentralized sources of energy supply. Unlike the 
centralized energy supply technologies, such as power plants based on 
hydroelectricity, coal, oil or natural gas, that have hitherto been the 
only choices open to rural communities, biogas plants do not require big 
capital to set up, and do not pose environmental problems that excite 
public opposition. Instead, in most cases, they offer solutions to existing 
environmental problems, and many unexpected benefits besides.

The organic materials needed for producing biogas in an anaerobic digester 
are readily available in developing countries. These include firewood, 
agricultural wastes and animal wastes. Many countries have large cattle and 
buffalo herds producing tonnes of manure. Traditionally, these wastes are 
carefully collected in India and used as fertilizer, but the increasing 
scarcity of firewood has forced many villagers to burn dung-cakes in 
cooking their food.

As biogas plants yield good quality sludge fertilizer, the biogas fuel 
and/or electricity generated is an additional bonus. And this has motivated 
the large biogas programmes in a number of developing countries, starting 
with China.

Overcoming early obstacles
China began mass adoption of biogas in 1975 under the slogan "biogas for 
every household". Within the first few years, 1.6 million digesters were 
constructed annually, but these were of low quality; and by 1980, half of 
all digesters were not in use and the rate of adoption had slowed. By 1992, 
only 5 million family sized plants were still operating, many of them 
redesigned to avoid leakage [2].

In India, as in China, a too-rapid implementation policy in the early 1990s 
exceeded the capacity of India's research and development organizations to 
produce reliable designs and to optimise digester efficiency. The situation 
has improved since, especially with the introduction of a low-cost 
polyethylene tubular digester. Now, everyone in India installing a biogas 
plant has the right to an allowance paid by the central government [3].

In a report, Biogas in India: A Sustainable Energy Success Story [4], the 
authors identified women and children as the major beneficiaries of biogas 
in India, where every year, 200 000 families turn away from the traditional 
fireplace and have a biogas plant installed to provide energy for cooking 
and lighting. By 2000, more than 2 million biogas plants have been built in 
India and almost 200 000 permanent jobs created.

India's early difficulties and recent success is being replicated in 
countries such as Nepal [5], Sri Lanka [6] and Vietnam [2].

In Vietnam, as in other developing countries - Colombia, Ethiopia, 
Tanzania, Cambodia and Bangladesh - the polyethylene tubular digester was 
promoted to reduce production cost by using local materials and simplifying 
installation and operation. The resulting low-cost digester has been well 
received by poor farmers, especially when farmers participate fully in the 
necessary maintenance and repair work. Within ten years, more than 20 000 
polyethylene digesters were installed and mainly paid by the farmers 
themselves. However, the digesters are still not fully integrated into the 
farming system, as there is only limited use of the effluent as fertilizer 
for fish and crops ("Dream farms", this series). There are also potentials 
for improving the digester for greater efficiency, ease of maintenance and 
durability. More cooperation between scientists and farmers and credit 
systems for poor farmers to install digesters will also help to increase 
the adoption rate.

In Sri Lanka, biomass accounts for 45% of the country's energy needs, with 
petroleum and hydroelectricity supplying 41% and 14% respectively [7]. Sri 
Lanka's economy is still largely based on agriculture. A major constraint 
to production is the increasing cost of fertilizer, while solid waste, 
mainly organic, is collected and disposed at a large number of unprotected 
sites, affecting the health of the poorest.

Although biogas digesters have been introduced in Sri Lanka since the 
1970s, poor design, lack of maintenance skills and insufficient capacity to 
deal with the problems meant that only a third of the 5 000 units installed 
functioned properly [6]. The Intermediate Technology Development Group 
(ITDG) started a project in 1996 to improve the success rate of the units 
on a national level by setting up demonstration units to help spread 
information, restoring abandoned units and training users to operate and 
maintain them. In addition, individual farmers get help to install biogas 
units on their farms to make use of the manure from their cows.

Mr. Ratnayake is one of the lucky farmers. With nothing more than cow dung, 
he now has enough power to cook with, iron the laundry and provide heat and 
light for his home without using a single piece of wood. All he has to do 
is to collect the manure from his cows in a specially adapted cattle shed 
where they feed, mix it with water and leaves it to ferment in a large 
concrete tank or pit. The gas produced is collected in a simple storage 
tank, from where it is piped into his house to use.

The women and children, freed from firewood collection and from cleaning 
smoke-blackened utensils and the disposal of animal waste, gain some two 
hours a day for other activities. About 80% now use this time to earn extra 
income that currently accounts for approximately 24% of the family's 
monthly income. Another advantage of using biogas is that there is very 
little waste from the process and it is environmentally friendly.

The dried manure left after biogas is generated is richer than ordinary 
manure and makes a fantastic organic fertilizer for Mr. Ratnayake's crops, 
which he can sell at a higher price as organic produce.

Biogas brings numerous benefits
The many benefits of biogas are now generally recognized. It has resulted 
in a smoke-free and ash-free kitchen, so women and their children are no 
longer prone to respiratory infections, and can look forward to longer, 
healthier lives. Women are spared the burden of gathering firewood, a load 
of 60-80lb per week, which can take up to one day a week. That, and the 
practice of containing livestock for manure collection, which might 
otherwise graze in the forest, both contribute to protecting the remaining 
forests and allowing the forests to regenerate.

The sludge remaining after digestion is richer in valuable nutrients than 
the animal manure, providing vegetables, fruits and cereals with a top 
quality fertilizer that guarantees better crops.

In rural areas where there is otherwise no electricity supply, biogas has 
enabled women to engage in evening study, literacy classes and other home 
and community activities.

Cattle dung is no longer stored in the home, but is fed directly to the 
biogas digester along with toilet waste. The anaerobic digestion process 
also destroys pathogens. As a result, sanitation has greatly improved.

Carbon trading bonanza
There are other benefits for countries that decide to adopt biogas. The 
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has set up a Clean 
Development Fund, and the World Bank has put together a Carbon Finance Unit 
to allow rich countries, which are pumping more carbon into the atmosphere 
than is allowed under the Kyoto Protocol, to buy emissions that poor 
countries prevent through conserving forests or promoting renewable energy. 
An article in the Nepali Times [8] pointed out that Nepal's successful 
biogas programme not only brought farmers a non-polluting fuel, conserved 
forests and provided high quality fertilizer for crops; it can make the 
rest of the world pay hard cash for not burning firewood to release carbon 
dioxide into the atmosphere.

About 85% of the fuel used in Nepal comes from biomass sources like 
firewood, animal manure and agricultural residue. The remainder, kerosene, 
diesel or liquefied petroleum gases. Its biogas programme would not have 
been possible if the users had not received subsidies. Each biogas unit 
costs $300 to set up, but the government pays one-third of the amount.

Nepal's biogas programme is internationally regarded as a model for 
successful use of alternative energy for the rural Third World. Nepal has 
now overtaken China and India in the number of biogas plants per capita. 
Each of its 125 000 functioning digesters prevents five tonnes of carbon 
dioxide equivalents from being pumped into the atmosphere every year. This 
'saved' greenhouse gas is what rich countries are buying to offset their 
own emissions, and is worth US$5 million. This money can be invested back 
into clean energy that would make Nepal eligible to trade even more carbon 
offset to rich polluters.

"We have an initial agreement with the World Bank," said Sundar Bajgain, 
executive director of the Biogas Support Project, which has played a 
leading role in installing biogas plants in private houses in 66 districts 
across the country. The biogas model can be applied to other renewable 
energy sources such as hydropower (under 15MW, as recommended by the 
International Panel on Climate Change) and solar power to reap rewards from 
carbon trading.

Admittedly, paying cash to poor countries not to burn firewood is a measure 
of desperation for rich countries like the United States, which, at 4.6 
percent of the world's population and growing, is responsible for 25 
percent of global greenhouse gas emissions due to human activities [9]. It 
would make much better sense for developed countries to cash in on the 
benefits of biogas themselves ("Bug power", this series), as they also have 
greater capacity for research and development to optimise the production 
and use of biogas.



_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture