2. palitha ranadewa - potential to access carbon markets through biogas & bio-slurry in gms

7/30/2019 2. Palitha Ranadewa - Potential to Access Carbon Markets Through Biogas & Bio-slurry in GMS

1/21

The potential to access carbon markets through

biogas projects in the Greater Mekong Sub-region:

Case studies and training needs


2/21

Study Objectives

1. To examine the level of understanding amongbiogas producers, farmers and relevantorganizations on the economic, social andenvironmental benefits of biogas, bioslurry andbioslurry compost activities; and

2. To understand the current status and potential of

biogas, bioslurry and bioslurry compost productionin the GMS region and how these activities can beleveraged to access carbon financing.


3/21

Methodology

Desk research

Field visits (Lao PDR - Vientiane

Province; Sikhaod, Xaythany, Naxaythong,Pak Gneun and Hadxayphong) and Thailand

Tamboon Prasak Muang district of Lamphun

Province) visited 40 biogasproducers and 40

farmers not producing biogas


4/21

1. Potential production of biogas, bio slurry and bio

slurry compost in GMS

2. Potential to access the carbon market

3. Status of bio gas production and bio slurry

applications

4. Level of awareness among stake holders; especiallybio gas producers and potential users

5. Training needs

Categories of findings


5/21

Scenario 1 at 100 percent TP



TP = Theoretical Potential

Potential production of biogas, bio-slurry and bio-

slurry compost


6/21

Composition and quantities of available livestock

waste in the GMS

LivestockTotal dry

biomass

(tons)

C (kg/kg drymatter)

N (kg/kg drymatter)

C (tons) N (tons)

Buffalo 18,105, 110 0.339 0.011 6,137,632 199,156

Cattle 26, 700, 651 0.355 0.014 9,478,731 373,809

Pigs 18, 321, 713 0.524 0.027 9,600,578 494,686

Poultry 2, 806, 626 0.322 0.03 903,734 84,199

Total 65, 934, 100 26, 120, 675 1, 151, 850

Source: Computed from the literature values and national statics
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_2/Estimation%20of%20potential%20production%20of%20livestock%20waste%20biomass.docx


7/21

Scenario 1: Theoretical potential of bio-slurry

production

Country/Province

Bioslurry(tons/year)

Dry matter(tons/year

C (tons/year) N (tons/year)Urea replaced

(tons/year)

Cambodia 46, 447,938 3, 000, 863 956, 759 65, 595 142,598

Lao PDR 32, 722, 468 2 ,151, 838 702, 192 47, 916 104,166

Myanmar 170, 826, 074 11, 042, 327 3 ,514, 611 241, 162 524, 266

Viet Nam 157, 137, 968 10, 973, 901 3, 967, 166 305, 084 663, 227

Thailand 122, 946, 393 8, 173, 283 2, 670, 137 198, 491 431, 503

Yunnan 153, 350, 112 10, 811, 659 3, 861, 540 293, 601 638, 264

Total 683, 430, 953 46 ,153, 870 15 ,672, 405 1, 151, 850 2, 504, 023

http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_2/Estimation%20of%20bioslurry%20production%20based%20on%20available%20livestock%20waste%20in%20GMS%20countries.docx


8/21

Potential of bio-slurry production in GMS

ScenarioBioslurry

(tons/year)Dry matter

(tons/yearC (tons/year) N (tons/year)

Urea replaced

(tons/year)

Scenario 1 683, 430, 953 46, 153, 870 15 ,672, 405 1 ,151, 850 2, 504 ,023

Scenario 2 512, 573, 214 34, 615, 403 11, 754, 304 863, 888 1, 878, 017

Scenario 3 341, 715, 476 23, 076, 935 7 ,836 ,202 575, 925 1 ,252, 011



9/21

Crop waste biomass, C and N quantities in

potential crop waste production (calculated formajor annual crops from yield, area harvested and harvest

index)

Level ofestimate

Total drybiomass in crop

waste (tons)

Amount of C incrop waste

(tons)

Amount of N incrop waste

(tons)

Scenario 1 261, 514, 037 128, 752, 469 2, 131, 137

Scenario 2 196, 135, 528 96, 564, 352 1, 598, 353

Scenario 3 130, 757, 019 64, 376, 235 1, 065, 569

http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_2/Estimation%20of%20potential%20production%20of%20crop%20waste%20biomass.docx


10/21

Potential bio-slurry compost production in GMS

Level ofestimate

Total drybiomass (tons)

C (tons) N (tons)

Scenario 1 246, 134 326 101, 097,412 1, 969, 792

Scenario 2 184, 600, 744 75, 823, 059 1, 477, 344

Scenario 3 123, 067, 163 50, 548, 706 984, 896

http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_2/Potential%20bioslurry%20compost%20production%20in%20the%20GMS.docx


11/21

Annual N production potential and equivalent

amount of urea in each scenario

Level ofEstimate

N production potential(tons)/year

Equivalent amount of urea(tons)/year

BioslurryBioslurrycompost

BioslurryBioslurrycompost

Scenario 1 1, 151, 850 1, 969, 792 2, 504, 023 4, 282, 157

Scenario 2 863, 888 1, 477, 344 1, 878, 017 3, 211, 618

Scenario 3 575, 925 984, 896 1, 252, 011 2, 141, 079

Source:


12/21

Estimated potential biogas production in the GMS

Country/Provinc

e

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

Biogas(m3

million/year)

Fuelwood

replaced

(tonesmillion

/year)

LPG

replaced

(tones/year)

Biogas(m3

million/year)

Fuelwood

replaced

(milliontones

/year)

LPG

replaced

(tones/year)

Biogas(m3

million/year)

Fuelwood

replaced

(milliontones

/year)

LPG

replaced

(tones/year)

Cambodia 789 3 15 ,776 592 2 11, 832 394 2 7 ,888

Lao PDR 565 2 11, 299 424 2 8 ,474 282 1 5 ,649

Myanmar 2 ,908 11 58, 151 2, 181 8 43 ,613 1, 454 6 29 ,075

Viet Nam 2, 890 11 57, 802 2, 168 8 43, 352 1, 445 6 28, 901

Thailand 2, 199 9 43, 986 1, 649 6 32, 989 1, 100 4 21 ,993

Yunnan 2 ,885 11 57 ,708 2 ,164 8 43, 281 1, 443 6 28 ,854

Total 12 ,236 48 244, 722 9, 177 36 183, 542 6 ,118 24 122 ,361

Source:
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_2/Potential%20for%20biogas%20production%20in%20GMS%20countries.docxhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_2/Potential%20for%20biogas%20production%20in%20GMS%20countries.docx


13/21

Potential GHG reduction through biogas

installation in the GMS region

Level ofEstimate

EnergysubstitutionCO2 eq (Gg)

ManuremanagementCO2 eq (Gg)

FertilizersubstitutionCO2 eq (Gg)

Totalemissionreduction

CO2 eq (Gg)

Value ofcarbon credit

(US$)

Scenario 1 48, 363 13, 853 3, 856 66, 072 991, 075, 940

Scenario 2 36, 272 10, 390 2, 892 49, 554 743, 306, 955

Scenario 3 24, 181 6, 926 1, 928 33, 036 495, 537, 970

Value of unit carbon credit : 15$ / ton of CO2 eq- is assumed
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_2/An%20overview%20of%20the%20methodology%20to%20calculate%20avoided%20GHG%20emissions.docx


14/21

Key observations

A number of biogas users have stopped their bio gasproduction

Most biogas plants built under past projects have

already stopped functioning It seems that many digesters are not operating in their

full capacity - Perhaps less than 50% of feeding rate

In general, the potential amount of available dung,

daily gas use and capacity of the biogas plants does not

correspond to the ground reality
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_2/Estimated%20versus%20actual%20bioslurry%20production.docx


15/21

Key observations

There are oversized plants having no additionalbenefits from the excess gas

There are under sized plants producing insufficient gas

for the households needs Cattle and buffaloes are usually kept in stable at night

time only

Lack of properly trained local technicians


16/21

Key observations

Poorly constructed and managed slurry pits

Application methods of bioslurry are not up to

standard

No proper bio slurry compost production


17/21

Majority of people are not clearly aware on biogas technology and

its benefits

Training in use of bio-slurry is weak

Poor rural communities cannot afford biogas technology and

appear to have low willingness to obtain it

In general it appears that biogas is more accessible to wealthier

households

Training and extension perspectives


18/21

Coordination among key stakeholders at grassroots level is a must

in order to implement effective dissemination of biogas

technology and bio-slurry applications

The level of awareness of GHG mitigation potentials, carbon

markets and global climate change is poor among key stakeholders

at all levels

Quality training materials are available at upper levels of program

implementation but this information does not seem to reach the

field level

Training and extension perspectives


19/21

Conclusions and recommendations

A comprehensive extension programme is needed to motivate

farmers and to establish effective production of biogas and properuse of bioslurry in order to obtain optimal benefits from

investment in biogas technology in the GMS region

Majority of people are not aware of biogas technology and its

benefits

Public awareness on biogas technology to overcome traditions and

predilections of local people could be improved

Existing biogas users can be motivated through nominal incentives

from climate change mitigating programmes in the GMS region so

that existing biogas programmes can be revitalized


20/21

Conclusions and recommendations

There is a need to design and implement suitable field

experiments to better assess the potential level of chemicalfertilizer replacement by bio-slurry, biosludge and bioslurry

compost in the GMS context

The inclusion of chemical fertilizer substitution and N2O emissionreduction from manure management require more attention,

emphasis and applied research


21/21

2. palitha ranadewa - potential to access carbon markets through biogas & bio-slurry in gms

Documents