Domestic biogas & carbon revenue A strategy towards sustainability
description
Transcript of Domestic biogas & carbon revenue A strategy towards sustainability
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
A strategy towards sustainability
PPREOldenburg
April 26 - 28, 2011
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Content
• Greenhouse emission reductions by domestic biogas installations– Changing the manure management modality– Substituting biomass and fossil fuels– Substituting chemical fertilizer– GHG emission reduction potential
• Reducing global GHG emissions– The Clean Development Mechanism
• Project cycle• Methodologies
– The voluntary market• Methodologies• Notes to the methodologies
• Voluntary or CDM?• The value of carbon revenue for biogas projects• Conclusions
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Introduction
Domestic biogas installations• Biogas• Bio-slurry
Carbon revenue• Greenhouse gas emission
reductions• Baseline minus project emissions• Up on delivery
Sustainability• Financial• Technical• Programmatic
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
GHG reduction by domestic biogas plantsBiogas & GHG reduction
Manure handling modality
Fossil- and NRB fuel
substitution
Chemical fertilizer
substitution
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Manure handling modality
Methane emissions per animal type “i” in “j” systems:
CH4i = ∑j Bo
i x VSi x MS%ij x MCFj
CH4= Methane emissions [kgm-3]Bo= Biodegradability [m3 CH4 (kgVS)-
1]MS%= Manure management system usage [%]MCF= Methane conversion factor [%]VS= Volatile solids [kgyr-1]
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Biodegradability and volatile solids
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Characteristics of manure management systems
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Methane conversion factors
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
MMM spreadsheet lay-out
Baseline manure management GHG emission for dairy cattle IPCC 2006 Table 10A-5
4.1.1 dairy cattle characteristics
1.5.1 VS [kg/hd/d] 1.851.5.2 Bo [m3CH4/kgVS] 0.133.1.3 hdnd [# of nd-cattle] 23.2.3 Collnd [%] 60%
4.3.1.1 N-excrnd [kgN/hd/yr] 40
4.1.2a CH4 & N2O emissons total
Lagoon Liquid / slurry Solid storage DrylotPasture /
range Daily spread DigesterBurned for
fuel Other
4.1.2.1a MCF 78.0% 42.0% 4.0% 1.5% 1.5% 0.5% 10.0% 10.0% 1.0%4.13.2.2a MS% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 27.0% 19.0% 1.0% 51.0% 0.0%
4.1.2.3a Efk [m3CH4/hd/d] 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.05 0.05 2.61 0.00 3.134.1.2.4a Efknd-plant [kgCH4/pl/yr] 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.07 0.07 3.54 0.00 4.25
4.1.2.5a EF3 [%] 0.1% 0.1% 2.0% 2.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5%4.1.2.6a EF3nd [kgN2O/hd/yr] 0 0.0004 0 0 0.216 0 0 0 0 0.224.1.2.7a EF3nd-plant [kgN2O/pl/yr] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.43
Baseline side only
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Biomass and fossil fuel substitution
Baseline emissions for thermal energy for one household:
BEth, h = ∑j (( F i,bl,h) x NCVi x EFco2i)
Beth,h = Baseline hh emissions from thermal energy [t CO2eq]
Fi, bl, h= Amount of fuel i in baseline situation per hh [kg, m3 or ltr]
NCVi = Net calorific value fuel i [GJkg-1etc]
EFco2i= CO2 emission factor for fuel i [tCO2kg-1]
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
NRB & FF spreadsheet lay-out
Avg
su
bstit
uted
fu
el
Cal
orifi
c va
lue
subs
titut
ed
fuel
Ene
rgy
subs
titut
ion
biog
as p
lant
reference 2.5 2.2unit [kg/pl/yr] [MJ/kg] [GJ/pl/yr]factorGWP (IPCC 3rd assessment report 2001)
Agricultural residue (LHV on wet basis) 0% 664 12.6 8.361Fuelwood (LHV on wet basis) non renewable: 75% 1752 15 26.283Charcoal 75% 0 29 0.000Dung cake 0% 1095 15.5 16.974Kerosene 100% 0 45.6 0.000LPG 100% 51 47.8 2.438
54.056
Fuel characteristics
Em
issi
on
Fact
or
CO
2
redu
ctio
n pe
r pl
ant
IPCC 2006 table 2.5[kgCO2/GJ] [kgCO2eq/pl]
1
100.0 0112.0 2208112.0 0100.0 071.9 063.1 154
2362
Carbondioxide
N2O
em
issi
on
fact
or
N2O
re
duct
ion
per
plan
t
CO
2eq
redu
ctio
n pe
r pl
ant
IPCC 2006 table 2.5 5.3[gN2O/MJ] [kgN2O/pl/yr] [kgCO2eq/pl/yr]
296
0.0040 0.033443 9.900.0040 0.105133 31.120.0010 0 0.000.0040 0.067896 20.100.0006 0 0.000.0010 0.002438 0.72
61.84
Nitrous oxide
Baseline side only
CH
4 em
issi
on
fact
or
CH
4
redu
ctio
n pe
r pl
ant
CO
2eq
redu
ctio
n pe
r pl
ant
IPCC 2006 table 2.5 5.2[kgCH4/GJ] [kgCH4/pl/yr] [kgCO2eq/MJ]
23
0.300 2.51 57.690.300 7.88 181.350.200 0.00 0.000.300 5.09 117.120.010 0.00 0.000.005 0.01 0.28
356.44
Methane
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
… and some charts ..
Fuel substitution mix [kg/plant/yr]
Agric residue, 664
LPG, 51Kerosene, 0
Dung cake, 1095
Charcoal, 0
Fuelwood, 1752
GHG reduction by source [kgCO2eq/plant/yr]
Fuelwood, 2404
Dung cake, 127
Kerosene, 0
LPG, 155
Agric residue, 63 GHG reduction by GHG type
Carbon dioxide
86%
Methane12%
Nitrous oxide2%
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Chemical fertilizer substitution
Avoiding emissions from chemical fertilizer application and production, however:
• Complicated calculation; no methodology available• Even more complicated to monitor / verify
Up to now excluded for biogas programmes
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaProject boundary
Animal manure storage
Biogas stove(thermal energy
to the user)
Fertilizer for fields
manure biogas
Bio-slurry
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
GHG reduction potential for domestic biogas
Summary greenhous gas reduction
Component[kgCO2/pl/yr] [%] [kgCO2/pl/yr] [%]
1 Manure management 1050 27% 518 98%2 Chemical fertilizer 0 0% 0 0%3 Fuel 2780 73% 2 0%4 GHG construction plant @ 2% 0% 8 1%
3830 528
baseline biogas
Domestic biogas plant GHG reduction
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Manuremanagement
Fuel substitution Plant construction
kgC
O2e
q/pl
/yr
baseline project
GHG reduction range: 1.7 to 6 tons CO2 eq / plant / yr
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
CDM in practice
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
CDM in practice II
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Reducing GHG emissions• ET• JI• CDM
– Annex 1 - non-annex 1 party
– Technology transfer– Sustainable development
» Economic» Social» Environment
.. and …• Voluntary market
Emission trading under the CDM
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
CDM project cycle
CDM project activity cycle
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
MethodologiesDescribe • how to measure baseline and project manure management change
and fuel substitution.• How to monitor and verify baseline and project situation.• How to calculate eventual emission reductions.
Exist as:Large scale: not available for domestic biogas plantsSmall scale: Simplified methodology: monitoring requirement,
registration fee Project size restricted (=“small”)
PoA: Grouped small scale projects
Many large, institutional buyers insist on emission reductions verified by a “recognized” methodology:
CDM: AMS I.C.(AMS) I.E.AMS III.R
Voluntary: Gold standard
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
AMS I.C.
“Thermal energy for the user with or without electricity”
• Renewable thermal energy for households • Substitution of fossil fuel• In examples “biogas” is not specifically mentioned, but “implied”
Project size limited to 45 MWth
A-priori household identification (canceled)
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
(AMS) I.E.
“Switch from non-renewable biomass for thermal applications by the user”
• Small thermal appliances for households • Substitution of non-renewable biomass• In examples “biogas” is specifically mentioned.
Project size limited to 45 MWth
A-priori household identification (canceled)Specification establishment non-renewable fraction of biomass.
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
(Non-) renewable biomass
Biomass is renewable if it comes from:• sustainably managed forests• sustainably managed croplands / grasslands• residues• Industrial / municipal waste
Non renewable:Land-use data plus surveys on:• Trend in fuelwood collection time• Trend in fuelwood prices• Trend in type of collected biomass
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
AMS III.R
“Methane recovery in agricultural services at household / small farm level ”
• Small farms / households.• Manure management modality change.• Only applicable in combination with AMS I.C. ((AMC I.E. not yet
mentioned).
Methane recovery systems up to 5 tons CO2 eq.Project size up to 60 kt CO2 eq.Specification establishment non-renewable fraction of biomass.
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Programme of Activities
Not a methodology as such
Several projects, meeting the PoA eligibility criteria, can be included when:
• Using approved methodologies• Avoiding double counting• Accounting for leakage• ERs are measurable, verifiable and additional
Then:• Only one single registration• Inclusion of new, additional projects relatively simple• Some requirements could be shared (e.g. EIA)• Validation and verification at project level
But:• Application of one methodology only (seems to be adjusted now)• DoE is accountable
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Gold Standard “small biodigester” methodology“Implementation of biodigesters in households within the
project’s boundaries”
• “…the individual hh will not act as project participants”• Substitution of NRB and fossil fuel• Manure management modality change
Satisfied demand option in baselineNo project size limitation (not “small scale”)NRB fraction calculation specified
But:• Statistical correction for sample size and standard deviation• “Heavy” on additionality and sustainability
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Gold Standard “small biodigester” methodology
Sustainable development matrix• Environment• Social development• Economic and technological development
Safeguarding princples• Human rights• Labour standards• Environmental protection
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Example SD matrixIndicator Mitigation Relevance to (localized) MDGs Parameter Score
(‘-‘ / ‘0’ / ‘+’)Brief explanation
Social development
Quality of employmentMasons and technicians trained for (rural) artisan level employment
MDG:SEDP: 9
# of biogas construction teams
+ Construction and quality control requires well skilled masons and technicians. Mason report better income then in regular construction sector
Livelihood of the poorWorkload reduction for women and childrenHealth improvement / injury reductionHigh upfront investment
The programme will assist hh with bearing the investment costs with an investment subsidy to the tune of ~ 25%, and will develop –in cooperation with national finance institutions- a biogas micro-finance component to reduce the burden of the high investment costs
MDG: 1.1; 3.4; 4.5SEDP: 9; 10
Workload reduction for women.Incidence of illnesses and injuries resulting from conventional energy use.
+ Biogas plants are an economically viable investment for small livestock holders that –often- live in rural areas. Investment costs, however, are entirely up-front, posing a barrier for poorer hh.Many of the micro-level benefits of biogas directly benefit women and children, an often more deprived section of society.
Access to affordable and clean energy services MDG:SEDP: 1; 7
# of biogas installations constructed
+ Domestic biogas installations produce clean energy. The cost of operation of the installations is negligible. For small holder hh, biogas installations are a viable investment.
Human and institutional capacityBiogas technical trainingBiogas multi-actor support network
MDG:SEDP: 9
# of participating government, non-government and private organizations
+ The programme aims to (further) develop a commercially viable domestic biogas sector for which it heavily invests in human and institutional capacityConstruction and quality control requires well skilled masons and technicians, for which the programme will run a comprehensive training component (total professional training over 53,000 person-days)The programme is establishing a provincial – district - commune support network nation wide.
Sub-total social development +4
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
An overview of methodologies
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Notes
• Carbonese doesn’t always translate easily• Pioneering due, few registered projects only• No methodology for chemical fertilizer substitution• Inclusion of manure management component?• To NRBe or not to NRBe• Suppressed and satisfied demand• Safeguarding additionality• The ODA issue …• PoA: Opportunities and risks
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
CDM or voluntary?
Considering that:• CDM and GS differ little, post validation procedure with GS might be
shorter• But CDM procedure is much more complicated than other VER
schemes• CERs might be more attractive for institutional investers (WB, ADB)• CERs might have higher, more predictable value than VERs (?)• Absorption capacity voluntary market might be limited• Voluntary market future perspective ?• Commitment period risk CERs > VERs (?)It seems:• Smaller or starting biogas projects should go for voluntary credits• Larger projects, depending financially on carbon revenue go for CERs• Programme of activities particularly interesting for expanding projects.
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Carbon value for biogas projects: Pakistan
Project expenses and carbon revenue
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Expenses Carbon revenue
Euro
Carbon revenue
Carbon rebate
Support
Investment
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
CARBONREVENUE
PERFORMANCEFEEDBACK
Nationaldomestic biogas
programme
Financial, technical and programmatic sustainability
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Conclusions
The good news :• Biogas-carbon methodologies available• Expertise and experience mounting• Good demand for CER & VER• Potential improving technical, financial and programmatic
sustainability
“However”:• Methodologies still harbor uncertainties and risks• Formulation is complicated• Management of carbon projects extra complicated• CER & VER market >2012 uncertain
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Domestic biogas & carbon revenue
Thank you for your attention.
Biogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice AreaBiogas Practice Area
Biochemical processes and biogas
The dairy cow
Mature “developed (!)” dairy cow Live weight 635 kgMilk production 20 – 35 kg / day
Main dung characteristics:Daily fresh manure production: 51 kg per day (61 litres / day)Total solids: 6.4 kg (TS (= DM) ~ 13% of fresh wght)Volatile solids: 5.4 kg (VS ~ 11% of fresh wght, VS ~
85% of TS)Chemical Oxygen Demand: 5.7 kg (COD ~ 11% of fresh wgt)
Macro nutrients:Nitrogen Nk: 0.39 kg (organic)Phosphorus P: 0.04 kgPotassium K: 0.16 kg
“Developing” cattle: Live weigt <250 kgMilk production 1-5
kg/dayTS >20% of fresh wght