DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS

Transcription

1 DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS Udin Hasanudin Laboratory of Agro-industrial Waste Management, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Lampung, Jl. Sumantri Brojonegoro No. 1, Bandar Lampung-35145, INDONESIA ERIA WG on Sustainability Assessment of Biomass Utilisation in East Asia The 3 rd Bioenergy Week Indonesia, Medan May 2015

2 WG Concept on Sustainability Triple Bottom Lines for Sustainable Development Domestic/Regional Gap Abatement Food vs. Energy (Culture, Education, Poverty, Health, Peace, Human Rights..) by HDI or similar index Social Performance Economic Sustainability, Energy Security (Economic Development) by Gross Value Added Economic Performance GHG Emission Reduction (Global & Regional Environment ) by LCA Environmental 2 Performance

3 List of WG Member Masayuki SAGISAKA: ERIA Working Group Leader, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Japan Yuki KUDOH: ERIA Working Group Acting Leader, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Japan Sau Soon CHEN: Environment & Bioprocess Technology Centre, SIRIM Berhad, Malaysia Jessie C. ELAURIA: Institute of Agricultural Engineering, College of Engineering and Agro- Industrial Technology, University of the Philippines Los Baños, the Philippines Shabbir H. GHEEWALA: The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment (JGSEE), King Mongkut s University of Technology Thonburi, Thailand Udin HASANUDIN: Department of Agroindustrial Technology, University of Lampung, Indonesia Jane ROMERO: Transport and Climate Finance Specialist (Consultant), Asian Development Bank Yucho SADAMICHI: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Japan Vinod K. SHARMA: Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research (IGIDR), India Xunpeng SHI: Energy Studies Institute, National University of Singapore 3

4 RENEWABLE ENERGY INNITIATIVES Case Study: Ethanol from Cassava

5 5

6 Sustainability Assessment Methodology (ERIA Project Report No.8-2) Environmental Impact - Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Economic Impact - Total Value Added Social Impact - HDI (Human Development Index) 6

7 What the Environmental Impact? LC GHG emission was used to evaluate the environmental impact of bioethanol production from cassava 7

8 Boundary system Non-Contract Farmers Contract Farmers Composting Coals CO 2 Wet cake, Cassava peels, Soil CO 2 Power Generator CO 2 CO 2 Biogas plant Ethanol Factory Thin slop Bioethanol CO 2 Markets (Chemicals industries, biofuel etc) 8

9 Schematic diagram of ethanol production PW Steam Molasses PW Feed Stock Cassava Pre Treatment Slurry Liquefaction Mash Saccharification & Fermentation Steam Distillation Decantation Thin Slops Product Wet Cake Biogas to Boiler WWTP Treated Effluent 9

10 Material balance on cassava-based ethanol production (based on a ha of plantation) 1.37 Ton Coal 10

11 CO 2 emission from ethanol production Process Source Unit* Quantity CO 2e Emission (kg/l Ethanol) (kg/gj) *** Plantation Diesel fuel L/ha Urea Kg/ha NPK ( ) Kg/ha Herbicides Kg/ha Transportation Diesel fuel L/ton 0.41 L/KL ethanol Processing Electricity (Coal) MW 5.7 MWh/KL ethanol CO 2 M3/day 0** 0 Waste treatment CH 4, flared M3/day 0** 0 CO 2 M 3 /day 0** 0 CH 4, vented M 3 /day CH 4, utilized M 3 /day TOTAL CO2 EMISSION (SCENARIO 1, FLARED) TOTAL CO2 EMISSION (SCENARIO 2, VENTED) TOTAL CO2 EMISSION (SCENARIO 3, UTILIZED) *) every ha produces KL ethanol **) neutral ***) Low Heating Value of Ethanol = 21.1 MJ/L 11

12 GHG Emission from Ethanol Production compare to Gasoline (kg CO 2 e/gj) GHG gasoline Utilized Vented Flared Flared Utilized Vented GHG gasoline (kg CO 2 e/gj) 12

13 GHG Emission from Ethanol Production compare to Gasoline (%) GHG gasoline 100 Utilized Vented 137 Flared Flared Utilized Vented GHG gasoline ( % ) 13

14 What the Economic Impact? TVA was used to evaluate the economic impact of bioethanol production from cassava 14

15 ITEMS Costs and returns in cassava production for partnership farmers QUANTITY/ HA COST/UNIT (in IDR) COST/HA (in IDR) MATERIAL Seed, Fertilizer, compost, and 1 package 1,187,950 1,187,950 Chemicals LABOR Weeding, Fertilizing, and Other days 25, ,328 Maintenance MACHINE Land preparation 1 package 294, ,498 Harvesting and Transportation 28,49 ton 69,545 1,981,338 OVERHEAD Tax, and rent, refraction 2,135,280 TOTAL COST 6,300,394 TOTAL fresh cassava root 28,490kg ,536,138 NET PROFIT 6,235,744 15

16 Costs and returns in cassava production for non-partnership farmers ITEMS QUANTITY/ HA COST/UNIT (in IDR) COST/HA (in IDR) MATERIAL Seed, Fertilizer, compost, and 1 package 1,027,716 1,027,716 Chemicals LABOR Weeding, Fertilizing, and Other days 25, ,811 Maintenance MACHINE Land preparation 1 package 478, ,172 Harvesting and Transportation 24,67 ton 74,897 1,847,716 Tax, and rent, OVERHEAD refraction 1,823,862 TOTAL COST 6,110,277 TOTAL fresh cassava root 24,670 kg ,106,193 NET PROFIT 4,995,916 16

17 Value added resulted from processing cassava tubers into ethanol on a liter ethanol basis Raw Material Cost Cassava = 6.48 kg IDR Processing Cost IDR /L Ethanol Price 5336 IDR /L Value Added

18 Costs and returns in production of ethanol from one hectare cassava production ITEMS QUANTITY COST/UNIT (IDR) TOTAL (IDR) TOTAL COST 4,466 L 4,231 18,895,646 TOTAL OUTPUT, L 4,466 L 5,336 23,830,576 SELLING PRICE PER L 5,336 NET PROFIT 4,934,930 BY PRODUCT Biogas 712 M 3 4,200 2,990,400 Compost 1.37 T 700, ,000 ADDITIONAL PROFIT 3,949,400 TOTAL PROFIT 8,884,330 18

19 What the Social Impact? HDI was used to evaluate the Social impact of bioethanol production from cassava 19

20 Social parameters on cassava production in North Lampung Item Quantity Number of population 7820 Number of family (NF) 1872 Average age of dead people (year) Income per capita (US$/year) Number of illiterate people 102 Number of preschool pupils 34 Number of basic school student 397 Number of junior high student 470 Number of senior high student 333 Number of diploma student 19 Number of university student 0 20

21 Life Expectation Index = = Number of adult people = 2 * NF + HS + DS + US = 2(1872) = 4096 ALR (Adult Literacy Rate) = 100 % * ( )/4096 = 97.5 % ALI (Adult Literacy Index) = ALR = = GEI = ( ) 7820 = 0.16 EI (Education Index) = 2/3 (ALI) + 1/3 (GEI) = 2/3 (0.975) + 1/3 (0.16) = 0.70 GDP Index = log( GDP pc ) log(100) log( 40000) log(100) = log( 635.8) log(100) = log( 40000) log(100) HDI = (LEI + EI + GDPI)/3 = ( )/3 =

22 Is it Sustainable? Integration of environmental. Economic, and Social Indicator?? 22

23 Sustainability indicators of cassava production and utilization for ethanol 23

24 Current Conditions Cassava tubers price increased to IDR /kg Ethanol factory changed cassava to molases as feed stock Ethanol production from cassava was terminated 24

25 Highlight of Pilot Project Sustainability Assessment Methodology (ERIA Project Report No.8-2) Indicators like GHG savings, TVA, and HDI change, are suitable for assessing the environmental, economic, and social sustainability, respectively, of biomass energy utilization Utilization of all by-products in the production of biomass energy is very much recommended to increase the sustainability of soil, reduce environmental impact, and optimize social and ecoconomic benefits 25

26 Improvement of Methodology Environmental indicator chosen for this phase of the project cover only GHG savings which is very relevant to current concerns on biofuels. Evaluation of GHG emissions for global warming using LCA is appropriate but other emission and impacts can also be considered, such as: land use change, soil quality, eutrophication, ecotoxicity, human toxicity, and resource depletion affect. Other Economic indicators are also considered, such as NP, TVA, and Forex saving. Although HDI is widely applied to evaluate social impact at state, regional or national level, there is need to develop an index or some indices that can better represent social impact at the community level. 26

27 Sustainability Indicators at Different Level 27

28 Latest Methodology Improvement In environmental aspects, one of important environmental sustainability elements, namely, soil sustainability, was introduced and possibility of its quantification was explored using microbial quinone profiles method. In economic aspects, the production and income approaches were discussed because different approaches could apply to different scale of biomass projects. In social aspects, Employment and Access to Modern Bioenergy, were considered. 28

29 RENEWABLE ENERGY INNITIATIVES Case Study: Palm Biomass Power Plant, Bangka Island

30 Project Location: Bangka-Belitung Province

31 Electricity Condition in Bangka-Belitung Province Number of household in Bangka-Belitung province is 324,600 households. Electrification ratio of Bangka-Belitung is 73.94% which mean 26.6% or 86,344 households are still not electrified. Recently the total installed capacity is MW with rated power (available power) of MW and peak load MW (PLN, 2013). Fuel consumption for electricity production by HSD in Bangka- Belitung is 193, kl, so that the estimated fuel consumption per household is 179,393.7 kl. Cost of fuel (HSD) is IDR 9,046.09/Liter, so that the cost of fuel totally in Bangka-Belitung is IDR 1.75 Trillion (PLN, 2012). Babel Province, there is no oil or coal as fossil energy sources. it s necessary to use energy from renewable sources that come from the surrounding area.

32 Waste generated from Palm Oil Mill POME Solid Waste % EFB Fiber Shell Boiler Ash % % 5-6 % % Solid Decanter (3.5% optional)

33 Biomass utilization in palm oil mill FFB Steam electricity Fiber EFB Boiler Kernel shell Boiler ash

34 ENERGY SOURCES IN PALM OIL MILL FFB WATER Diesel oil kl /hr 40 ton/hr 60 ton/hr 720 kwh/hr Electricity PALM OIL MILL 8,7 ton/hr 9.4 ton/hr 1.7 ton/hr 4.8 ton/hr Crude Palm oil EFB Kernel Fiber % FUEL Steam 2.8 ton/hr Shell 50-55% 24 ton/hr 33.7 ton/hr POME 5.6 ton/hr

35 Palm Biomass Power Plant

36 Purpose and General Description of Project Activity The project was intended to provide a new supply of electricity by using local fuel from the palm oil industries in the island. The project contributes to Indonesia s sustainable development by providing green electricity in isolated areas such as Bangka and therefore promoting the growth of the local economy by improving access to electricity. The electricity was utilized for palm oil mill and the excess electricity was sold to PT. PLN.

37 Feed stock composition: Fiber= 20%; Palm Shell= 20%; EFB= 60% Feed stock supply from their own mill (PT. Sawindo Kencana) only contribute up to 20%. The other 80% should be import from other palm oil mill.

38 Several problems related to un-successful the palm biomass-based power plant The availability of feedstock for boilers (80% from Kalimantan) NOT LOCAL AVAILABLE. The price of feedstock (PKS and EFB) rising continuously (more than IDR 400/kg). Based on this price, FIT is not attractive GOVERNMENT CONCERN Inconsistent quality of feedstock TECH CONCERN Feedstock preparation consumes high parasitic (own use) power. Higher maintenance compared to coal power plant. Lack of understanding by local authority for PPA process and other required licenses GOVERNMENT CONCERN This system removed the opportunity of oil palm plantation to have mulch or compost from EFB COMPETITION WITH OTHER PUSPOSES

39 RENEWABLE ENERGY INNITIATIVES Case Study: Self Suficience Energy Village Based on Biogas

40 UTILIZATION OF COW MANURE FOR BIOGAS ENERGY Location: Haurngombong Village, Sub distric Pamulihan, Sumedang, West Jawa

41 DKI Jakarta Village: Haurngombong Sub. District: Pamulihan District: Sumedang Sumedang Bandung

42 warung kawat simpang cirengganis cikondang sekepaku karangnangka rancamekar cipareuag Overview: Sub District Village District Province Area Population Elevation Av. Temperature Distant from Bandung : Pamulihan : Haurngombong : Sumedang : West Jawa : 219 Ha : 4,865 : ASL : 22 o C : 31 km cigembong pangaseran lapang The Potential of Village 1. Center of milk production and other agricutural products (Sweet Potato, Fresh Fish, etc.) 2. Center of organic compost production Haurngombong Village

43

44 2003: BIOGAS was introduced to solved sanitation problem and organic fertilizer production 2007: KEROSENE price increase and difficult to found it Village leader promoted biogas as source of alternative energy 2008: BIOGAS was socialized to the communities Collaboration with Pajajaran University, Bandung and PLN (PLN supply small biogas generator) Local Government Supports: Socialization program Biogas Training development Networking on biogas information and technology Establishment of local biogas working groups

45 Manure Inlet Biogas Reactor Cow Gas Holder Safety valve Feed Electricity Grass Cutting machine Stove Grass

46 Current Situation: The populations of cow in Haurngombong village are about 1300 and all of their manure was utilized for generate biogas in about 300 digester Biogas was utilized for cooking energy (more than 700 HH) for free Utilization for electricity and fuel of grass cutting machine was not working well due to corrosion. Haurngombong village prodused about 1,950 m3 of biogas per day which is equivalent with 897 kg of LPG or 1,209 litre of kerosene, or 6,825 kg of fire wood per day. The utilization of biogas for cooking reduced GHGs emission about kg of methane or about 17,550 kg CO 2 e per day.

47 Biogas digester installed in Haurngombong village

48 Biogas Utilization Cooking energy Parteurization of milk Electricity generation

49

50

51

52 Lessons learned from Self Suficience Energy Village Based on Biogas Haurngombong village is one of the Self Sufficiency Energy villages that successfully to utilize cow manure for renewable energy and solve sanitation problems in dairy cow farm village. Biogas project in Haurngombong village was successfully to educate people in the community level to contribute on renewable energy development and provide access on clean and cheap energy. The biogas project was also successfully to provide additional economic activities in the village, such as: compost and liquid fertilizer production, and some of the citizen can works also as biogas technician in the village so that it becomes a new source of livelihood for many villagers. The commitment of village leader give important contribution to make this program successfully.

53 Summary Renewable Energy should be develop based on local potential and problems/need in their community. Participation and supports of steakholders (community, government, university, and private company) are very important to secure the sustainability of the project.

54 Thank you for your kind attention