CDM Potential of Indian Dairy Sector Dr. Smita Sirohi Principal Scientist National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research N.Delhi May 2008
Livestock: Source of GHG Emissions From the Digestive Process: Enteric Emissions Methane From Animal Wastes 2
Contribution of Livestock to National GHG Inventory In CO 2 Equivalent: 208.6Tg 17 % of Total National Emissions 60% of Emissions from Agriculture 3
Enteric (8972 Gg) Manure (972 Gg) Total GHG Emissions from Livestock Methane 9918 Gg Nitrous Oxide 1Gg 4
Mitigation Options: Animal Waste Emissions Biogas Methane emissions from cow dung of one animal equivalent to 225 liters of petrol in energy terms (Dept. of Planning U.P., 2007) Cow dung 4 animals cater to 5
Bagepalli CDM Biogas Programme: CDM Initiatives 5500 households on Bagepalli Biogas Taluk of Kolar Projects Vedaranniyam Biogas Project: 12000 households Nagapattinam, TN Kolar District Biogas Project: 12000 households Kolar, Karnataka Biogas CDM Project of Bagepalli Coolie Sangha: 18000 households 5 Taluks of Chickballapur District 6
Technologies for Enteric Methane Mitigation Improving rumen fermentation efficiency Feed Additives Propionate enhancers Ionophores Dietary manipulation, 7
Feed additives Propionate Enhancers Fumarate : 24 % (Newbold, 1998) : 27.6%(Asuma et al., 1995) Malate : 25% (ADAS, 1998) : 27% (Martin et al., 1995) Acrylate : 13.8% (Ouda et al, 1999) Ionophores 8
Dietary manipulation Feed Substitution Low digestibility feeds with high digestibility ones: 7.8% (O Hara et al, 2003) Concentrate feeding: 40% Replacing fibrous concentrate with starchy concentrate: 22% Utilization of less ruminally degradable starch: 17% 9
Changing Probiotics Rumen microflora Aspergillus oryzae reduction potential: 50% (Frumholtz et al 1989) Saccharomyces cerevisiae Reduction potential: 10%, but not sustained (Mutsvangwa et al 1992) Methane oxidising bacteria Reduction potential: 8% (ADAS, 1998) 10
Defaunation Plant secondary metabolites for use as possible defaunating agents: Saponin (Kamra et al., 2000; Sliwinski et al., 2002; Lila et al., 2003). Bacteriocins Nisin 36% (Callaway et al., 1997) 11
Mitigation option Extent of reduction 1. Dietary manipulation Effect of Methane Mitigation Options on Dairy Animals in India (i) Supplementation of Green Fodder 5.7% (Singhal and Madhu Mohini, 2002) (ii) Concentrate feeding 15-32% (Singh and Madhu Mohini, 1999) 2. Feed additives (i) Monensin For animals on: Maintenance diet Medium producing ration High producing ration 3. Strategic supplementation (i) Urea Molasses Mineral Block (UMMB) 21% (De and Singh, 2001) 14-23% } 23-32% }(Singh, 1998) 14-25% } 15% (Singh et al., 2001) 8.7% (Srivastava and Garg, 2002) 12
Carbon Credits: Scope Potential to Generate CERs 10% annual reduction in enteric emissions =18 million CERs Small projects covering group of districts 13
Potential Annual CERs from Enteric Methane Mitigation 14
Feed Additives (Ionophores) Monensin premix 4.5 % Monensin Controlled Released Capsule (CRC) 6% Effect on milk productivity Strategic Supplementation (MUBs) Bangladesh 18% (McGuffey et al. 2001) (Rafiq et al, 2000) Uttranchal Buffaloes: 35.97% Cows: 33.8% (Singh and Singh, 2003) Himachal Pradesh Buffaloes: 35.18% Cows: 31.58% Probiotics Yeast probiotics 7.8% (Tripathi et al. 2006) (Wallace and Newbold, 1993) 15
Economics of MUB Supplementation Types of animals Units Adult animals: Local cows Buffalo Heifer: Local cows Buffalo Adult male: Cattle Buffalo Annual cost of suppleme ntation Rs. 730 730 550 550 730 730 Annual CH4 emissions Kg/head 36 77 22 37 34 55 Annual CH4 reduction @11% Kg/head Dairy animals 3.96 8.47 2.42 4.07 Non-Dairy animals 3.74 6.05 Gross cost of reduction Rs./t CO2 8778 4104 10823 6435 9295 5746 Increased returns from milk production @10% Rs. 583 1568 - - Net cost of reduction Rs./t CO2 1765-4711 - - - - - - 16
Type of animal Annual cost of ionophore Annual Cost of ionophore feed additive CH4 emission Annual CH4 reduction @11% Gross cost of reduction Increased returns from milk production @5% Rs. Net cost of reduction Unit Rs. Kg/head Kg/head Rs./t CO2 Rs./tCO2 Local cow 34 36 3.96 409 290-3078 Buffalo 40 77 8.47 225 785-4188 Crossbred cow 40 39 4.29 444 1185-12710 Other animals 34 35 3.85 421 - - 17
Particulars Units 2004 2020 Base case BAU Mitigation (25% coverage) Market economics of methane mitigation : Haryana Milk production/ consumption million tonnes/yr 5.299 7.873 8.031 Per capita milk consumption gms./day 645 744 759 Domestic milk price Rs./lit. 18.40 33.06 32.93 TWTP Rs. billion/year 114.04 292.76 298.16 Production Cost Rs. billion/year 76.65 212.61 214.89 Annualised Investment Rs. billion/year 0 0 0.05 Total Surplus Rs. billion/year 37.38 80.15 83.22 Economic cost Rs. billion/year 76.65 212.61 214.94 Dairy animals thousands 3341 4136 4116 buffaloes thousands 2771 3438 3422 crossbred cows thousands 268 394 392 local cows thousands 302 304 303 Total Methane emissions tonnes/year 216500 271533 260098 18
India Dairy Project using the molasses urea products (MUPs) undertaken during 1994-2003 in Gujarat Earlier Efforts Collaborative venture of U.S. based non-profit organization, Enterprise Works and electricity giants Applied Energy Systems Ltd. and Trans Alta. The Project was proposed to be a part of the US Initiative on Joint Implementation (USIJI) which was to be one of the most comprehensive programs for AIJ activities, the precursor of CDM. Enterprise Works and its partners in India (Appropriate Technology) worked with local commercial enterprises to produce and market low-cost MUPs as a dairy cattle feed supplement (Pashu Poshak) for increasing milk production and reducing methane emissions. 19
Project was expected to contribute 569,966 tonnes of CO2 reductions in 2005. TransAlta hoped the project would receive future recognition as a CDM project and in its Sustainable Development Annual Report 2000, reports a contractual transfer of following CO2 equivalent tonnes to TransAlta- 1996: 1000t, 1997: 6000t, 1998: 12,000t, 1999: 36,000t, 2000: 117,000t. Current status of the project from the perspective of mitigating methane is however unclear. Reported Net gain per animal (without accounting for returns from carbon credits): US$ 25.67 per annum 20
First CDM Dairy Project Uganda Cattle Feed project Strategic Supplementation of a Large Ruminant Dairy Sector for the Reduction of Methane: New Methodology Molasses Urea Products (47-48% reduction) Parties : RuMeth International Ltd., USA» TransAlta Corporation, Canada 21
Upcoming Initiatives in India Business organizations Pilot testing of products Dabur : Submitted PIN Research organizations Mitigation options 22
Key Barriers Technical Financial Institutional 23
The Way Forward Intensify CDM capacity building efforts in dairy sector Initiate work on CDM Baseline and Monitoring methodology
Towards a Common Goal. Accelerating Environmental Friendly Livestock Production.
Assumptions Real Income compound annual growth 5.71% (=observed growth during 1990/91-2004/05) Population 29.002 million (as per the projections given by Registrar General of Population) Feed cost linear growth 7.3% (= observed growth during 1990/91-2004/05) Milk yield linear growth rate 1.23% buffaloes, 0.70% crossbred, 1.24% local (= observed growth during 1990/91-2004/05) Mitigation Additional assumptions:
27