Biomass for nothing

Biomass for nothing

the Indian cdm basket includes a variety of biomass projects -- to generate electricity from agricultural residues like rice husk, cotton sticks, chilli waste, mustard sticks and wood of Prosopis juliflora. 24 such projects are in the process of being validated/registered with the cdm Board. They constitute about 44 per cent of Indian cdm projects, 57-odd in all, listed on the unfccc website as on September 9, 2005. But projects are small, and add up to only nine per cent of cers India could sell through its projects.

If all the 24 biomass projects are cleared, India could sell roughly 700,000 cers, earn Rs 16 crore per year (at us $5 per cer). Privately owned, these would generate 3-12 megawatt (mw) of power, selling it mostly to state electricity boards. The Indian government has been promoting these projects through its Union ministry of non-conventional energy sources (mones), and many states now have a power purchase policy under which they will buy biomass-generated power at rates varying from Rs 2.25 in Uttar Pradesh to Rs 3.32 in Rajasthan per unit generated. The cdm credit, roughly Rs 14-15 lakh per mw per year, gives additional benefits for plants to operate.

The first registered project is in Rajasthan, by privately-owned Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. It will sell the Netherlands government a total of 313,743 cer s over 7-10 years. At us $5 per cer, the company will get roughly Rs 1 crore per year for carbon credits sold. It sources raw material from farmers -- mustard sticks, agricultural residues like rice husk or even saw dust. It sells power to the Rajasthan state electricity board. The project design document does not specify the rate, but the state purchase policy for biomass-generated power is Rs 3.32 per unit. In this way, the state uses electricity from renewable sources, replacing coal and so saving carbon dioxide emissions. But when contacted, Ajay Manot, owner of this 'green project', refused to allow Down To Earth access. Shouldn't information about these projects be put in the public domain?

Straw economics
Roughly, 1 mwh of power is generated using 1-1.5 tonnes of biomass. Thus, a 7.5 mw plant, operating at 100 per cent capacity, would need 65,700-98,550 tonnes of biomass per annum. If the raw material is purchased at Rs 800 per tonne, the plant spends Rs 0.80 per k wh on it. If bought at Rs 1,200 per tonne, the plant will spend Rs 1.20 per k wh on its raw material. Thus, the economics and sustainability of these plants are determined by the price of biomass used.

Also, all these projects are in the private sector, sourcing raw material from rural areas and supplying energy to urban and industrial-grid connected India. The questions to examine, therefore, are: whether raw material sale is also benefiting people, and whether the raw material is sustainably sourced.

All biomass project design documents parrot the projects will use "surplus biomass", which they say remains "otherwise underutilised or burnt with no commercial value." This premise is unfounded. All potential raw materials planned for biomass gasification have competing uses -- rice straw is used as fodder; mustard sticks and P juliflora are the fuelwood of the very poor. Users of these raw materials are very poor -- mostly women who collect for home or sale. They are weak competitors. To counter their weak bargaining power, the companies should be made to pay a reasonable assured rate.

The project design documents justify cer s by saying the price of raw material has increased: in one case -- Satyamaharshi 6 mw biomass project -- the report says the price of lowly P juliflora has increased from Rs 460 per tonne to Rs 1,000 per tonne; rice husk from Rs 800 to Rs 1,350 per tonne and all other biomass from Rs 600 to Rs 800 per tonne. If this price will indeed be paid to farmers and other growers, it means benefits will be distributed. But is the raw material actually being bought at these rates? From whom? Project design documents do not establish a relationship with growers.

Whose energy?
Then, are these plants using raw material sustainably? If the project design documents are any indication, the simple answer is: very little. The documents simply say stakeholders have expressed satisfaction with the projects. In four different project design documents prepared by the world's leading consultancy firm, Ernst & Young (as told by project developers), it appears that an entire important section is copy-pasted (see box: Really creative carbon accounting). Such mechanical, formulaic response undermines the legal requirements. These subjects (consultations) require detailed individual treatment.

Down To Earth visited Hiriyur in Chitradurga district of Karnataka, where carefully guarded 20 mw R K Powergen Private Limited plant uses biomass. The project is to apply for cdm credits. The Indian government has approved it; private consultant Anandi Sharan Meili, who specialises in biomass projects, is preparing the project design document.

Some residents of village Babboor near the plant expressed enormous anger. It was fuelling, they said, large-scale deforestation. "First, the plant cut the trees of our area and now they are destroying the forests of Chikmangalur, Shimoga, Mysore and other places. They pay Rs 550 per tonne of wood, which they source using contractors. The contractors, in turn, source wood from all over the state," says M Tepaswami, a 65-year-old resident. Alleges V Jayprakash, "Now poor people find it difficult to get wood for cooking and other purposes." The economics of transportation ensures contractors buy wood cheap -- below Rs 200 per tonne. This is a case for the government to investigate and establish that the wood is being sourced legally.

Tepaswami also told Down To Earth that the owners bought land from villagers saying they would use it for agricultural purposes. The plant was built. Jobs were promised. "There is no end to their deceit: 20 residents of Babboor were promised jobs but all the employment benefits were given to outsiders. We were perceived as trouble makers," says M Chandrashekar.

The project is allegedly causing other problems. According to some employees of the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (kptcl), managing the electricity grid located next to the factory, air pollution levels have increased drastically. "The temperature has increased; our equipment is adversely affected due to the factory's pollution," asserts B Nagraj, maintenance engineer, kptcl, Hiriyur. According to the villagers, emissions have also affected crop yield. "Moreover, three borewells as deep as 91 metres have been dug at the factory premises. As a result, the groundwater level of our area has plunged drastically and no water is available for irrigation," asserts A G Prabhudev.

Project managers deny the allegations. "Apart from wood of abundantly available species, we also use the husk of rice, groundnut, coffee, waste from sugarcane and chilly and sawdust in huge quantities," asserts Amit Gupta, the plant manager. To generate 20 mw of power, the company would require between 175,000 to 260,000 tonnes of biomass each year. But inside the factory, Down To Earth found a large amount of wood, but very little other biomass. Gupta adds, "To generate 500,000 units of electricity per day, we use 500 tonnes of wood. But if there is deforestation, then local people are to be blamed because they are supplying the wood to us."

Meili informed Down To Earth the project would generate 100,000 cers every year. Sold at us $5 per unit, R K Powergen would earn about Rs 2.3 crore each year. Thus far from achieving the objectives of sustainable harvesting, the forests is put at risk for commercial interests by those under a legal duty to preserve it.

This concern was also voiced in front of Down To Earth at a workshop on ' cdm in forestry' organised by the Andhra Pradesh Forest Academy in Dulapally, Hyderabad. "Biomass plants are leading to deforestation. Worse, people are cutting tamarind trees for these projects as they have very high calorific value; this tree is important to the livelihood of poor people," B V Prasada Reddy, state conservator of forests, told Down To Earth.

Sustainable biomass power
Power generation through decentralised projects using biomass energy, as against dirty fossil fuels, is definitely a way to the future. But for this, the project design needs a supportive policy framework which ensures biomass is sustainably harvested; that the benefits of raw material supply and even power generation go to local communities and the adverse impacts of burning biomass are mitigated through pollution control measures. Distributed energy for villages not connected to the grid will ensure countries like India find alternatives to the global warming carbon-trajectory.

But the current breed of biomass projects is a quarter-measure. All in the private sector, they are ironically making use of provisions of a simpler mechanism within the cdm that should have benefitted small communities. The power generated is sold to the grid, not locally used.

The situation should change. Clear conditions should be layed down for a minimum guaranteed rate of the raw material; this should also ensure that the raw material is obtained from sustainable sources. Then there should be stringent provisions to ensure that biomass plants do not lead to local air pollution or destroy water sources. The profits, determined by the cheap raw material used, should also be made transparent in the project design documents.

What should be done is to build a portfolio of biomass cdm projects, which combine power generation with afforestation. These projects would combine cers available for planting trees -- made a prerogative of farmers -- with cers available for generating power. Currently, cdm projects offer a pittance for afforestation projects -- about us $2 per cer. To make a difference, cdm must not be a cheap development mechanism. Private industry offering us $2 per cer to farmers is peanuts, and so it lays itself open to the charge of being interested only in making a fast buck. It must truly become a clean development mechanism. 12jav.net12jav.net