socio-economic assessment of solar irrigation system in

Proceedings of IOE Graduate Conference, 2017Volume: 5 ISSN: 2350-8914 (Online), 2350-8906 (Print)

Socio-Economic Assessment of Solar Irrigation System in Saptari,Nepal

Bal Ram Raut a, Amrit Man Nakarmi b, Sangeeta Singh c

a, c Department of Architecture, Pulchowk Campus, IOE, TU, Nepalb Department of Mechanical Engineering, Pulchowk Campus, IOE, TU, NepalCorresponding Email: a balram [email protected], b [email protected], c [email protected]

AbstractAgriculture is one of the major contributors in the Nepalese economy.And irrigation is important for better agricultureyield.Traditional irrigation systems including diesel pumps, large irrigation conveyance for small land holder arecostly and hence an optional system like solar pumps offers a clean and simple alternative to fuel-burning enginesand generators for domestic water,livestock and irrigation.The study carries out socio-economic assessment ofphotovoltaic based water pumping systems in agricultural sector to produce the yield with low cost in Rupani RuralMunicipality of Saptari district.The study is primarily based on people perception with heavily relied on the reviewof secondary data relating to agriculture,socio-economic and climatic data recorded over time and space.FGD, KIIand question survey were done,processed, tabulated and analyzed.The study findings reveal that the overall costs and energy consumption of PV pumping system is lower despitehigher initial investment compared to the diesel pumping system.The initial investment cost for solar-basedpumping system is high as Rs 291,113.Life cycle cost (LCC) analysis was conducted to assess the economicviability of the system was found to be Rs 54,487,that of diesel water pump was Rs 1,46,691 and that of electricsystem was Rs 21,264/-.Based on crop pattern analysis,crop water requirement per year was found to be 58 million m3.The unit cost perm3 required for solar water pump,diesel water pump and Electric Water Pump were estimated to be Rs 24.46,Rs65.85 and Rs 9.546 respectively.Using the solar WP as compared to diesel WP,farmers can save for about Rs2,185 million per year annually.Per HH, they can save about Rs.436,000 in general.The savings can be increased ifthe irrigation systems,agriculture procedures and crop pattern are optimized.The study estimated that HH incomefrom agriculture in existing condition is Rs 103,258.If the solar based irrigation is used the income will increase toRs. 195,874.This study hence recommends using solar irrigation system for water pumping application to irrigatecultivable land in the study areas in general

KeywordsSolar Water Pump – Financial Analysis – SPSS – Cropwat

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

Agriculture is the main stay of Nepalese economy andaround 74%of Nepal’s population is engaged inagriculture [1] pre-dominantly of subsistence naturewhich provides food and livelihood security to asubstantial section of the Nepalese populationaccounting 40% of GDP [2].The livelihood of theNepalese depends on forest,grassland and mostlyagriculture,for this reason Nepal is identified a highlyvulnerable country to Climate Change[3].Any extent of

change in climatic variables therefore directly affectsagriculture performance.However,change in climaticvariability and uncertainty has been posing increasingthreats on agriculture.Such trend has seriouslythreatened the livelihood and food security of those whodepend on agriculture [4].Nepal’s agriculture is largelyrain fed and food security is dependent on thecharacteristics of the monsoon rain.To overcome thedependency on monsoon there is need of newtechnology for long time solution.

The technology to pump groundwater in ways that areeconomic and environmentally friendly should be

Pages: 549 – 557

Socio-Economic Assessment of Solar Irrigation System in Saptari, Nepal

developed.Solar pumps offer a clean and simplealternative to fuel burning engines and generators fordomestic water, livestock and irrigation.Solar pumps aremost effective during dry and sunny seasons and requireno fuel deliveries,minor maintenance,easy to install,naturally matched with solar radiation as usually waterdemand increases during summer when solar radiationis a maximum,and less expensive than other alternativesources of energy.There are opportunities for increaseduse of clean energy technologies to enhance agricultureproduction and value.Not only is there an identifiedneed for technology development,but also for creativeapproaches to bring clean energy innovations tocommercial scale.The consumption of fossil fuels alsohas a negative environmental impact,in particular therelease of carbon dioxide(CO2)into the atmosphere.CO2 emissions can be greatly reduced through theapplication of renewable energy technologies,which arealready cost competitive with fossil fuels in manysituations.

1.2 Introduction to Rupani Rural Municipality

Figure 1 shows that the study area,the area ofmunicipality is 5,808 ha with total cultivable land areaof 4,548 ha,which consisted of 3,929 ha cultivated area.The rural municipality is covered with forest land of1,014 ha.Total population and HH of the municipalityare 26,387 and 5012 respectively[1].Most of thepopulation has adopted their main occupation asagriculture in their own land,and small segments of thepopulation have adopted their main occupation asagriculture in the basis of salary/wage work.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The main objective of this is to carry out assessment offeasibility study of solar irrigation system in Nepal.Thefield study has been carried out at Rupani ruralmunicipalities in Saptari district.The specific objectiveswould be:

1. To technical feasibility study of solar basedirrigation system in Nepal. - Comparison of Solarirrigation with diesel generators and electricwater pump.

2. Conduct financial analysis of solar,diesel andelectric pump based irrigation system.

Figure 1: Rupani rural municipality

3. To assess the socio economic impacts of solarirrigation system.

4. Provide policy recommendations for the widerimplementation of Solar Irrigation Systems inNepal.

2. Methodology

Figure 2 show that the is illustrates the researchdesign,methods,tools and approaches adopted for thefulfillment of the objectives.

550

Proceedings of IOE Graduate Conference, 2017

Figure 2: Methodological framework

2.1 Sample Size Determination

The minimum number of Households was calculated tobe 67 from the formula for sample size calculation.Survey was conducted on 75 households of Saptaridistrict,Rupani Gaunpalika.[5]

S = (X2 ∗N ∗P∗ (1−P))/(d2(N −1)+X2 ∗P(1−P))

Where, S = sample size for finite populationX2 = table value of chi square for 1 degree of freedom atthe desired confidence level, N = population proportion,P = population proportion, d = the degree of accuracyexpressed as a proportion (e.g. 1.96 for 95% confidencelevel)

3. Findings and Result

This section deals with the descriptive results obtainedduring the questionnaire survey and processing ofsecondary data.Carrying out the primary data analysis

3.1 Cultivated Land Available on study Area

Figure 3 illustrates the existing cultivated land ofRupani municipality which has been created bycombining several shape file using Arc GIS from thedata of department of Survey. The land area of 3,929 hais cultivated in this municipality.

Figure 3: Cultivated land of Rupani municipality

3.2 Socio-Economic Activities

The major occupation is agriculture,animal husbandry,labor,abroad etc.Food crops like Paddy, wheat,maize,Oilseeds and etc are grown.Varieties of vegetables arebeing practiced such as potato,onion,brinjal,ladiesfinger,pointed guard,bottle guard,cauliflower and etc.Major livestock of the people are cattle,buffalo andgoat.Mango, banana,peach are major fruits. Besides,people have out migrated from hill to earn for betterliving. Countries of destination for earning areMalaysia, Qatar,Kuwait,Iraq,Dubai,Korea and etc.

3.3 Ownership of Irrigation System

The figure 4 shows that 65.3% of farmers had ownirrigation system.10.7% farmers were taken as hire.1.3% farmers wants to take hire but they were takenfrom other village and paid more money,18.7% farmershad own electric WP and hire in DWP.4% (missing)farmers depends on rain.

551


Figure 4: Ownership of irrigation system

3.4 Types of Irrigation System Used

The figure 5 shows that 41.3 % farmers had electricmotors and most of the electric motors were used forloan farming and distribution of electric line were onlyin settlement areas, 20% farmers had electric anddiesel/kerosene generators and 20 % farmers had ownelectric motor and hire to DWP/KWP.8% farmers haddepend on hire to DWP/KWP,1.3 % had electric motorand solar and 9.33 % missing means farmers depend onrain.They had no any irrigation systems.

Figure 5: Types of Irrigation System Used

3.5 Family Income from Agriculture Productsas Respondents

Figure 6 shows that average family income fromagriculture in per year is NRS 35,133 and minimum andmaximum incomes are NRS 5,000 and NRS 200,000and deviation from mean is 31,528.It means highvariation in income from agriculture.

Figure 6: Family income from agriculture product

3.6 Monthly Energy Charge

Figure 7 shows that the minimum and maximum costspay of monthly energy charge for agriculture purpose areRs 100 and 2,000 respectively and average pay Rs 697and deviation from mean is 276.It means high variationin energy charge.

Figure 7: Monthly energy charges

552


3.7 Electricity Available hrs/day

Figure 8 shows that 14.7 % claimed that electricity isavailable for less than 4 hrs/day, 57.35 % claimedelectricity available for 4-8 hrs/day and 28 % claimedthat electricity available 8-12 hrs.Thus use of electricpump is not always possible.

Figure 8: Electricity availability in par day

3.8 Crop Pattern Cycle

Figure 9 show that 70.67% farmers is done paddywheat/fallow empty,12% paddy wheat/vegetable empty,12% paddy wheat/barely S.Paddy empty and 5% paddyempty.This shows that paddy is the major crop.

4. Analysis and Discussion

The section of literature review and the descriptiveresult from the field survey gives the general andprevalent socio-economic scenario of the studyarea.This chapter further discusses the ability of thetechnology to feasibly fit into the context of community,the possible impacts it can make in social,economic andenvironmental dimension to assure the sustainability ofthe solar technology for effective irrigation.

4.1 Technical and Economic Analysis

Following assumptions were made to carried out theeconomic analysis of the system

Figure 9: : Electricity availability in par day

1. The operating life of the PV panels was assumedto be 20 years and life of diesel engine assumedto be as 5 years.

2. Maintenance cost of PV system assumed to be a0.5% of total capital cost per year.

3. Maintenance cost of diesel engine assumed to bea 15% of total capital cost per year.

4. Availability of sunshine hours considered to be a300 days in a year.

5. Cost of 1 hp diesel engine is equal to Rs20,000.00/- and it consumes 0.9 liter of diesel/hr

6. CO2 emission per liter of diesel 2.7kg[6]

7. Operating hours= 5.5 hr/day

8. The replacement value is evaluated to be onceduring the life analysis for diesel that covers thediesel engine as well as the pump.

9. Salvage value of diesel engine was assumed to bea 1 % of capital cost of engine whereas electricand solar was taken as 0.1%

4.2 Cost Comparison of Irrigation Systems byLife Cycle Cost

As shown in table 1,the three irrigation systems assumeto be 20 years life and solar, diesel and electric WP of

553


life cycle cost are Rs 463,878,Rs 1248,864 and Rs181,189 respectively. Among three systems life cyclecost of electric is least followed by solar and lastlydiesel. Electric transmission and distribution line are onsettlement area only not on farming area and electricityis not reliable or not schedule as it is generally availableonly 4-8 hrs per day per respondents and also observedfor 8 days during the survey.Thus solar energy couldprove to be better alternative technology for irrigation

4.3 Break-even point of water pumps

The figure 10 shows that the life cycle cost of solar, dieseland electric WP,out of these gradient of diesel and solarof life cycle cost intersect each other at 2.5 years,whichindicates that for short time irrigation need diesel WP isappropriate however for more than 2.5 years installationof solar is economic than diesel WP even electric WP ischeaper than solar.

Figure 10: Breakeven point of solar, electric and dieselWP

4.4 Internal Rate of Return (IRR) for SolarWater Pumping System

The internal rate of return for solar water pumpingsystem was calculated and found to be 47.29% for 20years.The higher percentage of internal rate of returnsindicated the good commercial return of theinvestment,the investment is economically viable.

4.5 Net Present Worth

The net present worth for the system was calculatedon the basis of present investment and the interest rateconsidered for the system and the profit achieved in eachyear.The life of PV system was consider for 20 year thusthe NPW for the water pumping system was Rs 881,216/-.Others two WP systems were found negative,it indicatedthat the systems was not viable economically.

4.6 Cropping pattern in existing condition

4.7 Cropping Patterns with Solar BasedIrrigation

In the lift system of this existing system mainlypaddy,wheat,potato,vegetable,pulses and maize are themajor crops grown in the command area at presentcondition. Area covered by each crop in the proposedsystem is shown in table 3.Coverage area of monsooncrops is 91%, coverage area of the winter crops is 60%and that of spring crops is 19.58%.Total cultivated areais 6,693.4 ha while the remaining land is fallow land.Inall the seasons the cropped area intensity was found tobe satisfactory.

4.8 Socio economic Impact of Solar WaterPump

Solar water pumps contribute to social development inseveral ways such as increasing agriculture product,replacement of fossil-fuel pumps to environmentalconservation by reducing CO2 emissions,saving onsubsidy expenditures for diesel fuel,electricity,foreignexchange savings resulting from reduced dieselimports,improved crop yields and increased agricultural

554


outputs and development of relevant technology andindustry which in turn results in increased employment,substantial savings for the government in terms ofdrought relief costs and the people such as improvedhouses for farmers,better nutrition,self independence.Other benefits to social development are theimprovement of social cohesion within the community,reduced migration out of the community and increasedcommunity interaction in social events due to increasedtime availability.

4.8.1 Income from Agriculture

The figure 11 shows the net returns for differentcrops,both with existing scenario and replacement bySolar Irrigation.Here potato is the only crop that givesgood return under both existing and solar irrigationsystems. However,the net return per hectare gets almostdoubled (NRs/hectare 281,385)of the amount in existingcondition if the farmers can install solar irrigation. It isto be noted that just growing potato can not only recoverall the losses from the crops that are grown by farmersfor feeding their families but also earn surplus. Totalloss incurred for growing crops including vegetable areestimated to be NRs. 85,885

4.8.2 Cost Saving on Fuel

Using the solar WP as compared to diesel WP, farmerscan save for about Rs 2,185 million (i.e.annually per HH)saved about Rs. 436,000 on energy used on fuel peryear annually and also consumption of 38 million literdiesel could be avoided.

Figure 11: Net returns (Nrs. per hectare) from theexisting and solar irrigation

4.8.3 Agricultural Production

The most direct benefit is the increased revenue andincome that come with the greater yields of irrigatedcrop land rain-fed land.Stable water supplies allowadditional growing seasons per year,massivelyincreasing output.Table 4 shows that the increase inproduction of the different crops after the use of thesolar system is compared with that of the existingsituation.Significant increment was noticed in paddy,wheat,Potato,vegetable and wheat.

4.8.4 Employments

Agriculture includes activities such as field preparation,planting, cultivating, pollinating, harvesting, seedprocessing,crop protection,field purity and irrigation,etc.The entire farming hires labor to assist in landpreparation, weeding and harvesting. Payment is madein cash and/or in kind.Farming that grow high valuehorticultural crops generate much more labor than thatfocus on grain crops. This indicates if farmers couldshift to horticultural crops, this would provide morelabor than other option.

4.8.5 Food Availability

The availability of adequate and stable supply of food,the additional irrigated land dedicated to vegetableproduction significantly altered local vegetableavailability. The use of the irrigation systems did not

555


displace other agricultural production,as over the longrainy season farmers planted their traditional staples ofpaddy,wheat,maize and etc. This is a land of plenty.

4.8.6 Food Utilization

Food utilization is defined as the ability to consume andbenefit from nutritious foods.there would be possibilityof increase in vegetable intake in the community.Itwould be hard to directly quantify the health andnutrition status impacts of the irrigation systems.Fromthe sale of vegetables, family have increased purchasingpower and are likely to be able to buy food and educatetheir children with ease.As a result,health status,schoolenrollment and retention were reported to haveincreased.

4.9 Environmental Impact Emission / ClimateProtection

Consumption of 38 million liter diesel could be avoidedby using of solar based irrigation which in turns canavoid emission of 102,527 ton/year of CO2.

4.10 Distribution of Solar Irrigation System

It is proposed that the house having land less than 1.5 hashould be supplied with a community based irrigationsystem which includes about 85% of the household whilethe rest holding more than 1.5 ha area should be providedwith individual irrigation system.

5. Conclusion and Recommendation

5.1 Conclusion

From the result and analysis we see that electric waterpump is more beneficial than solar water pump in thecase of electric line would be available on cultivatedland but during the survey I was not found that only thesettlement area was and not reliable (only available ofelectricity(4 to 8)hour but not scheduled as per surveyand observed) and second alternative is solar waterpump is more socially,economically,energy self reliantand environmentally better than the diesel water pumpfor long run.The economic analysis of water pumpsshows that life cycle cost for 20 years of solar WP isRs.4,64,500 while that of diesel WP was Rs.1,249,172which means solar PV water pump is cheaper by 269%

in long run whereas IRR was 47.29% compare to dieselwater pump.The NPW solar WP system was Rs 881,216at interest rate 10%.Others two WP systems were foundnegative,it indicated that the systems was not viableeconomically and also decentralized solar WP helps therural municipalities to be energy self reliant.Similarlythe unit water cost for water pumps solar,diesel andelectric was estimated to be Rs 24.46,Rs 65.85 and Rs9.85 respectively.Consumption of 38 million liter dieselcould be avoided by using of solar based irrigationwhich in turns can avoid emission of 102,527 ton/yearof CO2. Using the sustainable irrigation system i.e.solarbased irrigation as compared to existing irrigationsystem, significant increment was obtained i.e.paddy0.32 ton,wheat 0.83 ton, Potato 0.71 ton,vegetable 0.39ton and etc per HH and fallow land decreasei.e.cropping intensity increase(119% to 170%).Annuallyfarmers saved for energy charge is about 2,185 millionrupees per year i.e.annually per HH saved aboutRs.436,000 on energy used.As existing condition perhouse hold income from agriculture will be Rs 103,258however with using solar based irrigation total incomefrom crops will be Rs 195,874,they can increase theirearnings per HH to NRs.92,616 per year(incomeincrease by 90%).Through the saved money,they canspend of it for the dept payment(Rs 3,3020 per year forinstallment of bank as per calculation) ,goods, basicservices,education and also they can used for upgradingtheir tools and equipment and increase the productivityof land.In return they can enhance their socio economicstatus rapidly.This study hence recommends using solarirrigation system for water pumping application toirrigate cultivable land in the study areas in general.

5.2 Recommendation

1. Solar based irrigation systems, as per this study,are feasible both technically and economically.Also,the life cycle cost of Solar water pump iscomparatively lower compared to the dieselWP,solar WP should be promoted over dieselpump.

2. Government policies and plans should bedeveloped in order to promote such systems inthe areas where electricity is far-fetched and alsomakes easy way for loan mechanism in locallevel.

556


3. Environmental aspect should be carried out togeneralize the findings on the systems.

4. Irrigation system should be provided in two waysby individual irrigation system and communitybased irrigation system.

5. Collective efforts for raising awareness andundertaking capacity building by stategovernments,NGOs and international institutions.

References

[1] CBS. National population Census 2011 Household andPopulation by sex and ward level, Saptari. Central Bureauof statistic, 2011.

[2] Dil Bahadur Nayava, Janak Lal; Gurung. Impact ofclimate change on production and productivity: A casestudy of maize research and development in nepal.Technical Paper Journal of Agriculture and Environment.,15(2):176–183, 2010.

[3] P. Silwal. Assessment of Climate Change Vulnerabilitiesand Adaptation Option for Sustainable Livelihood: ACase Study of Baglung Municipality, Nepal. A ProjectPaper Submitted for B.Sc. Institute of Forestry, TU, 2009.

[4] Manish Webersik, Christian; Thapa. Nepal ClimateChange and Security Factsheet. United NationsUniversity, Institute of Advanced Studies, 2008.

[5] Daryle W Krejcie, Robert V; Morgan. Determingsample size for research avtivities. Educational andPsychological Measurement, 1970.

[6] T C Chaurey, A; Kandpal. Solar lanterns for domesticlighting in india: Viability of central charging stationmodel. Energy Policy, 16(5):3200–3205, 2009.

557

socio-economic assessment of solar irrigation system in

Documents