sorghum agronomy for optimization of farmers’ returns

Sorghum agronomy for optimization of farmers’ returns

Global Consultation on Pro-poor Sweet Sorghum Development for Bio-ethanol Production and Introduction to Tropical Sugar Beet

IFAD, Rome9th November 2007

Dr Jeremy Woods (Porter Institute and ICEPT, Imperial College London)E-mail: [email protected]: +44 (0)20 7594 7315

Apr 21, 2023 [email protected] 2

Thanks to:

• Prof Yamba (CEEEZ) and Dr Munyinda (UNZA) – Zambia

• Helen Watson (UKZN) – South Africa• Morden Muzondo, Evis Mvududu and Leonard

Nybanga (Biomass Users Network, Zimbabwe)• Clive Wenman, Farai Musikavanhu and Max

Muchatibaya (Triangle Sugar Mill, Zimbabwe)• Ghislain Gosse and the INRA team at Grignon.• And many more

Bioenergy Development Options - scale matters

Large Scale1. Sugarcane to EtOH2. Palm / Soy Biodiesel

Mill-owned estate

Very competitive globally

Little Value Added to Local Communities

Small-holder-led hybrid

Higher cost baseLess globally competitive

High Value Added to

Local Communities

Small Scale1. Sweet Sorghum – micro-distillery

2. Woodlot gasification elec. (Hosahali)

Multi-product cropping

e.g. sweet sorghum

Economics Uncertain

Complex-Value Added

to Local Communities

High risk

Local MarketsSocial Issues Crop not well characterised

Single Bioenergy Product

e.g. multi-species woodlot

Value Added to Local

CommunitiesHigh Risk

Complex food-fuel-cash-crop interactionsExport Potential


Markets define agronomic targets

Specific markets provide agronomic targets:• Sugar / sweeteners (high sucrose purity req’d)• Animal fodder (green leaves? Molasses, grain?)• Beer (grain)• Flour (grain)• Electricity and heat (fibre)• Biofuels (sugars and grain – purity less important)

How to value a multipurpose crop?


Agronomic trails to-date

• 1992 to 1995 – EU-funded as part of European Sweet Sorghum Network extension– Zimbabwe (Lowveld, Triangle and Chiredzi Research Station)

• Irrigated and dry-land (v. good water control)• Small-scale generally• Detailed crop modelling and multi-variety trials inlcuding Montieth-based growth profiling and

P/PET analysis for WUE

• 1997 to 2000 – CFC-funded- work on diversification of the sugar industry– Zimbabwe (Lowveld, Triangle and Chiredzi Research Station)

• Small to large scale (60 to 100ha on sugar estate fallow sugarcane land)• Multi-variety including Indian (NARI) and Chinese (CAS) varieties plus EU/US• ‘full-scale’ harvesting crushing and processing trials at Triangle Sugar Mill

• 2004 to 2005 – CFC-funded work on small-holder production trials– Zambia (CEEEZ and University of Zambia trials carried out on small-holder land in all

three agro-ecological zones of Zambia)• Small-holder-based, plus one sugarcane field (vertisol, Kafue Sugar) plus University research farm

• 2005 to 2007 – CEEEZ and UNZA-funded trials– Again on small-holder land in all three agro-ecological zones– Ratooning trial at UNZA

• CARENSA and now COMPETE land suitability modelling work– Helen Watson (UKZN) and Nicholas Dercas (AUA, Greece)

Policy Dialogue ConferenceThe Role of Renewable Energy Policy in Africa for Poverty Alleviation and Sustainable Development

Prof. F. D. Yamba and Dr. K. Munyinda

CEEEZ

Private Bag E721, Lusaka, ZAMBIA

Tel/Fax: +260 - 1 - 240267

Email: [email protected]

22 - 24 June 2005Moevenpick Royal Palm Hotel, Dar es

Salaam

“Sweet Sorghum as a Supplementary Feedstock to Ethanol Production”

Centre for Energy, Environment and Engineering Zambia Limited

CEEEZ

mailto:[email protected]


Zambia’s Agro-ecological Regions• Sweet sorghum varieties were

planted in eight localities in the three Agro-ecological Regions.

• Region I trial- planted at Lusitu on Cambisols.

• Region II trial- UNZA Liempe Farm, Magoye CDT and Consolidated Farming LTD, Kafue Sugar. – At UNZA Farm the trial was

planted on Lixisols, at Magoye CDT the trial was planted on Nitosols and at Consolidated Farming LTD, Kafue Sugar, the trial was planted on Vertisols.

• Region III, Mpongwe on Ferralsols.

IIb

III

III

II

I

Figure 1: Agro-ecological Regions.III - Region IIIII - Region IIIIb - Region IIbI - Region I

Munyinda, UNZA and CEEEZ 8

Performance of Sweet varieties at UNZAPerformance of Sweet varieties at UNZA

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

Sim

a

Ke

lle

r

Ma

dh

ura

Pra

j 1

Ge

2

Ge

2

Wra

y

Co

wle

y

TS

1

Variety

Yie

ld s

tem

s k

g/h

a

T1T2

Apr 21, 2023 Munyinda, UNZA and CEEEZ 9

• The yields obtained are comparable to other places, especially that these were obtained under partial drought conditions experienced in Zambia in the 2004/2005 season.

Potential of Sweet Sorghum


0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

1 2 3 4

Site

Ste

m Y

ield

(k

g/h

a) Sima

TS1

Madhura

Praj 1

GE2

GE3

Wray

Cowley

Keller

• Yield of Sweet Sorghums varied with location (variety x environment interaction)

• In general similar yields were obtained in Region II and I.

Potential of Sweet Sorghum

Apr 21, 2023 Munyinda, UNZA and CEEEZ 11

• There was a reduction of about two times in stem yield in Region III (the high rainfall region) compared to the other two Regions.

• This is attributed to soil type (acidic soils) and photoperiodic response.

• There was also an influence of soil type in Region II. Yield was low on shallow and infertile soils compared to more fertile soils.

Potential of Sweet Sorghum Production

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

1 2 3 4

Site

Ste

ms (

kg

/ha

)


• Stem diameter and hieght also varied with locality, soil type and population density.

• The higher population density, the thinner the stems and therefore prone to lodging as had occurred with Madhura.

• Brix% was highest at Mpongwe and lowest at UNZA

1 2 3 4

0

5

10

15

20

Site

Diam (mm)Hieght (m)Brix%

Potential of Sweet Sorghum Production

Accumulation of Sugar

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

T1 T2 T3 T4

Growth Stage

Bri

x%

Sima

Keller

Madhura

Praj 1

GE2

GE3

Wray

Cowley

TS1

Munyinda, K. 2005


• Sugar content as measured by the Brix% varied with variety and stage of growth as well as environment.

• Most varieties had peaked in sugar content by milk to dough stage, while Wray, GE2 and TS1 were still increasing. These are long season varieties whose growth was interupted by the drought.

• Hieghest values of sugar content were obtained with Wray, Keller, GE2 and TS1, and lowest with Madhura.

Accumulation of Sugar

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

0 10000 20000 30000 40000

Environmental Index

Fre

sh S

tem

Yie

ld (

kg/h

a)

Wray

Keller

TS1

GE3

Site mean Variety Slope Dev RegrTS1 1.105 0.443GE3 1.213 0.272Wray 0.462 0.354Keller 0.916 0.449

Figure 10: Stability analysis of sweet sorghum varieties TS1, GE3, Wray and Keller

•The most responsive variety to input applications were:•GE2, Praj-1 and GE3.

•These varieties should preferentially be grown by farmers with high crop management.

•Sima and Wray are very stable variety across different environments.

•These two varieties are most suitable for low-resource farmers. They have the least difference in yield between sub-optimal and optimal input application. •Wray was higher than that of Sima because it was more acid tolerant and was more adapted to different soil conditions.

Stability – response to inputs


RecommendationsRecommendations

Potential for sweet production can beincreased through:• Selection and development of adapted cultivars

especially for Region III.• Selection of sites:

Higher fertility soils should be utilized• Use of irrigation. This could mitigate the effect

of fertilizers.


• Use of recommended fertilizers and pesticides (particularly for resource-poor farmers)

• Evaluating appropriate population density.Thicker sweet sorghum stems could be problematic for

small scale growers.

• Production of at least two per season

RecommendationsRecommendations


Impact of ratooningSweet sorghum production under rain-fed and supplementary irrigated conditions

Millable Stalk (tonnes/ha)

Ethanol production (M liters)

Variety Single crop

Double (ratoon) crop- est

Single crop

Double (ratoon) crop-

est

GE3 82.5 165.0 38.2 76.3

Cowley 71.4 142.8 33.0 66.1

Wray 70.2 140.4 32.5 65.0

TS1 51.7 103.4 23.9 47.8

Madhura 41.8 83.6 19.3 38.7

Praj-1 40.7 81.4 18.8 37.7

GE2 40.3 80.6 18.6 37.3

Keller 35.8 71.6 16.6 33.1

Sima 22.2 44.4 10.3 20.5

Prof. Yamba, CEEEZ 20

TECHNICAL/ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT – ethanol (1)

Factory Size (tonne/cane hr)

100 150 250 300 350 400 500

Scenario

BAU (UScents) 21 21 17 16 13 10 12

CDM Spread (UScents) 19 19 16 14 11 8 10

CDM Advanced Payment (33%) (UScents)

18 18 15 13 10 5 9

Analysis of Actual Pricing – typical factory sizes

Prof. Yamba, CEEEZ 21

Larger factories give lower prices

Ethanol has an economic advantage to gasoline since at an IRR of 20% its price is around UScents 20 against the gasoline price of US Cents 43

This price can further be reduced to US Cents 15 if the project is implemented under CDM of the Kyoto Protocol

TECHNICAL/ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT

Comments (Yamba, 2005…

International Biofuels OpportunitiesMonday 23 April 2007

Contribution to bioenergyin

Southern Africa

Presented by Dr Helen Watson for


Competence Platform on Energy Crop & AgroforestrySystems for Arid and Semi-arid Ecosystems – Africa

www.compete-bioafrica.net

EUROPEAN COMMISSION: Research Directorate


0 200 400 600

Kilometres

-

Legend

SLCR Pixels

International Areas

National Areas (No Categories)

National Areas (IUCN Categorised)

Figure 5.3: Distribution of SLCR Pixels and Protected Areas

0 200 400 600

Kilometres

-

Legend

SLCR Pixels

Mangroves

Swamp Bushland

Croplands

Salt Pans

Waterbodies

Cities

Figure 5.7: Distribution of SLCR Pixels and Global Land Covers

Helen Watson (2007) Area in 1000 hectares

Stage of Analysis Malawi Mozambique Tanzania Zambia Total

Area of all four countries 14056 96851 110488 90337 311732

Area identified as potentially suitable 742 4906 464 3546 9658

Area after protected areas removed 595 4602 403 2433 8033

Area after steep slopes (>16%) removed 580 4529 398 2426 7933

Area after land suitable for food crops removed 330 4032 288 1852 6502

Areas after currently cultivated areas removed 322 4029 288 1852 6491

After areas less than 500ha removed 255 3469 174 1485 5383

29

Data &

indicators

Environmental Policy & Institutions

• Net emissions to air, water and land

• Climate change mitigation & adaptation

• Inc GHGs

• Above and below-ground carbon balances

• Biodiversity

• Good agricultural practice & soil management

• Waste

• Direct & Indirect Land Use

• New policies & plans

• Directives

• Incentives

• Barriers

• Institutional capacity

• Technology neutral options

Economic

• Competitiveness

• Market breakthrough

• Incentives

• Barriers & Regulations

• Taxes

• IP rights and ownership

• Value chains and value retention

Social

• LCA Social impacts

• health & safety

• environmental quality

• Labour conditions

• Welfare / happiness

• Equitable access to local resources

• e.g. land tenure

• Barriers

Research & Demonstration

Scale & Location

e.g. Regional and local levels

Assurance reporting

Regional Strategic Drivers e.g. EU’s Lisbon Criteria

Diaz-Chavez, 2007

It is dangerous to generalise


Conclusions

• Sorghum is a highly efficient and durable crop– Radiation use efficiency (even better than sugarcane)– Nutrient use efficiency (particularly nitrogen)– Water use efficiency / hydrological impacts– Carbon / GHG use efficiency (full life-cycle basis)

• It is very versatile:– Varieties with variable lengths of growing period– Range of vars from grain to fibre to sugar– Annual or perennial?

• It is at a very early stage in its development. Continued development needs to:– Obtain better genetic material– Match varieties to:

• Soil• Climate• Management


Conclusions cont’d• The high oil price could drive unsustainable development• We need a range of carefully evaluated developmental models• Foreign investment should be welcomed but with caution• Main aim should be to understand how, and how much, value should

be retained at the local level• Then define the tools and policies to enable that to happen

– E.g. multipurpose or speciality breeding required?• Major and sustained investment is needed in capacity building• There is a possible once in a generation opportunity redirect new

investment into sustainable land management in developing countries – it must not be missed!

• With the right approach and careful implementation sweet sorghum could play a major role in the development of new, multi-purpose, pro-poor markets


THANK YOU!Further work on biofuels in the BioEnergy Group- Imperial:

Cereals 2007 (HGCA) – including farm audits COMPETE

RTFO-related (multiple strands) NILE

TSEC-Biosys QUEST

BEST

sorghum agronomy for optimization of farmers’ returns

Documents

triangle sugar mill2004

kafue sugar

smallholder land

local communitiessmallholder

sugar industryzimbabwe

max muchatibaya triangle

tropical sugar beetifad

sorghum agronomy