vietnam experiences for 24 indicators · 2017-12-11 · social pillars-aitvn & casrad indicator...

“Building Capacity for enhancing bioenergy sustainability through

the use of GBEP indicators (GCP/GLO/554/GER)”

VIETNAM EXPERIENCES

FOR 24 INDICATORS

Speaker: Dr. Pham Quang Ha

Institute for Agricultural Environment /VAAS

Rome 30 Nov 2017

1

Project GCP/GLO/554/GER: Bioenergy pathways analyzed in Vietnam

In consultation with the Multi-Stakeholder Working Group (MSWG) established under the project, the following bioenergy pathways wereprioritized:

• Cassava-based ethanol; and

• Biogas (mostly from pig manure, as well as cassava wastewater), at both household and industrial levels.

15 November 2017Multi-Stakeholder Working Group Meeting

2

Project GCP/GLO/554/GER: National Centers of excellence

The measurement of the GBEP indicators for the selected bioenergy pathways in Viet Nam was carried out by the following Centers of excellence:

• Vietnam Academy of Agricultural Sciences (VAAS) - Institute of Agricultural Environment (IAE) and Centre for Agrarian Systems Research and Development(CASRAD);

• Asian Institute of Technology Center in Vietnam (AITCV); and

• Hanoi University of Science and Technology (HUST) - Vietnam Japan International Institute for Science of Technology (VJIIST).


3

Capacity development needs and activities

In consultation with the MSWG and the Centers of excellence, a capacity development need assessment was conducted and trainings were organized on:

• July 2017. Methodologies for calculating emissions of GHG and non-GHG(i.e. GBEP indicators 1, 4) from the selected bioenergy pathways; and

• Nov 2017. Methodologies and especially modelling approaches for assessing the impacts of the ethanol demand on agricultural markets (i.e. GBEP indicator 10).

Multi-Stakeholder Working Group Meeting

4 15 November 2017

Multi-Stakeholder Working Group meetings

• 1st meeting (July 2016): Presentation of the project and identification of the priority bioenergy pathways and sustainability issues;

• 2nd meeting (July 2017): Discussion and validation of preliminary project results; and

• 3rd meeting (15 November 2017): Discussion and validation of final project results and related conclusions and recommendations.

• Regional workshop ( 16-17 November 2017) on ‘Sustainable Bioenergy Production and Use in Southeast Asia: Lessons Learnt and Future Opportunities’ (November 2017); and


5 15 November 2017

Next steps

• Incorporation of MSWG’s feedback into the draft report by the Centers of excellence, and preparation/publication of final report (early 2018).

• Publication both in English and Vietnamese version


6

• Conclusion & Recommendation

7

8

• Quite good data for environmental indicators.

• Indicators 1 and 4 can be completed by modelling and MRV

• Get some difficulty in social-economic indicators as data at house hold level are missing andsome data are not statistical available such as job created, time unpaid

• Indicator 10 need more time to be completed as it need a large of pool of input values/parameters

• Bottle-neck in biogas development as Gas- CH4 produced from biogas as not efficiently useand with have prob. About water pollution control especially at small farm scale

• Energy from cassava base ethanol is computed as high efficacy energy used and clean butthe price of gasoline is key driven factor

• Cassava production is sustainable only when farmers can get comparative benefit incomparison with other crop

• Role of policy is crucial to sustainable bioenergy production in whole LCA.

• It was estimated that bioethanol cassava based needs as high as 28% of totalcassava production and areas but it depend highly for the real operating of thebioethanol factory. The percentage of cassava production for bioethanol was onlyless than 1%. Data from socio-economic indicators and from the operation of bio-ethanol factories should see clearly the tendency.

9

Biogas at house hold levels are quite developed, using of biosolid and slurry is quite

familiar but warning a big issue for water surface pollution.

Waste Management from biogas plant, house holds and bioethanol production

plants should be highly considered and monitored.

10

Conservation methods, as minimum or no-tillage practices, are encouraged for use

cultivation by the extension center of provinces and localities for being used in cassava

cultivation and become common in cassava cultivation on sloping land but it should be

mandated

Protection of water and soil quality is very critical while developing bio-energy such as

ethanol cassava based or biogas. Control should be advanced as it is a big issue for water

surface pollution.

Waste Management from biogas plant, house holds and bioethanol production plants should

be highly considered and monitored.

11


12 15 November 2017

8 environmental indicators reported by IAE & HUST

for cassava-ethanol & biogas

13

WHY CASSAVA ETHANOL & BIOGAS PATHWAY?

N. Name of indicators Description Cassava-ethanol Biogas( House Level(H)& Industry level (Ind.)

1 Lifecycle GHG emissions (IAE&HUST)

Agronomicalprocess

Biomass H/Ind.

2 Soil quality Yes Yes

3 Harvest levels of wood resources

H

4 Emissions of non-GHG air pollutants, including air toxics

(IA&HUST)

Agronomicalprocess

Biomass H/Ind.

5 Water use and efficiency Yes Yes

6 Water quality Yes Yes

7 Biological diversity in the landscape

Yes -

8 Land use and land-use change related to bioenergy feedstock

production

Yes -14

Main methods• Literatures review

• Working group brain storming, workshops ( July2016 & July 2017 & Nov. 2017)

• Emails exchanges, training & FAO’s consultations

• Collecting data from official data bases

• Interview thorough field trips (April 2017) at two provinces

(Phu Tho & Tay Ninh)

• Soil, water sampling and analysis

• Modelling

• Reporting for Environmental indicators

15

16

FOR BIOGAS PATHWAY

For biogas-based biofuel, we reported here only biogas from animal

production (pork) with various combinations of the amount of manure

produced and daily biogas volume in Viet Nam, NPK rate in non-biogas and

biogas farms, and using bio-slurry result in increasing yield of crops were

analyzed

17

FOR CASSAVA PATHWAY

The popular process of cassava production in Vietnam:

Area

Land preparation

Planting

Crop maintenance

Harvesting

Residue management

Industry

18

Annual cassava area in Vietnam (thousand ha) for the period of 1995-2015

19

Evolution of annual cassava yield (ton/ha), 1995-2015

20

Rate of increase of yield vs. area for Cassava in Viet Nam in the last 10 years period

-1%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

-10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%

Yie

ld c

han

ge (

%/y

)

Area change (%/Y)

Soil organic matter in sloping land

Where:

DH1: Plant cassava

DH3: Plant forest tree

DH4: Non-use land, under restoration

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0-30 30-60 0-30 30-60 0-30 30-60 0-30 30-60 0-30 30-60

ĐH1 ĐH3 ĐH4 ĐH5 ĐH6

OC %

DH5: Plant industrial tree (tea) with measure to erosion control (terrace)

DH6: Natural regenerated forest land

Figure 1: Organic carbon (%OC) on the soil at the risk of erosion in PhuTho in 2014

21

USE of Manure or digested form biogas

Increases the amount of pore space available for plant rootsand the entry of water and air into the soilIncrease the water-holding capacity of the soil significantlyProvide exchange and adsorption sites for nutrientsProvide nutrients for plantsBut heavy metals?

22

Water use for bioenergy production in Viet Nam.

High Efficiency Water use in Biogas

ParameterCassava-

BioethanolBiogas

Total annual renewable water

resources (TARWR)884.1 km3/year 884.1 km3/year

Water withdrawn for the bioenergy

production (2016)0.0598 km3/year 0.0583 km3/year

Total water withdrawn for

bioenergy production as a

percentage of TARWR

0.0068% 0.0066%

Total energy produced from

bioenergy376,200,000 MJ 5,981,700,000 MJ

Volume of water withdrawn for

bioenergy production per unit of

energy output

0.159 m3/MJ 0.0097 m3/MJ

Parameter Unit

Amount found in sampled

wastewater of types of bio-

digester

Threshold values

for industry

waste water

established by

QCVN

40:2011/BTNMT

(Column B)

Threshold values

for waste water

from livestock

by QCVN 62-

MT:2016/BTNMT

(Column B)KT1 KT2 Composite

Ntt mg/l 265.62 218.55 188.40 50 150

Ptt mg/l 74.73 84.95 69.27 6 No regulation

TSS mg/l 4639.84 3690.85 3223.11 100 150

COD mg/l 1083.83 875.14 726.70 150 300

BOD5 mg/l 565.42 429.99 385.36 50 100

Fecal

coliform

MPN/

100 ml1948 2814 4331 5000 5000

Quality of wastewater after biogas

LCA results for Biofuel: GHG emissions

Total emissions: 59.2 gCO2eq/MJethanol

8%

31%

5%

54%

2%

LUC

cultivation

transport

processing

use

GHG emission saving: 37%

25

59.23

94.00

cassava (flatland) (gasoline)

g CO2eq/MJ fuel

LCA results for Biofuel: non-GHG emissions

26

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

SO2 NOx CO VOCs PM10 Dust NH3

g/MJ ethanol

g/MJ gasoline

Social Pillars-AITVN & CASRAD

Indicator 9. Allocation and tenure of land for new bioenergyproduction (for ethanol)

Indicator 11. Change in income (for both ethanol and biogas)

Indicator 12. Jobs in the bioenergy sector (for both ethanol andbiogas)

Indicator 13. Change in unpaid time spent by women and children

collecting biomass (for biogas at household level)

Indicator 14. Bioenergy used to expend access to modern energy

services with focus on biogas at household level

Indicator 15. Change in mortality and burden of disease

attributable to indoor smoke (for biogas at household level)

Indicator 16. Incidence of occupational injury, illness and fatalities

Indicator 11: Income for Biogas Pathway

Main income sources of biogas households (%)

Production

activities

Distribution of

households by

the main income

source

Distribution of

households by

the secondary

income source

Crop 69.6 22.8

Livestock 23.2 70.2

Wage 5.4 1.8

Non-farm

business

1.8 0Size of biogas user household: 6.3 person/householdsIncome from livestock of a biogas user household: US$588,04/year/household

Per capita income/year

(US$)

Per capita income from

livestock/year

(US$)

539.46 93.34

Ratio (%) 100 17.30

Per capita income and per capita income from livestock of biogas households (%)

Kinds of saving Value(USD)

Ratio(%)

Fuel for cooking 167.18 91.27

Electricity 2.18 1.19

Chemical fertilizer 11.13 6.08

Other 2.67 1.46

Total cost savings 183.16 100

Average cost saving from the use of biogas digester in a year (per biogas user household)

Fuel for cooking

91%

Electricity1%

Chemical fertilizer

6%

Other 2%

Saving cost by sources

There are 4 big biogas projects under MARD:

• Biogas program for animal husbandry sector in Vietnam (co-

implemented by SNV and Livestock Production Department –

MARD) from 2003 up to now

• Low carbon agriculture support project (ADB-MARD) 2013-2019

• Livestock Competitiveness and Food Safety Project (WB) 2010 –

2015

• Strengthening the quality, agricultural product safety and biogas

program development (ADB), period 2010 – 2013

Total biogas plants constructed: 450,000 units 90%

functional operation 405,000 digesters (10m3 average)

Indicator 12 : Jobs in Biogas pathway

Indicator 13: Unpaid timeTime saved for collecting firewood and other daily activities before and

after using biogas

N.

Before

using

biogas

(hour/day)

After using

biogas

(hour/day)

Time saved

(hour/day)

Time used for firewood collection 33 1.83 0.14 1.69 (*)

Time used for cooking 41 2.151 1.181 0.97

Time used for cleaning cookers

and cooking appliance32 0.608 0.328 0,28

Uses of time saved Leisure Study Production

% households 41.3 4.4 91.1

Uses of time saved after using biogas

(*) Total number of households with access to biogas is 405,000 so the total time saved in the whole country is 684,450 hours per day

ECONOMIC INDICATORS

INDICATOR 17 PRODUCTIVITY

INDICATOR 18 NET ENERGY BALANCE

INDICATOR 19 GROSS VALUE ADDED

INDICATOR 20 CHANGE IN CONSUMPTION OF FOSSIL FUELS AND

TRADITIONAL USE OF BIOMASS

INDICATOR 21 TRAINING AND REQUALIFICATION OF THE WORKFORCE

(Biogas)

INDICATOR 22 ENERGY DIVERSITY

INDICATOR 23 INFRASTRUCTURE AND LOGISTICS FOR DISTRIBUTION

OF BIOENERGY (Ethanol)

INDICATOR 24 CAPACITY AND FLEXIBIITY OF USE OF BIOENERGY

12/11/2017 31

Indicator 17 : PRODUCTIVITY for Ethanol

(17.1) Productivity of bioenergy feedstocks

Domestic consumption : 1.8 million tons

Export : 3.7 million tons

(17.2) Processing efficiencies by technology and feedstock

- By technology : Europe, China, India

(17.3) Amount of bioenergy end product : 67.450 MJ/ha/year

(17.4) Production cost per unit of bioenergy : 15,420 VND/liter ethanol

( Exchange rate : 22.300 VND/USD)

12/11/2017 32

Indicator 17 : PRODUCTIVITY for biogas

(17.1) Productivity of bioenergy feed stocks

• Biogas at household scale/farm scale 27,750 millions of pig.

One head (50 kg) : produce 0.949 ton fresh manure/year.

• Biogas at industrial scale (starch production):

Productivity 19.61 m3 wastewater/1 ton of starch.

(17.2) Processing efficiencies by technology and feedstock

• 1.165 MJ/kg of pig manure on a wet base

• 43.62 MJ/m3 of wastewater

12/11/2017 33

Indicator 17 : PRODUCTIVITY for biogas

(17.3) Amount of bioenergy (GJ/plant/year)

• Small biogas plants(10m3): 9,720,000

• Medium biogas plants (500 m3): 16,642,880

• Large biogas plants (2000m3): 4,632,673

• Starch processing : 3,206,789,73

(17.4) Biogas production cost (USD/MJ)

• Household level: 0.015627.

• Farm level: 0.015835

• Starch processing: 0.002740.

12/11/2017 34

• (18.1) feedstock production,

• (18.2) processing of feedstock into bioenergy,

• (18.3) bioenergy use; and/or

• (18.4) lifecycle analysis

INDICATOR 18: NET ENERGY BALANCE

12/11/2017 35

Ethanol fuel production technology

12/11/2017 36

Biogas production and waste water treatment

12/11/2017 37

INDICATOR 18: NET ENERGY BALANCE

Vietnam – Japan International Institute for Science of Technology

Bioethanol pathway:

It needs 1.00 MJ of Fossil Fuel to produce 1.61 MJ of Ethanol (Cassava)

Biogas pathway from pig farm:

It needs 1.00 MJ of Fossil Fuel to produce 30.28 MJ of Biogas (Big farm)

39

INDICATOR 19 - GROSS VALUE ADDED

12/11/2017

Household level: HL

Industrial level: ID

Pathway

Bioethanol

Biogas

Gross value added USD/MJ

0.0033 USD/MJ

HL: 0.00116

ID: 0.010149

% GDP

2018

0.00315

0.0074

20.1:

• 20.1a: Substitution of fossil fuels with domestic bioenergy measured by energy content,

• 20.1b: annual savings of convertible currency from reduced purchases of fossil fuels.

20.2:

Substitution of traditional use of biomass with modern domestic bioenergy measured by energy content.

INDICATOR 20: CHANGE IN CONSUMPTION OF FOSSIL FUELS AND

TRADITIONAL USE OF BIOMASS (only for Biogas)

12/11/2017 40

INDICATOR 20: CHANGE IN CONSUMPTION OF FOSSIL FUELS (ETHANOL)


Change in consumption of fossil fuel in Vietnam during 2013-2018

Ethanol Fossil fuels substituted by ethanol

Year m3/y MJ/y MJ/y Price bblfossilsub_OIL USD/y

2013 37,000 780,700,000 294,802,971 101.31 5,000,878

2014 25,300 533,830,000 201,581,491 108.26 3,654,103

2015 15,200 320,720,000 121,108,248 62.82 1,273,895

2016 29,500 622,450,000 228,810,798 42.43 1,625,592

2018b 267,850 5,651,635,000 2,134,134,481 42.43 15,162,013

aVietnam Petroleum Assosiation, http://www.hiephoixangdau.org/

bVietnam are going to replace all RON92 by E5 in 2018 (MOIT 2017).

41

http://www.hiephoixangdau.org/

42

Year Biogas Fossil fuels substituted by biogas

m3/y kWh/y kWh/y Price

bblfossilsub_OIL

USD/y

2013 2,032,759,125 2,032,759,125 313,655 101.31 31,776,361.00

2014 2,032,759,125 2,032,759,125 313,655 108.26 33,956,261.39

2015 2,032,759,125 2,032,759,125 313,655 62.82 19,703,790.33

INDICATOR 20: CHANGE IN CONSUMPTION OF FOSSIL FUELS

Biogas pathway

Biogas from livestock

Biogas from industrial scale – cassava starch plant:

Year Biogas Fossil fuels substituted by biogas

m3/y kWh/y TOE Price

bblfossilsub_OIL

USD/y

2016 500,000,000 3,220,773,356 496,965.33 62.82 31,219,362

Indicator 22: Energy Diversity

Description: Change in diversity of total primary energy supply due to bioenergy

• The diversity of energy supply is quantified using the Herfindahl index, which is simply the sum of the squares of the shares (i.e. fractions) of TPES provided by each energy supply category

• The impact of bioenergy on diversity can be assessed using the Herfindahlindex by calculating it with the bioenergy components included and comparing this to the index calculated without the bioenergy components, allocating the fractions supplied by bioenergy to the most likely alternative use

12/11/2017 43

Results of the indicators 22’s measurement

12/11/2017 44

Share of energy sources in Total Primary Energy 2015

Herfindahl index : 0.226

33.81%

25.49%

12.94%

6.54%

15.53% 0.18%

0.01%4.35%

0.02%

1.12%5.51%

Coal Oil Gas

Hydro Traditional biomass Electricity import

Other RE Bagass and Rice husk Biofuels

INDICATOR 23: INFRASTRUCTURE AND LOGISTICS FOR DISTRIBUTION OF BIOENERGY

(23.1) Number and

(23.2) capacity of routes for critical distribution systems, along with

(23.3) an assessment of the proportion of the bioenergy associated with each

12/11/2017 45


Gasoline distribution network

12/11/2017 46

Finding for ethanol transportation

For supplying ethanol fuel to the Northern province of VN, it should be delivery from two ethanol plant in Middle of Vietnam. It takes a long road for transportation and need approximately 525-625 MJ/MT.


For supplying ethanol fuel to the Southern Middle of VN, it need approximately 72-359 MJ/MT.

For supplying ethanol from Tung Lam plant to Hochiminh city, it is consumption about 79 MJ/MT. For supplying ethanol from Tung Lam plant to Southeast of VN, it is consumption about 63 and 189 MJ/MT.

INDICATOR 24: CAPACITY AND FLEXIBIITY OF USE OF BIOENERGY

• (24.1) Ratio of capacity for using bioenergy compared with actual use for each significant utilization route

• (24.2) Ratio of flexible capacity which can use either bioenergy or other fuel sources to total capacity

Vietnam – Japan International Institute for Science of Technology12/11/2017 48


Tax and price of gasoline

CIF, 47%

VAT 1, 6%

Import tax, 8%

Cost + Benefit, 9%

Stabilization fund, 2%

Envirometal protection,

19%

VAT 2, 9%

Finding for biogas pathway

• For cassava starch processing,

- Biogas was utilized about : 58.2%

- Flexible ration for power generation : 46,96%.

• For biogas utilization at farm scale,

- Capacity ratio for utilization of biogas is almost zero.

- The flexible ratio for power generation : 145%.

• For household level

- The capacity ratio approach approximately 1

- The capacity ratio for biogas at household level is only about 5%


Thank you! Contact us:

[email protected]@fao.org

[email protected]

52 30 November 2017FAO Rome Meeting

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

vietnam experiences for 24 indicators · 2017-12-11 · social pillars-aitvn & casrad indicator...

Documents