Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CU TEC
Technical and Economic Prospects of Rice Residues for Energy in Asia
Dipl.-Ing. Werner Siemers “Sustainable Bioenergy Symposium” at RE Asia Bangkok, June 2, 2011
CU TEC Contents
Introduction Motivation Characteristics for rice husks and rice straw Potentials for energetic use Rice husks Rice straw
Economic and institutional implications Conclusion
CU TEC Motivation
Use of biomass for energy production If surplus available
Reduction of fossil energy consumption Substitution for electricity,
heat and …….
Reduction of CO2- emissions Net reduction is assured
Husk and straw are by-product resp. waste of food production
Husks and straw are/had been burnt for “waste handling” local emissions
CU TEC Characteristics
Straw and husks are totally different
Husks Straw
Uniform in size Bulky
Dry Dry, but sometimes wet
At factory level accumulated
Field based resource
Market access, traded Only local market
Price structure available
High variation in prices
Direct use for energy (power plant, heat) possible
Needs further processing for efficient energy use
Ash content high Ash content high
CU TEC Potential for energetic use
Desktop studies for four countries India, Thailand, Vietnam, China Additional summary paper Organised by FAO, Rome Executed in 2008 and 2009 References Shijun Ding: “Rice Residue Utilization for Bio-fuels Production in
China”, revised version, 12 October 2009 Phan Hieu Hien: “Study on bioenergy production from rice residues
in Viet Nam”, Final report (revised), August 2009 Werner Siemers: “Rice residue utilization for biofuels production
Case Study Thailand”, Final report (revised edition), May 2009 Werner Siemers: “Rice residue utilization for biofuels production
Case Study India”, Final report (revised edition), July 2009 Werner Siemers: “Policy Brief Rice residue Utilization for Biofuels
Production”, October 2009
CU TEC India
Total rice production of 130 Mt 30 Mt rice husks Rice husk for traditional non-energetic use, 20% to 30% of
volume assumed Rice husk for energy, total 11 Mt Rural heat and energy demand, milling, parboiling Open burning for ash production Some modern biomass power plants
Apparent surplus of some 10 Mt husk 100 Mt rice straw Animal production: Fodder and bedding material, nearly 50% Domestic purpose, energy and material, nearly 30% Apparent surplus of 22 Mt in the rice producing areas One power plant operated on straw, but technical difficulties
CU TEC Thailand
Total rice production of 30 Mt 6.1 Mt rice husk Negligible traditional non-energetic use, 0.3 Mt Traditional energy use: rice mills and cooking/heating, 1.2 Mt Energy demand in cement and other industries, 1.3 Mt Existing modern biomass power plants (usual 10 MW), 1.7 Mt
Apparent surplus of 1.6 Mt, but would be Zero soon, regional shortages occur already, transport over long distances
22 Mt rice straw Animal production: fodder and bedding material Open field burning Apparent surplus: nearly 50% But: present material costs are too high for modern energetic
utilization, logistics and markets not developed
CU TEC Vietnam
Total rice production 36 Mt 6.5 Mt rice husk Non-energetic: Fertiliser, fodder Energy use: household cooking, food processing, paddy
drying, brick and cement industry Apparent surplus of 1 Mt, mainly in the Mekong Delta, rest of
surplus scattered One modern biomass power plant erected (2 MW), more
planned 21.5 Mt rice straw Animal production: fodder (regionally 50% to 80%), bedding
material (15% to 30%) Organic fertilizer, mushroom production Energetic: cooking and heating (10%, Northern and Central) Apparent surplus: 6 Mt (mainly Mekong Delta) But: traded price for straw is 2 to 5 times higher than husk
CU TEC China
Total rice production 189 Mt 38 Mt rice husk 200 Mt rice straw (no further distinction between husks and straw)
Fodder (20%) and organic fertilizer (15%) Household cooking, 47% of all resources Burning without energy recovery, 15% No real visible surplus
Apparent surplus: 37 Mt or maximum 150 Mt which is the conversion of the field burning quantity into useful
energy, plus a possible shift from the household cooking demand to modern energy
Plans for decentralized use (briquetting, pelletizing, gasification) and centralized (cogeneration) power plants
CU TEC Potentials for energetic use
Summary for 4 representative countries China Vietnam Thailand India
Theoretical potential
Rice husk, Mt 38 6.5 6.1 30
Rice straw, Mt 200 21.5 22.0 100
Estimated surplus Rice husk, Mt See straw 1.0 1.6 10
Rice straw, Mt 37 to 150 6.0 11.0 22
Present Modern use Power Plant, Mt n.a. 0.016 1.7 2.0 to 2.5
CU TEC Economic implication
Husks prices are rising, straw costs are higher because of logistics and processing
Examples from Thailand, IRR for biomass power plants
Husk
Straw
CU TEC Institutional implication
Incentives are necessary Feed-in tariff to cover higher costs
CDM (Clean Development Mechanism) as additional
income for CO2 reduction Framework conditions must be right Independent power production Feed-in law for renewables and/or biomass Reliable policy More efforts for straw utilisation
Feed-in tariffs for biomass
China Vietnam Thailand India
USct/kWh 3.7 to 5.2 4.0 8.2 to 8.8 3.0 to 4.7
CU TEC Conclusion
Rice husks and rice straw are one of the major sources for biomass energy in Asia
The potential is only used to a certain extent in modern applications
There are traditional and modern competing usages (both non-energetic and energetic)
Situation for husks is more advanced because of technical and economic advantages
For efficient straw utilisation there is still need for improvement in logistics and pre-processing
Both can contribute to more renewable energy and less carbon
There is limited competition for food and some competition on the fodder situation
CU TEC
Thank you very much
for your attention!!
Further Contact:
