How to safely brush your teeth
In the developed countries it is safe to drink tap water directly. Although the tap water is uncooked it has been processed so that it is considered hygienic, sterile and germ-free. On the other hand, the situation in the developing countries is completely different. The tap water needs to be boiled before being consumed.
Let me propose an idea.For those living in or visiting developing countries) Please use boiled water also for brushing your teeth. Why? Every time you brush your teeth, droplets of the water you are using is retained in the mouth (of course just trace amounts), and some other droplets are unknowingly swallowed. Obviously, boiled water is safer.
Read More..
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Monday, January 12, 2009
This is the paper that I wrote and submitted to SISEST 2008
Biomass as a source of household energy in developing countries: technology and sustainable development issues
Stefanus Muryanto
Office of Research and Department of Chemical Engineering,
UNTAG University in Semarang
Jalan Pawiyatan Luhur, Bendan Duwur, Semarang, INDONESIA 50233
E-mail: stefanus_muryanto665@yahoo.com
Abstract
Biomass as a source of energy has been used for millennia, long before humankind discovered fossil-based fuels. Biomass particularly wood is the main energy source for cooking and heating in the rural communities of the developing countries. The practice of using biomass as an energy stock in the developing world is expected to continue for many years in the future. It is an added advantage that biomass, unlike other energy resources, can be found in practically every country, and constitutes mainly of agricultural residues, wild vegetation, and purposely-grown crops.As a source of energy, biomass is gaining importance since it is renewable, environment-friendly, and sustainable. Depending on the type of energy services required, the technologies for converting biomass into useful energy can be simple and easy to adopt in the rural areas of the developing countries. However, in most of these countries the use of biomass for energy is inefficient and health-damaging. During cooking, only a small fraction of the heat released by the burnt biomass can be captured by the food being cooked mostly due to the inadequacy of the cookstove design. Additionally, the cookstove gives off a lot of smoke that causes indoor air pollution detrimental to the household members. The biomass projects for energy are in most instances land-intensive and labour-intensive. This situation gives rise to a wide range of positive and negative impacts: socio-economically and environmentally. This paper discusses the biomass conversion technologies suitable for rural regions of the developing countries, and the potential factors that contribute to the aforementioned impacts. These factors include access to energy services, income generating activities, and pattern of land utilization. A typical case of a rural biogas plant is presented to illustrate both the benefits and the drawbacks of bioenergy projects.
Overview of Household Energy in Developing Countries
Biomass as a source of energy has been used worldwide for millennia, long before humankind discovered fossil-based fuels. It is the term used for all material originating from biological or organic sources. These sources include forests and wild vegetation, agriculture and animal farms, wood-based industries, and dairy processing and municipal wastes. Biomass is essentially the product of the endothermic reaction of photosynthesis, and thus collection and storage of the energy generated by the sun [Herzog et al, 2001]. Biomass can then be converted into bioenergy, which is the useful form of energy such as heat and electricity. In the developing countries, especially in rural areas, some 2 to 3 billion people [Kammen, 2006] rely on biomass, comprising of fuelwood, charcoal, agricultural waste and animal dung, to meet their energy needs for cooking, lighting and space heating. In many of these countries, biomass even accounts for over 90% of household energy consumption [Anon, 2006]. The world’s poor rely on biomass since it is generally available for free. The widespread use of biomass energy in poor countries has complex consequences, since its utilization is usually inefficient, health-damaging, unsustainable, and environmentally detrimental. However, biomass utilization is a significant source of jobs and income for developing countries with their various small scale biomass-based industries [Karekezi and Kithyoma, 2006]. Such industries include the processing of bricks and tiles, agricultural (tobacco, tea, etc), smoked fish, pig iron and other metal working and so on.
It is predicted that demand for traditional biomass products like firewood, charcoal, manure and crop residues in developing countries, being the main source of household energy, is likely to increase in the years ahead [Kammen, 2006]. Unless policy intervention was put in place, one estimate shows that due to population growth, until 2030 there would be around three billion people still rely on biomass as the main source of energy [Anon, 2006]. Invariably, wood will be the main type of the biomass used. In several countries of South East Asia such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines, fuelwood is obtained from both forest and non-forest resources. The fuelwood originating from the non-forest resources are slabs and sawdust from wood-based industries, lops and tops, dead stumps, twigs and small branches from land clearing, wooden poles from replacement or demolition of old buildings and structures, wooden crates from traditional and supermarkets and so on [Anon, 2001].
Rural communities also exploit residues from agriculture which are usually available in abundance. Such agro-residues consist of rice husk and straw, coconut husks and shells, dried coconut leaves, dried fronds, small branches and twigs, palmoil kernel shells and fibre, and bagasse [Anon, 2001]. These residues are usually not considered as commercial items, and therefore statistical data are not always available.
The use of biomass for energy per se is not a cause for concern. The problems arise since the harvesting of resources is generally unsustainable and the energy conversion technologies are currently inefficient and health-damaging.
Biomass for Household Energy in the Rural Regions of Indonesia
The Indonesian staple food is rice, which is traditionally eaten with vegetables and (dried) fish. In the rural regions, meals are commonly prepared either in large earthenware, a copper, or an aluminum pot over a biomass stove or open wood fires which have no control to adjust the flame.
Most of rural Indonesian communities consume meat, chicken, poultry or dairy products only occasionally, usually during the festive season such as Idul Fitri. Dried fish are pan-fried in vegetable oil, mostly coconut oil, while the fresh fish can be fried or made into a variety of dishes such as soup, thick soup, grilled over burning charcoal or wrapped in leaves and steamed. The cooking stove is of low efficiency (about 10%) and emits a lot of smoke [Smith, 1994; Holdren and Smith, 2005: 67] especially when the fuelwood used is not sufficiently dried.
Agricultural residues are quite popular across all household income levels in rural communities since these residues are available for free. Low income families do not seem to be able to afford buying commercial fuels and therefore rely greatly on gathering and collecting these residues.
Charcoal is in most parts of Indonesian villages a precious and valuable material. Rural population produce charcoal, but seldom use it for themselves since it is normally sold to the urban communities. The most common wood for charcoal is leucena (Leucena sp.), but also from old and unproductive trees like Euphoria longana Lour., Lancium domesticum Corr., Artocarpus heterophyllus, Hibiscus macrophyllus, and Arenga pinnata Merr.. Charcoal emits less smoke than fuelwood and is therefore preferred by urban population since they live in a densely populated area, where smoke can be a nuisance. Some dishes are also preferentially prepared over charcoal fires with the intention to impart certain flavours, whether such flavours are real or merely perceived. It is believed that food cooked with petroleum-derived fuels such as kerosene and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) would loose its specific flavour. Smoked fish produced by home industries for example, are prepared by stacking the fish over burning and smoking coconut shells and husks.
Kerosene is still a popular cooking fuel for both rural communities as well as poor urban people. It also serves as a fire starter for wood-fuelled kitchens. However, kerosene is actually impractical since it wets the hands, the cooking utensils, and other equipment, and smells. It is also reported that kerosene gives off more noxious gases than LPG [Samson et al, 2001]. Kerosene stoves are generally quick cooking and the heat output is adjustable, although old kerosene stoves may run the risk of catching fires. LPG is becoming more popular among Indonesian households especially for middle and upper income families. In addition, the government of Indonesia has recently started a household energy program to shift to LPG for low income levels.
Some of the urban poor, however, might not be able to afford purchasing kerosene let alone LPG. Consequently they rely on collecting wood from construction sites, wooden crates from traditional as well as super markets, or wood scraps from demolished buildings. Kerosene and charcoal are only used occasionally. Small scale and home industries (tofu, tempeh, and smoked fish) usually establish links with people on construction sites or traditional markets to secure a constant supply of fuels in the form of wood scraps, scaffoldings, wooden crates and so on. The author argues that the use of biomass for energy should not be discouraged; rather, improvement in its utilization in terms of efficiency and health effect should be encouraged (see the following section).
Biomass Conversion Technologies for the Rural Regions in Developing Countries
Open wood fires, commonly used for cooking in rural communities of the developing countries, have low energy efficiency. A typical wood-fired cookingstove burning one kg of wood imparts only 18% of the heat generated to the cooking pot [Holdren and Smith, 2005: 67]. Most of the heat (74 %) is released to the atmosphere, and further 8% is contained in the PICs (products of incomplete combustion), and thus is lost. The PICs consist of noxious gases: CO, NOx, formaldehyde, benzene, 1-3 butadiene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and particulate matters (calculated as carbon) which are detrimental to health [Holdren and Smith, 2005: 67; Smith, 1994]. In addition, wood has lower heating value of between 15 to 17 MJ/kg, compared to the value for diesel oil and coal which is 43.1 MJ/kg and 26.3 MJ/kg, respectively [Kamarudin Abdullah, 2008]. Furthermore, the heat released by the fuelwood is also wasted during simmering of the food. As is known, some food e.g. steamed rice, needs fires of low heat or simmering (near the end of the cooking period) to obtain desirable taste and appearance. With traditional stoves, however, the flame of the stoves could not be adjusted during cooking, and consequently the fuelwood burns with constant intensity wasting a significant portion of the heat generated.
Since biomass has a lower calorific value than fossil fuels, converting it into more useful and readily forms is considered necessary for energy efficiency purposes. Some conversion technologies are easy and simple to adopt in rural areas of the developing countries [Qurashi and Hussain, 2005]. These technologies are elaborated in the following sections.
Improved Cook Stoves (ICS)
Basically, an improved cookstove (ICS) programme attempts to increase the efficiency of traditional stoves. The efficiency is achieved through improving fuel combustion and heat transfer to the cooking pot. Better combustion would produce less unburnt material and less smoke. If the smoke was channeled outside of the house, by using a chimney or a spacious open window, the problem of indoor air pollution (IAP) is reduced [Anon, 2006: 419; Sarkar, 2006; Bhattacharya 2001]. Hence, an improved cookstove contributes to a healthy household environment. In an improved cookstove, the heat generated is confined within the stove and heat losses through radiation are minimized. Further, increasing heat transfer rate to the cooking pot reduces cooking time, so that more time is available for the women or whoever in charge of the food preparation, to do other household chores or socio-economic activities.
An improved cookstove programme (ICP) has been promoted since 1960s in several developing countries both in Asia and Africa and met with promising success especially in China and India [Bhattacharya, 2001 ]. The author maintains that promotion of ICS programs [Anon, 2006a] in rural Indonesia must be intensified.
Densification
As discussed previously, biomass has a lower calorific value than fossil fuels. Therefore, the technology that can convert solid (yet loose) biomass fuel into a dense form is desirable, since it increases the heating value of the original biomass per unit mass. The densification or compaction process of biomass is well established and is available in two categories: briquetting and pelleting processes which yield fuel briquettes and fuel pellets respectively. Briquettes are normally 5 to 6 cm in diameter and 30 to 40 cm in length. Pellets, on the other hand, are smaller, measuring 1 cm in diameter and 2 cm in length [Bhattacharya, 2001].
Densified biomass is convenient to handle and store, hence, it is expected to gain wide acceptance among the rural people. However, the densification process involves a cost, which makes it rather unappealing in the rural regions where fuelwood or other biomass fuels are available for free. Hence, detailed study of the local fuel supply and demand is required and needs adequate attention [Anon, 2001].
Rice husks and straw which are in abundance in Indonesia could be used as cooking fuel through a densification process should more convenient stoves be available. Recent reports suggest that such stoves are available or at least are in the process of dissemination [Samson et al, 2001]. However, even improved stoves still need kerosene as a starter.
In the developed countries of Europe and the USA pellet fuels are preferred than briquettes. In these countries, pellets are mainly used for space heating [Bhattacharya, 2001]. Bhattacharya [2001] reported, however, that in the developing countries of Asia, briquettes are more popular. In Indonesia, commercial briquettes are largely produced from coal. Thailand, on the other hand, mainly produces rice husk- and sawdust-briquettes. Sawdust may need drying prior to compaction into briquettes, due to its typically higher moisture content [Bhattacharya, 2001]. Densified biomass fuels are potentially promising in the following Asian countries: Indonesia [Anon, 2008], Bangladesh, China, India, Myanmar, the Philippines, and Thailand [Bhattacharya, 2001].
Biogas
Biogas, which mainly consists of methane (CH4): 54 – 80% and CO2: 20 – 45% [Pramudono, 2007: 33] is a potential renewable energy source for developing countries [Bhattacharya, 2001; Qurashi and Hussain, 2005; Anon, 2007; Pramudono, 2007]. It has been successfully exploited for energy stock in many developing countries particularly in China and India [Anon, 2007]. The production of biogas involves conversion of organic materials such as animal wastes and manure, watery municipal waste, even human waste, i.e. excrements from family latrines, through anaerobic digestion process. Several benefits can be obtained from a biogas project. Firstly, the digestion process generates heat that kills the pathogens present in the manure so that a biogas project has a positive impact on sanitation [Anon, 2006b]. Secondly, the material left after the digestion is a valuable organic fertilizer [Goldemberg, 2000: 37]. Thirdly, a biogas project does not necessarily require highly skilled technicians. In fact, it can be successfully operated by rural farmers [Goldemberg, 2000: 37]. Fourthly, production of biogas abates the negative effect on climate change, since methane is a greenhouse gas that is 22 to 24 times worse than CO2 [Anon, 2007: 11].
Socio-Economic Issues
Since biomass is a local resource, addressing the reliance of household energy on biomass must consider the real needs of the local people. It is important to note that poor conditions of the rural communities (children malnutrition, underpaid jobs, unrealistically high kerosene prices and so on) are indicative of poor access to energy. Another important point to note is that in most cases, prominent members of a community are easily (yet wrongly) perceived as representative of the whole community, while in reality they are not. The following excerpt shows an unsuccessful rural bioenergy programme caused by such perception.
“....an early initiative to popularize family biogas plants in India targeted only families with enough cattle to support a dung-fuelled digester. Poor families did not own enough cattle, and in fact had previously depended on free dung for fuel and fertilizer. Once the digesters appeared, dung suddenly became valuable and could no longer be collected for free. The poor families ultimately had to rely on inferior, and less sustainable, sources of fuel. Where the poor use residues for fuel, bioenergy projects can make scarce a resource that was previously abundant and free. In contrast, community biogas installations in Karnataka, India, provide digester sludge – a superior fertilizer – to all community members.” [Kartha and Larson, 2000: 53].
It may happen that the seemingly unproductive lands as a common property in rural areas are deliberately misused, for example to be planted with energy-dedicated crops. In reality, there is no unproductive land as far as rural communities common resource is concern. What may be perceived as unproductive land, can be the one for which rural poor rely for their subsistence: free fodder for the cattle, free dead wood for fuel, a spring where water comes up from the ground for the cattle or drinking water and so on. In fact, such a “waste land” may provide rural people, albeit minimally, with food, fodder, fuelwood, construction and artisan materials etc. However, growing energy crops on underutilized lands can reap many benefits (see Environmental Issues).
Unlike the already established commercial energy such as petroleum, an entire flow of biomass resource utilization involves local people in every stage, starting from cultivation, processing, transportation, storage and usage. There is opportunity in each stage for income generation as well as for acquiring certain skills which may be useful for other activities.
Poor rural farmers typically do not have sufficient access to information about market conditions, technical advances, and availability of capital investment. In consequence, they may have weak bargaining power which in turn, results in earning lower profit margins. Therefore, it is imperative for the well-meaning bioenergy project planners that this situation be addressed accordingly. The local institutions and farmers’ cooperatives should be included in the bioenergy project to overcome these shortcomings [Kartha and Larson, 2000: 54].
Environmental Issues
The environmental issues involving biomass production for energy comprise energy and carbon balances, soil quality and fertility, hydrological cycle, and biodiversity [Kartha, 2006].
Although biomass is a source of renewable energy, biomass production sometimes consumes non-renewable energy, usually in the form of fossil fuels. An intensive and large biomass plantation necessitates the use of farm machinery which runs on gasoline or diesel oil. Fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, the production of which consumes fossil fuels, may also be used. In short, the entire cycle of a bioenergy plantation: land preparation, growing, tending, harvesting, processing, storage and transport may require the non-renewable energy input. Therefore, it is necessary to have an energy ratio analysis, i.e. the calculation of the ratio between the energy content of the biomass produced divided by the energy of the fossil fuels consumed to produce the biomass [Kartha, 2006]. Kartha [previous citation] reported that some crops grown in the temperate zones have significantly high energy ratios of 12 to 16, which is obviously favourable. It is expected that similar crops in the tropical regions could achieve even higher energy ratios, since climatic conditions such as rainfall is more abundant resulting in higher yield biomass.
The “self-sufficient energy village” programme (= Desa Mandiri Energi) utilizing Jatropha curcas Linn crops [Hadi, 2008] may well achieve such a high energy ratio since the crops are well suited to grow on degraded lands under harsh conditions [Anon, 2007: 9; Jongschaap et al, 2007: 5-10, 23]. This means that land preparation, cultivating, tending and harvesting need only minimal energy input. However, the energy ratio is lower if the processing of the jatropha seeds for oil is centralized and at a distance from the surrounding plantations, so that collection and delivery of the seeds require significant amount of energy for transport.
The issue of carbon balance is also dependent on the type of the biomass grown and how the energy is generated out of it. Clearly, harvesting energy plant such as fuelwood without replanting is unsustainable and leads to substantial carbon emissions. On the other hand, clearing natural forests, and subsequently replanting them with energy-dedicated plants may result in the net carbon emission equal zero or even positive. The amount of carbon sequestered in the biomass is released during forest clearing, but this deficiency will be compensated (in the long run) by the carbon captured by the new plants. The most favorable condition in terms of carbon balance is when underutilized land is planted with energy crops. In such a case the balance is definitely positive since the land very likely contains less carbon than the planted crops.
The author believes that utilization of biomass for household energy will not threaten either soil quality, soil fertility or hydrological cycle, since the practice is usually less intense compared to land clearing or deforestation for plantation industries. The rural people are essentially wise enough not to completely harvest the whole trees for fuelwood [Sarkar, 2006]. In most cases, they only utilize the branches and twigs, leaving the leaves and other residues littering the ground. In time the leaves and crop residues decompose, hence organic matter and plant nutrients recycle back into the soil. In this case, jatropha is favorable since the leaves, one of the most nutrient-rich of the plant, are not edible and, therefore, avoided by the cattle, thus securing the ground with nutritive materials. Intensive plantation usually needs more water than natural vegetation. Sugarcane for example, although an excellent crop for bioethanol production [Moreira, 2006], is reported to require intensive irrigation, i.e. around 2,200 liters of water for every liter of ethanol produced [Kartha, 2006; de Fraiture, 2008]. The production of ethanol from maize in the US is even water-consuming. For one liter of the ethanol produced, roughly 4,500 liters of water is needed [Orth, 2008: 59]. Therefore, it is important that water requirement of bioenergy crops to be grown be quantified well in advance. Less water-intensive crops are clearly better candidates for bioenergy production. Another potential energy crop is cassava (Mannihot esculenta) [Rosegrant et al, 2006]. Based on his own experience, however, the author of this current paper believes that cassava plantation does not normally generate adequate undergrowth or litter. Hence, such plantation may cause excessive water runoff, with the result that less water will be retained by the soil, upsetting the hydrological cycle.
Biomass energy plantation can have either positive or negative impacts on biodiversity. If the forest or vegetation as a natural habitat is cleared, the ecosystems embedded in it is disrupted or even destroyed. For example, if an underutilized land is planted with jatropha, some species endemic to the land (birds, insects, and other animal varieties) may move to other places, which may not necessarily provide the same ecosystem surroundings. The biodiversity is then disrupted. Furthermore, the jatropha plantation as one energy crop (mono cropping) can act as an incubation area for pests or disease, which can then spread into the surroundings. Bad incidents (uncontrolled growth of destructive trees, extensive spread of fungal disease) caused by such monoculture practice have taken place in several countries: South Africa, Uruguay, and India [Kartha, 2006].
Some parts of the underutilized land dedicated to energy crop should be left in natural vegetation, to serve as “green belts” or sanctuary for the wild species. Further, these parts are essential for rural people subsistence (fuelwood, fruits and tubers, fodder). In this way the biodiversity is preserved, the rural communities still have access to sources of subsistence, all while benefiting for the energy crop.
Concluding Remarks
Biomass is a potential renewable energy source since it is available in nearly every country. It is believed that biomass would still be an important source of household energy, mainly for cooking purposes, in many countries of the developing world in the years ahead. The utilization of biomass for energy purposes is country-specific, or even site-specific, to the extent that it involves the three aspects of sustainable development: economic, social, and environmental.
In view of the conversion technologies available for biomass-based energy, three options are considered most suitable for the rural regions in the developing countries: improved cookstoves, densification, and biogas.
A bioenergy project should be planned and implemented as such that the real needs of the local people are addressed. These needs include access to energy services, income generating activities, and access to rural common properties as sources of subsistence.
An intensive biomass plantation for energy could affect energy and carbon balances, the quality and fertility of soil, as well as the hydrological cycle in a negative manner. Equally, it can also negatively affect the biodiversity, particularly if the plantation is a monoculture.
This paper shows that appropriate management of a bioenergy project can reap many benefits for the rural people in the developing countries, as well as lend support to good sustainable development practices.
Acknowledgements
The socio-economic and environmental issues sections of this paper rely heavily on the work of Kartha and Larson [2000]. Also the author wishes to thank SISEST 2008 committee for accepting this paper.
References
Anonymous, 2001, ‘Biomass: More Than A Traditional Form of Energy’, in Biomass Energy in ASEAN Member Countries, FAO, RWEDP, online: www.rwedp.org/acrobat/asean.pdf, (10 Oct. 2008).
Anonymous, 2006, ‘Chapter 15. Energy for Cooking in Developing Countries’, in World Energy Outlook 2006 (Focus on Key Topics), pp 419-445, online: (accessed 02 Oct. 2008):
www.worldenergyoutlook.org/docs/weo2006/cooking.pdf
Anonymous, 2006a, ‘CDM Cook Stove Project Kupang I. Indonesia’, online: http://dna-cdm.menlh.go.id/Downloads/Stove_Cook_CDM/PDD_StoveCook.CDM.pdf, (13 October 2008).
Anonymous, 2006b, ‘Bioenergy for Sustainable Rural Development’, A UNDP Project Document of the Gov.of the Arab Republic of Egypt, UNDP, New York.
Anonymous, 2007, ‘A media guide to bioenergy', Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP). FAO, Rome.
Anonymous, 2008, ‘Declaration/Summary on Energy and Environment’, Energy and Environment Forum (FOREL), Diponegoro University, Semarang.
Bhattacharya, S.C., 2001, ‘Commercialization options for biomass energy technologies in ESCAP countries’, Background Paper at Regional Seminar on Commercialization of Biomass Technology, 4-8 June 2001, Guangzhou, China.
de Fraiture, C., 2008, ‘Biofuels add to the strain, SciDev.Net, online: www.scidev.net/Opinions/~, , accessed 20 July 2008.
Goldemberg, J., 2000, ‘Chapter 10. Rural Energy in Developing Countries’ in World Energy Assessment: Energy and the Challenge of Sustainability, online (accessed 02 August 2008): www.whrc.org/resources/published_literature/pdf/Holdrenetal/WorldEnergyAssess.00.pdf
Hadi, S.P., 2008, ‘Jalan Panjang Menuju Desa
Mandiri Energi. Studi Kasus Dusun Pagergunung, Kec.Brati, Kab.Grobogan’ (A case study on sufficient-energy-village program in Central Java), proc. National Seminar & Workshop on Energy & Environment, Diponegoro University Press, Semarang. ISBN 978-979-704-605-7.
Herzog, A.V. et al, 2001, ’Renewable Energy Sources’, Energy and Resources Group, RAEL, UC Berkeley, USA, online (accessed 02 August 2008): www.eolss.com.
Holdren, J.P. & Smith, K.R., 2005, ‘Chapter 3. Energy, the Environment and Health’ in World Energy Assessment: Energy and the Challenge of Sustainability, online (accessed 24 August 2008): www.whrc.org/resources/published_literature/pdf/Holdrenetal/WorldEnergyAssess.00.pdf
Jongschaap, R.E.E, et al, 2007, ’Claims and Facts on Jatropha curcas L..Global Jatropha curcas evaluation, breeding and propagation programme’, Report 158, Plant Research International B.V., Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Kamaruddin Abdullah, 2008, ‘Bioconversion Energy Technologies: Catalysts for Bioeconomical Development in the ASEAN Region’, Asian Biotechnology and Development Review, vol 10, no 1 & 2, pp 75-86, 2008.
Kammen, D.M., 2006, ‘Bioenergy in Developing Countries: Experiences and Prospects’, Brief 10 of 12, in Bioenergy and Agriculture: Promises and Challenges, by P. Hazell and R.K. Pachauri (eds.), IFPRI, Washington D.C., USA.
Karekezi, S. & Kithyoma, W., 2006, ‘Bioenergy and the Poor’, Brief 11 of 12, in Bioenergy and Agriculture: Promises and Challenges, by P. Hazell and R.K. Pachauri (eds.), IFPRI, Washington D.C., USA.
Kartha, S., 2006, ‘Environmental Effects of Bioenergy’, Brief 4 of 12, in Bioenergy and Agriculture: Promises and Challenges, by P. Hazell and R.K. Pachauri (eds.), IFPRI, Washington D.C., USA.
Kartha, S. and Larson, E.D., 2000, ‘Bioenergy Primer. Modernised Biomass Energy for Sustainable Development’, Energy and Atmosphere Programme, Bureau for Development Policy, UNDP, New York.
Moreira, J.R., 2006, ‘Brazil’s Experience with Bioenergy’, Brief 8 of 12, in Bioenergy and Agriculture: Promises and Challenges, by P. Hazell and R.K. Pachauri (eds.), IFPRI, Washington D.C., USA.
Orth, M., 2008, ‘We Must Increase Efficiency’, Deutschland (Magazine on Politics, Culture and Business), Societäts-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main, v.E4, n.2, April-May 2008.
Pramudono, B., 2007, ‘Empowering Biomass-based Alternative Energies to Secure National Energy Supply’, Diponegoro University Press, Semarang. ISBN: 979-704-489-0. (in Indonesian).
Qurashi, M.M. & Hussain, T., 2005, ‘Renewable Energy Technologies for Developing Countries. Now and to 2023’, publications of the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO),: isesco.org.ma/english/../Renewable Energy Technologies/Renewable.pdf, (14 August 2008).
Rosegrant et al, 2006, ‘A Closer-look at the Food-versus-Fuel Debate’, in The Promises and Challenges of Biofuels for the Poor in Developing Countries, by J.v. Braun and R.K. Pachauri, IFPRI 2005-2006 Annual Report Essay, IFPRI Washington D.C., USA.
Samson et al 2001, ‘Enhancing Household Biomass Energy Use in the Philippines’, College of Engineering and Agro-Industrial Technology, U.P.Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines.
Sarkar, S., 2006, ‘Indoor Air Pollution and Women Health in the Informal Sector’, Post-doctoral research project, Dinhata College, West Bengal, India.
Smith, K.R., 1994, ‘Health, energy, and greenhouse-gas impacts of biomass combustion in household stoves’, Energy for Sustainable Development, vol 1, no 4, pp 23-29, Nov 1994.
---------------------------------------------------- Read More..
Stefanus Muryanto
Office of Research and Department of Chemical Engineering,
UNTAG University in Semarang
Jalan Pawiyatan Luhur, Bendan Duwur, Semarang, INDONESIA 50233
E-mail: stefanus_muryanto665@yahoo.com
Abstract
Biomass as a source of energy has been used for millennia, long before humankind discovered fossil-based fuels. Biomass particularly wood is the main energy source for cooking and heating in the rural communities of the developing countries. The practice of using biomass as an energy stock in the developing world is expected to continue for many years in the future. It is an added advantage that biomass, unlike other energy resources, can be found in practically every country, and constitutes mainly of agricultural residues, wild vegetation, and purposely-grown crops.As a source of energy, biomass is gaining importance since it is renewable, environment-friendly, and sustainable. Depending on the type of energy services required, the technologies for converting biomass into useful energy can be simple and easy to adopt in the rural areas of the developing countries. However, in most of these countries the use of biomass for energy is inefficient and health-damaging. During cooking, only a small fraction of the heat released by the burnt biomass can be captured by the food being cooked mostly due to the inadequacy of the cookstove design. Additionally, the cookstove gives off a lot of smoke that causes indoor air pollution detrimental to the household members. The biomass projects for energy are in most instances land-intensive and labour-intensive. This situation gives rise to a wide range of positive and negative impacts: socio-economically and environmentally. This paper discusses the biomass conversion technologies suitable for rural regions of the developing countries, and the potential factors that contribute to the aforementioned impacts. These factors include access to energy services, income generating activities, and pattern of land utilization. A typical case of a rural biogas plant is presented to illustrate both the benefits and the drawbacks of bioenergy projects.
Overview of Household Energy in Developing Countries
Biomass as a source of energy has been used worldwide for millennia, long before humankind discovered fossil-based fuels. It is the term used for all material originating from biological or organic sources. These sources include forests and wild vegetation, agriculture and animal farms, wood-based industries, and dairy processing and municipal wastes. Biomass is essentially the product of the endothermic reaction of photosynthesis, and thus collection and storage of the energy generated by the sun [Herzog et al, 2001]. Biomass can then be converted into bioenergy, which is the useful form of energy such as heat and electricity. In the developing countries, especially in rural areas, some 2 to 3 billion people [Kammen, 2006] rely on biomass, comprising of fuelwood, charcoal, agricultural waste and animal dung, to meet their energy needs for cooking, lighting and space heating. In many of these countries, biomass even accounts for over 90% of household energy consumption [Anon, 2006]. The world’s poor rely on biomass since it is generally available for free. The widespread use of biomass energy in poor countries has complex consequences, since its utilization is usually inefficient, health-damaging, unsustainable, and environmentally detrimental. However, biomass utilization is a significant source of jobs and income for developing countries with their various small scale biomass-based industries [Karekezi and Kithyoma, 2006]. Such industries include the processing of bricks and tiles, agricultural (tobacco, tea, etc), smoked fish, pig iron and other metal working and so on.
It is predicted that demand for traditional biomass products like firewood, charcoal, manure and crop residues in developing countries, being the main source of household energy, is likely to increase in the years ahead [Kammen, 2006]. Unless policy intervention was put in place, one estimate shows that due to population growth, until 2030 there would be around three billion people still rely on biomass as the main source of energy [Anon, 2006]. Invariably, wood will be the main type of the biomass used. In several countries of South East Asia such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines, fuelwood is obtained from both forest and non-forest resources. The fuelwood originating from the non-forest resources are slabs and sawdust from wood-based industries, lops and tops, dead stumps, twigs and small branches from land clearing, wooden poles from replacement or demolition of old buildings and structures, wooden crates from traditional and supermarkets and so on [Anon, 2001].
Rural communities also exploit residues from agriculture which are usually available in abundance. Such agro-residues consist of rice husk and straw, coconut husks and shells, dried coconut leaves, dried fronds, small branches and twigs, palmoil kernel shells and fibre, and bagasse [Anon, 2001]. These residues are usually not considered as commercial items, and therefore statistical data are not always available.
The use of biomass for energy per se is not a cause for concern. The problems arise since the harvesting of resources is generally unsustainable and the energy conversion technologies are currently inefficient and health-damaging.
Biomass for Household Energy in the Rural Regions of Indonesia
The Indonesian staple food is rice, which is traditionally eaten with vegetables and (dried) fish. In the rural regions, meals are commonly prepared either in large earthenware, a copper, or an aluminum pot over a biomass stove or open wood fires which have no control to adjust the flame.
Most of rural Indonesian communities consume meat, chicken, poultry or dairy products only occasionally, usually during the festive season such as Idul Fitri. Dried fish are pan-fried in vegetable oil, mostly coconut oil, while the fresh fish can be fried or made into a variety of dishes such as soup, thick soup, grilled over burning charcoal or wrapped in leaves and steamed. The cooking stove is of low efficiency (about 10%) and emits a lot of smoke [Smith, 1994; Holdren and Smith, 2005: 67] especially when the fuelwood used is not sufficiently dried.
Agricultural residues are quite popular across all household income levels in rural communities since these residues are available for free. Low income families do not seem to be able to afford buying commercial fuels and therefore rely greatly on gathering and collecting these residues.
Charcoal is in most parts of Indonesian villages a precious and valuable material. Rural population produce charcoal, but seldom use it for themselves since it is normally sold to the urban communities. The most common wood for charcoal is leucena (Leucena sp.), but also from old and unproductive trees like Euphoria longana Lour., Lancium domesticum Corr., Artocarpus heterophyllus, Hibiscus macrophyllus, and Arenga pinnata Merr.. Charcoal emits less smoke than fuelwood and is therefore preferred by urban population since they live in a densely populated area, where smoke can be a nuisance. Some dishes are also preferentially prepared over charcoal fires with the intention to impart certain flavours, whether such flavours are real or merely perceived. It is believed that food cooked with petroleum-derived fuels such as kerosene and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) would loose its specific flavour. Smoked fish produced by home industries for example, are prepared by stacking the fish over burning and smoking coconut shells and husks.
Kerosene is still a popular cooking fuel for both rural communities as well as poor urban people. It also serves as a fire starter for wood-fuelled kitchens. However, kerosene is actually impractical since it wets the hands, the cooking utensils, and other equipment, and smells. It is also reported that kerosene gives off more noxious gases than LPG [Samson et al, 2001]. Kerosene stoves are generally quick cooking and the heat output is adjustable, although old kerosene stoves may run the risk of catching fires. LPG is becoming more popular among Indonesian households especially for middle and upper income families. In addition, the government of Indonesia has recently started a household energy program to shift to LPG for low income levels.
Some of the urban poor, however, might not be able to afford purchasing kerosene let alone LPG. Consequently they rely on collecting wood from construction sites, wooden crates from traditional as well as super markets, or wood scraps from demolished buildings. Kerosene and charcoal are only used occasionally. Small scale and home industries (tofu, tempeh, and smoked fish) usually establish links with people on construction sites or traditional markets to secure a constant supply of fuels in the form of wood scraps, scaffoldings, wooden crates and so on. The author argues that the use of biomass for energy should not be discouraged; rather, improvement in its utilization in terms of efficiency and health effect should be encouraged (see the following section).
Biomass Conversion Technologies for the Rural Regions in Developing Countries
Open wood fires, commonly used for cooking in rural communities of the developing countries, have low energy efficiency. A typical wood-fired cookingstove burning one kg of wood imparts only 18% of the heat generated to the cooking pot [Holdren and Smith, 2005: 67]. Most of the heat (74 %) is released to the atmosphere, and further 8% is contained in the PICs (products of incomplete combustion), and thus is lost. The PICs consist of noxious gases: CO, NOx, formaldehyde, benzene, 1-3 butadiene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and particulate matters (calculated as carbon) which are detrimental to health [Holdren and Smith, 2005: 67; Smith, 1994]. In addition, wood has lower heating value of between 15 to 17 MJ/kg, compared to the value for diesel oil and coal which is 43.1 MJ/kg and 26.3 MJ/kg, respectively [Kamarudin Abdullah, 2008]. Furthermore, the heat released by the fuelwood is also wasted during simmering of the food. As is known, some food e.g. steamed rice, needs fires of low heat or simmering (near the end of the cooking period) to obtain desirable taste and appearance. With traditional stoves, however, the flame of the stoves could not be adjusted during cooking, and consequently the fuelwood burns with constant intensity wasting a significant portion of the heat generated.
Since biomass has a lower calorific value than fossil fuels, converting it into more useful and readily forms is considered necessary for energy efficiency purposes. Some conversion technologies are easy and simple to adopt in rural areas of the developing countries [Qurashi and Hussain, 2005]. These technologies are elaborated in the following sections.
Improved Cook Stoves (ICS)
Basically, an improved cookstove (ICS) programme attempts to increase the efficiency of traditional stoves. The efficiency is achieved through improving fuel combustion and heat transfer to the cooking pot. Better combustion would produce less unburnt material and less smoke. If the smoke was channeled outside of the house, by using a chimney or a spacious open window, the problem of indoor air pollution (IAP) is reduced [Anon, 2006: 419; Sarkar, 2006; Bhattacharya 2001]. Hence, an improved cookstove contributes to a healthy household environment. In an improved cookstove, the heat generated is confined within the stove and heat losses through radiation are minimized. Further, increasing heat transfer rate to the cooking pot reduces cooking time, so that more time is available for the women or whoever in charge of the food preparation, to do other household chores or socio-economic activities.
An improved cookstove programme (ICP) has been promoted since 1960s in several developing countries both in Asia and Africa and met with promising success especially in China and India [Bhattacharya, 2001 ]. The author maintains that promotion of ICS programs [Anon, 2006a] in rural Indonesia must be intensified.
Densification
As discussed previously, biomass has a lower calorific value than fossil fuels. Therefore, the technology that can convert solid (yet loose) biomass fuel into a dense form is desirable, since it increases the heating value of the original biomass per unit mass. The densification or compaction process of biomass is well established and is available in two categories: briquetting and pelleting processes which yield fuel briquettes and fuel pellets respectively. Briquettes are normally 5 to 6 cm in diameter and 30 to 40 cm in length. Pellets, on the other hand, are smaller, measuring 1 cm in diameter and 2 cm in length [Bhattacharya, 2001].
Densified biomass is convenient to handle and store, hence, it is expected to gain wide acceptance among the rural people. However, the densification process involves a cost, which makes it rather unappealing in the rural regions where fuelwood or other biomass fuels are available for free. Hence, detailed study of the local fuel supply and demand is required and needs adequate attention [Anon, 2001].
Rice husks and straw which are in abundance in Indonesia could be used as cooking fuel through a densification process should more convenient stoves be available. Recent reports suggest that such stoves are available or at least are in the process of dissemination [Samson et al, 2001]. However, even improved stoves still need kerosene as a starter.
In the developed countries of Europe and the USA pellet fuels are preferred than briquettes. In these countries, pellets are mainly used for space heating [Bhattacharya, 2001]. Bhattacharya [2001] reported, however, that in the developing countries of Asia, briquettes are more popular. In Indonesia, commercial briquettes are largely produced from coal. Thailand, on the other hand, mainly produces rice husk- and sawdust-briquettes. Sawdust may need drying prior to compaction into briquettes, due to its typically higher moisture content [Bhattacharya, 2001]. Densified biomass fuels are potentially promising in the following Asian countries: Indonesia [Anon, 2008], Bangladesh, China, India, Myanmar, the Philippines, and Thailand [Bhattacharya, 2001].
Biogas
Biogas, which mainly consists of methane (CH4): 54 – 80% and CO2: 20 – 45% [Pramudono, 2007: 33] is a potential renewable energy source for developing countries [Bhattacharya, 2001; Qurashi and Hussain, 2005; Anon, 2007; Pramudono, 2007]. It has been successfully exploited for energy stock in many developing countries particularly in China and India [Anon, 2007]. The production of biogas involves conversion of organic materials such as animal wastes and manure, watery municipal waste, even human waste, i.e. excrements from family latrines, through anaerobic digestion process. Several benefits can be obtained from a biogas project. Firstly, the digestion process generates heat that kills the pathogens present in the manure so that a biogas project has a positive impact on sanitation [Anon, 2006b]. Secondly, the material left after the digestion is a valuable organic fertilizer [Goldemberg, 2000: 37]. Thirdly, a biogas project does not necessarily require highly skilled technicians. In fact, it can be successfully operated by rural farmers [Goldemberg, 2000: 37]. Fourthly, production of biogas abates the negative effect on climate change, since methane is a greenhouse gas that is 22 to 24 times worse than CO2 [Anon, 2007: 11].
Socio-Economic Issues
Since biomass is a local resource, addressing the reliance of household energy on biomass must consider the real needs of the local people. It is important to note that poor conditions of the rural communities (children malnutrition, underpaid jobs, unrealistically high kerosene prices and so on) are indicative of poor access to energy. Another important point to note is that in most cases, prominent members of a community are easily (yet wrongly) perceived as representative of the whole community, while in reality they are not. The following excerpt shows an unsuccessful rural bioenergy programme caused by such perception.
“....an early initiative to popularize family biogas plants in India targeted only families with enough cattle to support a dung-fuelled digester. Poor families did not own enough cattle, and in fact had previously depended on free dung for fuel and fertilizer. Once the digesters appeared, dung suddenly became valuable and could no longer be collected for free. The poor families ultimately had to rely on inferior, and less sustainable, sources of fuel. Where the poor use residues for fuel, bioenergy projects can make scarce a resource that was previously abundant and free. In contrast, community biogas installations in Karnataka, India, provide digester sludge – a superior fertilizer – to all community members.” [Kartha and Larson, 2000: 53].
It may happen that the seemingly unproductive lands as a common property in rural areas are deliberately misused, for example to be planted with energy-dedicated crops. In reality, there is no unproductive land as far as rural communities common resource is concern. What may be perceived as unproductive land, can be the one for which rural poor rely for their subsistence: free fodder for the cattle, free dead wood for fuel, a spring where water comes up from the ground for the cattle or drinking water and so on. In fact, such a “waste land” may provide rural people, albeit minimally, with food, fodder, fuelwood, construction and artisan materials etc. However, growing energy crops on underutilized lands can reap many benefits (see Environmental Issues).
Unlike the already established commercial energy such as petroleum, an entire flow of biomass resource utilization involves local people in every stage, starting from cultivation, processing, transportation, storage and usage. There is opportunity in each stage for income generation as well as for acquiring certain skills which may be useful for other activities.
Poor rural farmers typically do not have sufficient access to information about market conditions, technical advances, and availability of capital investment. In consequence, they may have weak bargaining power which in turn, results in earning lower profit margins. Therefore, it is imperative for the well-meaning bioenergy project planners that this situation be addressed accordingly. The local institutions and farmers’ cooperatives should be included in the bioenergy project to overcome these shortcomings [Kartha and Larson, 2000: 54].
Environmental Issues
The environmental issues involving biomass production for energy comprise energy and carbon balances, soil quality and fertility, hydrological cycle, and biodiversity [Kartha, 2006].
Although biomass is a source of renewable energy, biomass production sometimes consumes non-renewable energy, usually in the form of fossil fuels. An intensive and large biomass plantation necessitates the use of farm machinery which runs on gasoline or diesel oil. Fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, the production of which consumes fossil fuels, may also be used. In short, the entire cycle of a bioenergy plantation: land preparation, growing, tending, harvesting, processing, storage and transport may require the non-renewable energy input. Therefore, it is necessary to have an energy ratio analysis, i.e. the calculation of the ratio between the energy content of the biomass produced divided by the energy of the fossil fuels consumed to produce the biomass [Kartha, 2006]. Kartha [previous citation] reported that some crops grown in the temperate zones have significantly high energy ratios of 12 to 16, which is obviously favourable. It is expected that similar crops in the tropical regions could achieve even higher energy ratios, since climatic conditions such as rainfall is more abundant resulting in higher yield biomass.
The “self-sufficient energy village” programme (= Desa Mandiri Energi) utilizing Jatropha curcas Linn crops [Hadi, 2008] may well achieve such a high energy ratio since the crops are well suited to grow on degraded lands under harsh conditions [Anon, 2007: 9; Jongschaap et al, 2007: 5-10, 23]. This means that land preparation, cultivating, tending and harvesting need only minimal energy input. However, the energy ratio is lower if the processing of the jatropha seeds for oil is centralized and at a distance from the surrounding plantations, so that collection and delivery of the seeds require significant amount of energy for transport.
The issue of carbon balance is also dependent on the type of the biomass grown and how the energy is generated out of it. Clearly, harvesting energy plant such as fuelwood without replanting is unsustainable and leads to substantial carbon emissions. On the other hand, clearing natural forests, and subsequently replanting them with energy-dedicated plants may result in the net carbon emission equal zero or even positive. The amount of carbon sequestered in the biomass is released during forest clearing, but this deficiency will be compensated (in the long run) by the carbon captured by the new plants. The most favorable condition in terms of carbon balance is when underutilized land is planted with energy crops. In such a case the balance is definitely positive since the land very likely contains less carbon than the planted crops.
The author believes that utilization of biomass for household energy will not threaten either soil quality, soil fertility or hydrological cycle, since the practice is usually less intense compared to land clearing or deforestation for plantation industries. The rural people are essentially wise enough not to completely harvest the whole trees for fuelwood [Sarkar, 2006]. In most cases, they only utilize the branches and twigs, leaving the leaves and other residues littering the ground. In time the leaves and crop residues decompose, hence organic matter and plant nutrients recycle back into the soil. In this case, jatropha is favorable since the leaves, one of the most nutrient-rich of the plant, are not edible and, therefore, avoided by the cattle, thus securing the ground with nutritive materials. Intensive plantation usually needs more water than natural vegetation. Sugarcane for example, although an excellent crop for bioethanol production [Moreira, 2006], is reported to require intensive irrigation, i.e. around 2,200 liters of water for every liter of ethanol produced [Kartha, 2006; de Fraiture, 2008]. The production of ethanol from maize in the US is even water-consuming. For one liter of the ethanol produced, roughly 4,500 liters of water is needed [Orth, 2008: 59]. Therefore, it is important that water requirement of bioenergy crops to be grown be quantified well in advance. Less water-intensive crops are clearly better candidates for bioenergy production. Another potential energy crop is cassava (Mannihot esculenta) [Rosegrant et al, 2006]. Based on his own experience, however, the author of this current paper believes that cassava plantation does not normally generate adequate undergrowth or litter. Hence, such plantation may cause excessive water runoff, with the result that less water will be retained by the soil, upsetting the hydrological cycle.
Biomass energy plantation can have either positive or negative impacts on biodiversity. If the forest or vegetation as a natural habitat is cleared, the ecosystems embedded in it is disrupted or even destroyed. For example, if an underutilized land is planted with jatropha, some species endemic to the land (birds, insects, and other animal varieties) may move to other places, which may not necessarily provide the same ecosystem surroundings. The biodiversity is then disrupted. Furthermore, the jatropha plantation as one energy crop (mono cropping) can act as an incubation area for pests or disease, which can then spread into the surroundings. Bad incidents (uncontrolled growth of destructive trees, extensive spread of fungal disease) caused by such monoculture practice have taken place in several countries: South Africa, Uruguay, and India [Kartha, 2006].
Some parts of the underutilized land dedicated to energy crop should be left in natural vegetation, to serve as “green belts” or sanctuary for the wild species. Further, these parts are essential for rural people subsistence (fuelwood, fruits and tubers, fodder). In this way the biodiversity is preserved, the rural communities still have access to sources of subsistence, all while benefiting for the energy crop.
Concluding Remarks
Biomass is a potential renewable energy source since it is available in nearly every country. It is believed that biomass would still be an important source of household energy, mainly for cooking purposes, in many countries of the developing world in the years ahead. The utilization of biomass for energy purposes is country-specific, or even site-specific, to the extent that it involves the three aspects of sustainable development: economic, social, and environmental.
In view of the conversion technologies available for biomass-based energy, three options are considered most suitable for the rural regions in the developing countries: improved cookstoves, densification, and biogas.
A bioenergy project should be planned and implemented as such that the real needs of the local people are addressed. These needs include access to energy services, income generating activities, and access to rural common properties as sources of subsistence.
An intensive biomass plantation for energy could affect energy and carbon balances, the quality and fertility of soil, as well as the hydrological cycle in a negative manner. Equally, it can also negatively affect the biodiversity, particularly if the plantation is a monoculture.
This paper shows that appropriate management of a bioenergy project can reap many benefits for the rural people in the developing countries, as well as lend support to good sustainable development practices.
Acknowledgements
The socio-economic and environmental issues sections of this paper rely heavily on the work of Kartha and Larson [2000]. Also the author wishes to thank SISEST 2008 committee for accepting this paper.
References
Anonymous, 2001, ‘Biomass: More Than A Traditional Form of Energy’, in Biomass Energy in ASEAN Member Countries, FAO, RWEDP, online: www.rwedp.org/acrobat/asean.pdf, (10 Oct. 2008).
Anonymous, 2006, ‘Chapter 15. Energy for Cooking in Developing Countries’, in World Energy Outlook 2006 (Focus on Key Topics), pp 419-445, online: (accessed 02 Oct. 2008):
www.worldenergyoutlook.org/docs/weo2006/cooking.pdf
Anonymous, 2006a, ‘CDM Cook Stove Project Kupang I. Indonesia’, online: http://dna-cdm.menlh.go.id/Downloads/Stove_Cook_CDM/PDD_StoveCook.CDM.pdf, (13 October 2008).
Anonymous, 2006b, ‘Bioenergy for Sustainable Rural Development’, A UNDP Project Document of the Gov.of the Arab Republic of Egypt, UNDP, New York.
Anonymous, 2007, ‘A media guide to bioenergy', Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP). FAO, Rome.
Anonymous, 2008, ‘Declaration/Summary on Energy and Environment’, Energy and Environment Forum (FOREL), Diponegoro University, Semarang.
Bhattacharya, S.C., 2001, ‘Commercialization options for biomass energy technologies in ESCAP countries’, Background Paper at Regional Seminar on Commercialization of Biomass Technology, 4-8 June 2001, Guangzhou, China.
de Fraiture, C., 2008, ‘Biofuels add to the strain, SciDev.Net, online: www.scidev.net/Opinions/~, , accessed 20 July 2008.
Goldemberg, J., 2000, ‘Chapter 10. Rural Energy in Developing Countries’ in World Energy Assessment: Energy and the Challenge of Sustainability, online (accessed 02 August 2008): www.whrc.org/resources/published_literature/pdf/Holdrenetal/WorldEnergyAssess.00.pdf
Hadi, S.P., 2008, ‘Jalan Panjang Menuju Desa
Mandiri Energi. Studi Kasus Dusun Pagergunung, Kec.Brati, Kab.Grobogan’ (A case study on sufficient-energy-village program in Central Java), proc. National Seminar & Workshop on Energy & Environment, Diponegoro University Press, Semarang. ISBN 978-979-704-605-7.
Herzog, A.V. et al, 2001, ’Renewable Energy Sources’, Energy and Resources Group, RAEL, UC Berkeley, USA, online (accessed 02 August 2008): www.eolss.com.
Holdren, J.P. & Smith, K.R., 2005, ‘Chapter 3. Energy, the Environment and Health’ in World Energy Assessment: Energy and the Challenge of Sustainability, online (accessed 24 August 2008): www.whrc.org/resources/published_literature/pdf/Holdrenetal/WorldEnergyAssess.00.pdf
Jongschaap, R.E.E, et al, 2007, ’Claims and Facts on Jatropha curcas L..Global Jatropha curcas evaluation, breeding and propagation programme’, Report 158, Plant Research International B.V., Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Kamaruddin Abdullah, 2008, ‘Bioconversion Energy Technologies: Catalysts for Bioeconomical Development in the ASEAN Region’, Asian Biotechnology and Development Review, vol 10, no 1 & 2, pp 75-86, 2008.
Kammen, D.M., 2006, ‘Bioenergy in Developing Countries: Experiences and Prospects’, Brief 10 of 12, in Bioenergy and Agriculture: Promises and Challenges, by P. Hazell and R.K. Pachauri (eds.), IFPRI, Washington D.C., USA.
Karekezi, S. & Kithyoma, W., 2006, ‘Bioenergy and the Poor’, Brief 11 of 12, in Bioenergy and Agriculture: Promises and Challenges, by P. Hazell and R.K. Pachauri (eds.), IFPRI, Washington D.C., USA.
Kartha, S., 2006, ‘Environmental Effects of Bioenergy’, Brief 4 of 12, in Bioenergy and Agriculture: Promises and Challenges, by P. Hazell and R.K. Pachauri (eds.), IFPRI, Washington D.C., USA.
Kartha, S. and Larson, E.D., 2000, ‘Bioenergy Primer. Modernised Biomass Energy for Sustainable Development’, Energy and Atmosphere Programme, Bureau for Development Policy, UNDP, New York.
Moreira, J.R., 2006, ‘Brazil’s Experience with Bioenergy’, Brief 8 of 12, in Bioenergy and Agriculture: Promises and Challenges, by P. Hazell and R.K. Pachauri (eds.), IFPRI, Washington D.C., USA.
Orth, M., 2008, ‘We Must Increase Efficiency’, Deutschland (Magazine on Politics, Culture and Business), Societäts-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main, v.E4, n.2, April-May 2008.
Pramudono, B., 2007, ‘Empowering Biomass-based Alternative Energies to Secure National Energy Supply’, Diponegoro University Press, Semarang. ISBN: 979-704-489-0. (in Indonesian).
Qurashi, M.M. & Hussain, T., 2005, ‘Renewable Energy Technologies for Developing Countries. Now and to 2023’, publications of the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO),: isesco.org.ma/english/../Renewable Energy Technologies/Renewable.pdf, (14 August 2008).
Rosegrant et al, 2006, ‘A Closer-look at the Food-versus-Fuel Debate’, in The Promises and Challenges of Biofuels for the Poor in Developing Countries, by J.v. Braun and R.K. Pachauri, IFPRI 2005-2006 Annual Report Essay, IFPRI Washington D.C., USA.
Samson et al 2001, ‘Enhancing Household Biomass Energy Use in the Philippines’, College of Engineering and Agro-Industrial Technology, U.P.Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines.
Sarkar, S., 2006, ‘Indoor Air Pollution and Women Health in the Informal Sector’, Post-doctoral research project, Dinhata College, West Bengal, India.
Smith, K.R., 1994, ‘Health, energy, and greenhouse-gas impacts of biomass combustion in household stoves’, Energy for Sustainable Development, vol 1, no 4, pp 23-29, Nov 1994.
---------------------------------------------------- Read More..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
