Practical applications of biofuels for the poor - Highlights from the International Conference on Biofuels (Day 2, part 2)
During the fourth session of the International Conference on Biofuels, Simon Trace, chief executive of the NGO Practical Action explained how biofuels can help the poor in very concrete ways, but also warned on circumstances under which they can be less beneficial and risky.
Practical Action is committed to helping the 'really poor' people in the developing world, that is those who live on less than a dollar a day, by using appropriate technologies. The organisation looks at designing concrete solutions for problems such as water and energy access, shelter, transport and food access. It does so by collaborating directly with the communities and by sticking to utilizing local resources, in short, it relies on a strictly bottom-up approach.
In his fascinating presentation, Simon Trace outlined three main reasons as to why the poor should be interested in biofuels: (1) they may offer technical solutions to improved energy access, (2) they may boost rural communities' incomes, and (3) they should be informed about the risks of large-scale projects, which may have negative impacts on their life-world.
Trace set out by stating that not all biofuels are equal, and that the energy and greenhouse gas balance of different fuels must be taken into account. When it comes to their potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, he made the following remark:
Biofuels and energy access
Practical Action then presented a case for biofuels at the local level, in that they can help increase energy access for poor communities - both energy for household use (cooking, heating, cooling) as for transport (crucial in rural and remote communities, where fossil fuels are often extremely expensive or simply not available.)
Almost two billion people in the developing world have no access to modern energy and rely on primitive biomass resources. The sheer physical burden of collecting fuel wood is enormous. Trace stressed that this burden on the body is itself extremely energy inefficient - women and often children spend a lot of their (scarce) calories on walking and carrying raw energy from the gathering site to the home, where the primitive fuel is then burned in highly inefficient ways on open fires. An open fire wastes up to 90 per cent of the useful energy contained in wood or dung, and causes indoor air pollution, a major health burden in the developing world killing up to 1.5 million women and children per year.
But the economic burden is equally big: lack of access to modern energy prevents communities from running schools, hospitals, telecommunications and households in efficient ways - all these are crucial for local development and poverty alleviation.
Biofuels can contribute to solving these problems, in the following ways:
bioenergy :: biofuels :: energy :: sustainability :: biomass :: ethanol :: biodiesel :: biogas :: renewables :: poverty alleviation :: energy access :: rural development :: developing world ::
They can be produced locally, from local crops and in a small-scale, decentralised manner. This is most feasible for biodiesel production, the technology and start-up costs for which are less capital intensive than those for ethanol. In fact, in many instances, straight vegetable oils can be used in diesel engines without any adaptations (that is, in warm climates). The fuel can be used for power generation, for rural transport and for farm machinery, irrigation pumps, and so on.
Simon Trace explained that one of the major causes of poverty is isolation. Improving the access and mobility of the isolated poor paves the way for access to markets, services and opportunities. Practical Action has been running several projects with locally produced biodiesel in Peru, where the fuel is used by remote river communities to power their boats. Their only alternative is extremely expensive diesel fuel, which is often in short supply. The decentrally produced biodiesel is not only much cheaper, but supply chains and scales of the projects can be adapted to precise local needs.
Note that the Biopact is currently writing a project proposal on local biodiesel production in both Congos (Democratic Republic of Congo and the Republic of Congo) and the Central African Republic, where river transport is the true spine of the (informal) economies of these vast but sparsely populated countries. In the DRC alone, around 30 million people (50% of the total population) rely on river transport to move goods and people around on a daily basis. The rivers supply food and agricultural products for the 15 million other people who live in the country's largest cities. If fuel costs increase or fuel supplies are cut off, river transport collapses with dramatic consequences for all citizens. The situation is similar in the Republic of Congo and the CAR. Here too, locally produced biodiesel or straight vegetable oils are less expensive than petro-fuels, which are often simply not available at all. Biofuels can break the economic uncertainties and dependence that come with reliance on imported fossil fuels.
Simon Trace then briefly focused on the famous jatropha projects in Mali, where the Mali Folke Center has been cooperating with the UNCTAD and the UNDP to run local energy platforms. Jatropha biodiesel is used in Lister-Petter diesel generators for electricity production. Even though the technology is appropriate in the case of Malian communities, in other places alternatives like solar and micro-hydro might be more suitable and efficient, Trace thinks. (We doubt this, as solar comes at a cost 10 to 20 times higher than most bioenergy projects based on biogas or locally manufactured biodiesel; micro-hydro can be less costly but only works where conditions permit its application).
Better cooking stoves - which are under development by many organisations - as well as biogas made in anaerobic digesters that ferment local waste streams, offer great potential as well.
In conclusion, when it comes to local energy access, the poor can definitely benefit from biofuels. But each community and its particular environment call for a thorough analysis of which technologies are most suitable - biofuels are only one of the many options, with others being wind, solar and micro-hydro.
The scale of the problem of the lack of energy access in the South is however gigantic (1.7 to 2 billion people are affected). If we want to solve the problem in 10 years time, we need to reach 475,000 people each single day, for ten years in a row...
Income generation
According to Trace, another major advantage of biofuels is their potential to generate income for the poor. This can be accomplished in different ways: (1) by involving rural communities in feedstock production, (2) by employment creation in the sector by large agribusiness, and (3) by redistributing the income or the savings generated on a national level to the poor; states can benefit from lower petroleum import bills when locally produced biofuels are used instead of diesel and gasoline; or they can acquire revenues from biofuel exports; this money can be spent on social services (health, education), on poverty alleviation programs or on infrastructure works that benefit the poor (e.g. rural roads).
Feedstock production
Experience with cash crops such as coffee, tea or cocoa shows that incomes only reach the poor when they acquire some part of ownership in the production chain. This can be achieved when farmers and workers organise in cooperatives or other forms of association. Smallholder production is not allways efficient, and so good extension services must be in place to make sure smallholders can survive and participate in the sector by applying the latest and most efficient farming techniques.
Large scale projects and jobs
Trace said large-scale production of biofuels can benefit local communities because they often offer many jobs - biofuel production is relatively labor intensive. But the logic of agribusiness is to be as efficient as possible, and, depending on the feedstock (perennial or annual), the threat of mechanisation always looms. Moreover, for crops such as sugar cane, much of the generated labor is seasonal. But all in all, large agribusiness must not be diabolised as such when it generates local employment and jobs that offer more perspectives than mere subsistence farming.
Redistributing national savings
When a state decides to produce biofuels to lessen its dependence on imported petroleum, it is of course crucial that the biofuel in question has a clear margin of competitiveness; in other words, it must be consistently and considerably less costly to produce than diesel or gasoline. Currently only Brazil (for ethanol) and Malaysia and Indonesia (biodiesel) can produce below fossil fuel prices (with oil at over US$ 35/40, sugar cane ethanol in Brazil is competitive; with oil at over US$60, palm based biodiesel is feasible).
However, when a national government saves on replacing petroleum by biofuels, then it is not very likely that these savings ever reach the poorest. The benefits are supposed to trickle down to them via social services (health, education), poverty alleviation programs or infrastructure works (rural roads, etc...). But Trace, citing a study by the New Economics Foundation, showed that in many developing countries, of each 100 dollars spent by governments, less than 1 dollar reaches the 10% poorest.
In short, the argument that the state can save money with biofuels and that this may benefit the most vulnerable in society, is theoretically correct, but only strong governance and appropriate policies can ensure that this theoretical potential is actually made tangible. Redistributive policies are difficult to implement in the highly developed world, so it is not to be expected that they will work easily in the lesser developed countries.
Potential negative effects of biofuels on the poor
But biofuels are no panacea, far from it. Simon Trace told the Conference there are several potential disadvantages and risks of biofuels in the developing world.
First of all, the effects of large scale production which does not involve rural households, on food prices must be understood and analysed more thoroughly. Farmers may benefit from increased food prices (and over 70 per cent of sub-Saharan Africa's population consists of farmers), but the urban poor (an ever growing group of people) will have no means do defend themselves against this. These uncertainties must be addressed in assessments of large biofuel projects and mitigated by appropriate policies.
Further, market forces may push interesting biofuel feedstocks that may benefit small farmers and may help restore the environment (such as Jatropha curcas) out of the market, in favor of monocultures that bring few jobs.
Third, there is a serious problem with land tenure in the South. Small farmers often do not formally own the land they work on, and land grabs coming from outside and above (from top-down decisions and powerful companies) may push people off their land. Strong land reform and formal land ownership rules must be implemented. The West must help developing countries with crafting such policies.
Fourth, some biofuel crops contribute to climate change instead of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Obviously, when forests are cleared for energy crops, the biofuels derived from them are not 'green'.
However, in the debate following Trace's presentation, a representative from Malaysia raised the taboo subject of palm trees and their role in the carbon cycle. He stressed that rainforests sequester less carbon than palm trees, and there is some science backing this up. But obviously, the argument is quite absurd, because rainforests are biodiversity hotspots and offer many additional ecoservices. The value of rainforests for mankind is priceless.
Policies crucial
To conclude, Simon Trace stressed the crucial role of policy frameworks. Biofuels can have many advantages - reduced GHG emissions, increased energy security - but in the end, it depends on us to make sure we also realise their potential to benefit the poor.
Policies decide whether the savings on imported fuel costs are redistributed in a fair way; land tenure policies decide whether the poor become owners of their own land and of their productive activities; and policies decide whether biofuels are produced in a socially and environmentally sustainable way.
Jonas Van Den Berg & Laurens Rademakers, Biopact, 2007, cc.
References:
Simon Trace's presentation should be online at the Conference website soon or at the website of Practical Action.
Article continues
Practical Action is committed to helping the 'really poor' people in the developing world, that is those who live on less than a dollar a day, by using appropriate technologies. The organisation looks at designing concrete solutions for problems such as water and energy access, shelter, transport and food access. It does so by collaborating directly with the communities and by sticking to utilizing local resources, in short, it relies on a strictly bottom-up approach.
In his fascinating presentation, Simon Trace outlined three main reasons as to why the poor should be interested in biofuels: (1) they may offer technical solutions to improved energy access, (2) they may boost rural communities' incomes, and (3) they should be informed about the risks of large-scale projects, which may have negative impacts on their life-world.
Trace set out by stating that not all biofuels are equal, and that the energy and greenhouse gas balance of different fuels must be taken into account. When it comes to their potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, he made the following remark:
If one hectare of grassland is converted to sugar cane for ethanol, it may save 12 tonnes of carbon dioxide. But if that same hectare were to be afforested and the trees left to stand, it would save up to 20 tonnes of CO2.Of course, this is a bit misleading, because trees don't offer a liquid fuel, which has many socio-economic benefits (mobility, transport of goods and persons, and its crucial role in local economies). Sugar cane based ethanol offers both: impressive CO2 reductions and a transport fuel. In short, the opportunity costs of different land-use options must be analysed in-depth.
Biofuels and energy access
Practical Action then presented a case for biofuels at the local level, in that they can help increase energy access for poor communities - both energy for household use (cooking, heating, cooling) as for transport (crucial in rural and remote communities, where fossil fuels are often extremely expensive or simply not available.)
Almost two billion people in the developing world have no access to modern energy and rely on primitive biomass resources. The sheer physical burden of collecting fuel wood is enormous. Trace stressed that this burden on the body is itself extremely energy inefficient - women and often children spend a lot of their (scarce) calories on walking and carrying raw energy from the gathering site to the home, where the primitive fuel is then burned in highly inefficient ways on open fires. An open fire wastes up to 90 per cent of the useful energy contained in wood or dung, and causes indoor air pollution, a major health burden in the developing world killing up to 1.5 million women and children per year.
But the economic burden is equally big: lack of access to modern energy prevents communities from running schools, hospitals, telecommunications and households in efficient ways - all these are crucial for local development and poverty alleviation.
Biofuels can contribute to solving these problems, in the following ways:
bioenergy :: biofuels :: energy :: sustainability :: biomass :: ethanol :: biodiesel :: biogas :: renewables :: poverty alleviation :: energy access :: rural development :: developing world ::
They can be produced locally, from local crops and in a small-scale, decentralised manner. This is most feasible for biodiesel production, the technology and start-up costs for which are less capital intensive than those for ethanol. In fact, in many instances, straight vegetable oils can be used in diesel engines without any adaptations (that is, in warm climates). The fuel can be used for power generation, for rural transport and for farm machinery, irrigation pumps, and so on.
Simon Trace explained that one of the major causes of poverty is isolation. Improving the access and mobility of the isolated poor paves the way for access to markets, services and opportunities. Practical Action has been running several projects with locally produced biodiesel in Peru, where the fuel is used by remote river communities to power their boats. Their only alternative is extremely expensive diesel fuel, which is often in short supply. The decentrally produced biodiesel is not only much cheaper, but supply chains and scales of the projects can be adapted to precise local needs.
Note that the Biopact is currently writing a project proposal on local biodiesel production in both Congos (Democratic Republic of Congo and the Republic of Congo) and the Central African Republic, where river transport is the true spine of the (informal) economies of these vast but sparsely populated countries. In the DRC alone, around 30 million people (50% of the total population) rely on river transport to move goods and people around on a daily basis. The rivers supply food and agricultural products for the 15 million other people who live in the country's largest cities. If fuel costs increase or fuel supplies are cut off, river transport collapses with dramatic consequences for all citizens. The situation is similar in the Republic of Congo and the CAR. Here too, locally produced biodiesel or straight vegetable oils are less expensive than petro-fuels, which are often simply not available at all. Biofuels can break the economic uncertainties and dependence that come with reliance on imported fossil fuels.
Simon Trace then briefly focused on the famous jatropha projects in Mali, where the Mali Folke Center has been cooperating with the UNCTAD and the UNDP to run local energy platforms. Jatropha biodiesel is used in Lister-Petter diesel generators for electricity production. Even though the technology is appropriate in the case of Malian communities, in other places alternatives like solar and micro-hydro might be more suitable and efficient, Trace thinks. (We doubt this, as solar comes at a cost 10 to 20 times higher than most bioenergy projects based on biogas or locally manufactured biodiesel; micro-hydro can be less costly but only works where conditions permit its application).
Better cooking stoves - which are under development by many organisations - as well as biogas made in anaerobic digesters that ferment local waste streams, offer great potential as well.
In conclusion, when it comes to local energy access, the poor can definitely benefit from biofuels. But each community and its particular environment call for a thorough analysis of which technologies are most suitable - biofuels are only one of the many options, with others being wind, solar and micro-hydro.
The scale of the problem of the lack of energy access in the South is however gigantic (1.7 to 2 billion people are affected). If we want to solve the problem in 10 years time, we need to reach 475,000 people each single day, for ten years in a row...
Income generation
According to Trace, another major advantage of biofuels is their potential to generate income for the poor. This can be accomplished in different ways: (1) by involving rural communities in feedstock production, (2) by employment creation in the sector by large agribusiness, and (3) by redistributing the income or the savings generated on a national level to the poor; states can benefit from lower petroleum import bills when locally produced biofuels are used instead of diesel and gasoline; or they can acquire revenues from biofuel exports; this money can be spent on social services (health, education), on poverty alleviation programs or on infrastructure works that benefit the poor (e.g. rural roads).
Feedstock production
Experience with cash crops such as coffee, tea or cocoa shows that incomes only reach the poor when they acquire some part of ownership in the production chain. This can be achieved when farmers and workers organise in cooperatives or other forms of association. Smallholder production is not allways efficient, and so good extension services must be in place to make sure smallholders can survive and participate in the sector by applying the latest and most efficient farming techniques.
Large scale projects and jobs
Trace said large-scale production of biofuels can benefit local communities because they often offer many jobs - biofuel production is relatively labor intensive. But the logic of agribusiness is to be as efficient as possible, and, depending on the feedstock (perennial or annual), the threat of mechanisation always looms. Moreover, for crops such as sugar cane, much of the generated labor is seasonal. But all in all, large agribusiness must not be diabolised as such when it generates local employment and jobs that offer more perspectives than mere subsistence farming.
Redistributing national savings
When a state decides to produce biofuels to lessen its dependence on imported petroleum, it is of course crucial that the biofuel in question has a clear margin of competitiveness; in other words, it must be consistently and considerably less costly to produce than diesel or gasoline. Currently only Brazil (for ethanol) and Malaysia and Indonesia (biodiesel) can produce below fossil fuel prices (with oil at over US$ 35/40, sugar cane ethanol in Brazil is competitive; with oil at over US$60, palm based biodiesel is feasible).
However, when a national government saves on replacing petroleum by biofuels, then it is not very likely that these savings ever reach the poorest. The benefits are supposed to trickle down to them via social services (health, education), poverty alleviation programs or infrastructure works (rural roads, etc...). But Trace, citing a study by the New Economics Foundation, showed that in many developing countries, of each 100 dollars spent by governments, less than 1 dollar reaches the 10% poorest.
In short, the argument that the state can save money with biofuels and that this may benefit the most vulnerable in society, is theoretically correct, but only strong governance and appropriate policies can ensure that this theoretical potential is actually made tangible. Redistributive policies are difficult to implement in the highly developed world, so it is not to be expected that they will work easily in the lesser developed countries.
Potential negative effects of biofuels on the poor
But biofuels are no panacea, far from it. Simon Trace told the Conference there are several potential disadvantages and risks of biofuels in the developing world.
First of all, the effects of large scale production which does not involve rural households, on food prices must be understood and analysed more thoroughly. Farmers may benefit from increased food prices (and over 70 per cent of sub-Saharan Africa's population consists of farmers), but the urban poor (an ever growing group of people) will have no means do defend themselves against this. These uncertainties must be addressed in assessments of large biofuel projects and mitigated by appropriate policies.
Further, market forces may push interesting biofuel feedstocks that may benefit small farmers and may help restore the environment (such as Jatropha curcas) out of the market, in favor of monocultures that bring few jobs.
Third, there is a serious problem with land tenure in the South. Small farmers often do not formally own the land they work on, and land grabs coming from outside and above (from top-down decisions and powerful companies) may push people off their land. Strong land reform and formal land ownership rules must be implemented. The West must help developing countries with crafting such policies.
Fourth, some biofuel crops contribute to climate change instead of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Obviously, when forests are cleared for energy crops, the biofuels derived from them are not 'green'.
However, in the debate following Trace's presentation, a representative from Malaysia raised the taboo subject of palm trees and their role in the carbon cycle. He stressed that rainforests sequester less carbon than palm trees, and there is some science backing this up. But obviously, the argument is quite absurd, because rainforests are biodiversity hotspots and offer many additional ecoservices. The value of rainforests for mankind is priceless.
Policies crucial
To conclude, Simon Trace stressed the crucial role of policy frameworks. Biofuels can have many advantages - reduced GHG emissions, increased energy security - but in the end, it depends on us to make sure we also realise their potential to benefit the poor.
Policies decide whether the savings on imported fuel costs are redistributed in a fair way; land tenure policies decide whether the poor become owners of their own land and of their productive activities; and policies decide whether biofuels are produced in a socially and environmentally sustainable way.
Jonas Van Den Berg & Laurens Rademakers, Biopact, 2007, cc.
References:
Simon Trace's presentation should be online at the Conference website soon or at the website of Practical Action.
Article continues
Saturday, July 07, 2007
Researcher: feeding distiller's grains vital to future of livestock operations
According to research by Dr. Jim MacDonald, a Texas Agricultural Experiment Station researcher, there is no reason the cattle-feeding industry there cannot remain strong and viable if it incorporates distiller's grains into rations. Distiller's grains are the residue of corn that is processed into ethanol.
The Experiment Station beef cattle nutritionist says "our concern has been 'Will there be enough feed?' Assuming all the distiller's grains are available for livestock feed, clearly there will be."
But, MacDonald says, the ratio of corn being fed versus distiller's grains could go from 11-to-1 today to 3-to-1 nationally in the next 10 years. So it will become important to find the most optimal ways to feed distiller's grains in such large quantities. Several researchers are working on this (and some projections show this could even make meat less costly in the future; on other applications of biofuel byproducts, see here).
Relatively few distiller's grains are fed in the Southern Plains states now. Some beef producers are reluctant because there's no incentive and no ready supply. However, with the opening of two ethanol plants scheduled later this year in the Panhandle, a steady supply of distiller's grains should be available, making the alternative feedstock more attractive:
biofuels :: energy :: sustainability :: ethanol :: biodiesel :: byproducts :: distiller's grains :: livestock ::
"In the future, as long as it is priced relative to corn, I think there will be a necessity to use this new large pool of feed," MacDonald said. The proportion of corn used from 2002 to 2006 hasn't changed much in the areas of human consumption, high fructose production or exports, he said.
The biggest change has been corn moving from the livestock-feed sector to the fuel-ethanol sector, MacDonald said. Livestock feed has decreased from 60 percent to 55 percent in that time period, while the ethanol fuel sector increased from 8 percent to 14 percent.
However, National Corn Growers Association forecasts show that while the percentage has decreased, the actual bushels of corn produced will continue to increase due to higher yields and acres planted, he said.
Ethanol expansion
The acres of corn harvest is expected to rise from the current 71 million to 80-85 million over the next five years, MacDonald said. Yields are projected to rise from about 150 bushels per acre to almost 180 bushels per acre in the next 10 years.
"We're not sure how big the ethanol industry is going to get, but if every plant being proposed as of now gets built, the Renewable Fuels Association says we'll be producing 12.5 billion gallons of ethanol a year from starch," he said.
In estimating feed availability for livestock, MacDonald assumed as much as 15 billion gallons of ethanol being produced annually. At that rate, 35.5 percent of all corn would be needed for ethanol. This would bring the amount of corn available for feed down from the current 60 percent to 33.5 percent, assuming the other categories remain steady.
Because yields are expected to increase, he said the decrease of actual corn fed will not be as dramatic, going from 6.1 billion bushels in 2006 to 5 billion bushels by 2017.
The beef and dairy industries are in the best position of any of the livestock industry to use distiller's grains, MacDonald said.
Based on the number of plants proposed in the Texas High Plains, he estimated feed yards will need to include 15 percent to 20 percent of distiller's grains in the diet (moisture-free basis) to use all the available supply.
The two Hereford plants, with a combined 200 million gallons of ethanol production per year, will produce 665,000 tons of distiller's grains, he said. This quantity alone would be enough to include 6 percent to 7 percent distiller's grains in the diets of the 5.75 million head of cattle fed in the Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma region.
If a proportion higher than 20 percent were included into area feed yard and dairy rations, distiller's grains will need to be railed in from the Midwest, he said.
Growth of the ethanol industry in the Corn Belt has created a greater demand for corn in that area, MacDonald said. However, they now have a large surplus distiller's grains. That could make them cheaper to rail into Texas than whole corn.
"The only thing that keeps this all in balance is our ability to utilize the distiller's grains," MacDonald said. "We still have to go through the learning curve of how to feed them."
In the tri-state area, distiller's grains would be mixed with steam-flaked corn. This is different from in the Midwest, where dry-rolled corn is fed, he said.
Several studies are under way to see how to maximize the use of distiller's grains in the feed yard situation, MacDonald said. Those results should be available later this summer.
Picture: Tons of distiller’s dried grains being held in storage at a Midwest ethanol plant. Credit: Agricultural Research Service.
References:
Eurekalert: Researcher: Feeding distiller's grains vital to future of livestock operation success - July 6, 2007.
Article continues
posted by Biopact team at 3:39 PM 0 comments links to this post