Ackom, Emmanuel

Online Research Database In Technology

                       General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.  • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal   If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.     Downloaded from orbit.dtu.dk on: Nov 09, 2017Comparative Assessment of Modern Bioenergy Potential in Thailand & KenyaAckom, EmmanuelPublication date:2015Link back to DTU OrbitCitation (APA):Ackom, E. (2015). Comparative Assessment of Modern Bioenergy Potential in Thailand & Kenya. Poster sessionpresented at Asia Pacific Clean Energy Summit and Expo 2015, Honolulu, Hawaii, United States.Comparative Assessment of Modern Bioenergy Potential in Thailand & Kenya Emmanuel Kofi Ackom Global Network on Energy for Sustainable Development (GNESD), UNEP DTU Partnership, UN City, Technical Univ. of Denmark, Denmark. email: emac@dtu.dk  Introduction:  Bioelectrification from agricultural residues presents an opportunity in the food-energy nexus and help address issues pertaining to food (in)security and modern energy provision especially to rural communities in Asia and Africa.    Bioelectrification  from residues hold good potential for both Thailand and Kenya, however  it seems to have greater potential impact in Kenya compared to Thailand.    Wider uptake in bioelectrification would require additional investments in research, demonstration and deployment.  2015 Asia Pacific Clean Energy Summit, September 24-26, 2015, Honolulu, USA.  Using methods developed by FAO and IEA, this paper estimated per annum residue amounts from Thailand and Kenya's agricultural production. This study applied sustainable extraction of agricultural residues factor for the two countries. Additionally, it estimated the corresponding bioelectricity amount that could be produced.  Globally, 2.7 billion people rely on traditional biomass for  their basic household energy needs (Fig. 1). This is especially the case in South Saharan Africa (SSA) and developing Asia. This paper is a comparative study on Thailand and Kenya (both are GNESD member centre countries).            Key drivers for the increased modern bioenergy interests in  Thailand and Kenya include's:  diversification of energy resources;  reducing national energy imports;  rural income generation; and   reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.  Both Thailand and Kenya are agricultural economies. Thailand is a major exporter of food such as rice, sugar, corn and palm oil, globally. Kenya on the other hand exports tea, coffee and horticultural produce. Debate on the use of food sources for energy generation is still on-going. The utilization therefore of agricultural residue (instead of food materials) for energy generation is a preferred option as it avoids food (in)security issues and other environmental and GHG concerns.  Results and Discussions: There appear to be more agricultural production and hence residue generation in Thailand compared to Kenya (Tables 1 & 2). Method: Our findings show that 10.4 million bone dry tonnes (bdt)/year of residues are potentially available for bioelectricity generation in Thailand whiles for Kenya this is approximately a tenth of Thailand's residues and amounts to 1.2 million bdt/year. Using the range of conversion efficiencies for biogasifiers that are currently available on the market for bioelectricity estimations, these sustainably extracted residues have the potential to generate between 6.7-18 TWh for Thailand (Table 1).  Results and Discussions (contd.): However, the amount of bioelectricity generation from Kenya's residues could potentially satisfy the country's electricity demand to a far greater extent compared to Thailand. For example, up to a third of Kenya's electricity demand of 6.32 TWh/year can be met from agricultural residues alone (Fig. 2).   Whereas, bioelectrification from sustainably derived residues in Thailand, would only satisfy up to 11% of the country's 155 TWh electricity demand per year.   Conclusion: Acknowledgement: Special thanks to the Global Network on Energy for Sustainable Development (GNESD) for supporting this research. Fig. 1. Global bioenergy use globally (current & future)  Due to competing utilization of agricultural residues for animal fodder, bedding, soil nutrient replenishment and other energy applications, only 20% of available residues (sustainable extraction) would be considered for bioelectricity generation in both Thailand and Kenya.  In practice however, ddapho-climatic studies would be required to determine the exact extent to which agricultural residues should be extracted from each soil type as this is geographic and soil/location specific. For Kenya however, the residues could provide between 0.8 - 2.2  TWh/year (Table 2).  These are significantly smaller compared to Thailand.   Objective: The objective of this study was to understand the role that sustainably extracted agricultural residues could play in achieving national demand for electricity in both Thailand and Kenya. Source: http://www.davegtravels.com/ Source: IEA World Energy Outlook, 2014 *Includes traditional use of solid biomass in households  Table 1. Estimated bioelectricity potential rom  agricultural residues in Thailand   Source   Food   (tonnes/  year)   (RPR)    Residue    (dry   tonnes/  year)   Residue.   20%   (dry   tonnes/  year)   Bioelectricity potential    TWh (GJ x 0.28 x efficiency x 10E-6)    Low  High  Maize  3.22E+06  1.5  4.11E+06  8.22E+05  0.6  1.6  Millet  5.39E+04  3.0  1.37E+05  2.75E+05  0.02  0.05  Rice  8.00E+04  1.5  1.02E+05  2.04E+04  0.01  0.04  Sorghum  1.64E+05  2.62  3.65E+05  7.31E+04  0.05  0.14  Wheat  5.12E+05  1.2  5.22E+05  1.04E+05  0.07  0.18  Barley  6.42E+04  1.7  9.28E+04  1.86E+04  0.02  0.04  Sugar cane   bagasse  5.71E+06  0.3  4.28E+05    8.56E+04  0.05  0.13  Total        1.16E+06  0.8  2.15 Table 2. Estimated bioelectricity potential rom  agricultural residues in Kenya   Source   Food   (tonnes/  year)   (RPR)    Residue    (dry   tonnes/  year)   Residue.   20%   (dry   tonnes/  year)   Bioelectricity potential    TWh (GJ x 0.28 x efficiency x 10E-6)     Low  High  Maize  4.45E+06  1.5  5.68E+06  1.14E+06  0.7  2.0  Rice  3.16E+07  1.5  4.03E+07  8.06E+06  5.3  14.0  Sorghum  5.40E+04  2.6  1.20E+05  2.41E+04  0.02  0.05  Sugarcane  6.88E+07  0.3  5.16E+06  1.03E+06  0.6  1.6  Coconut  1.30E+06  0.6  7.01E+05  1.40E+05  0.06  0.2  Coffee  4.90E+04  2.1  8.74E+04  1.75E+04  0.01  0.03  Total        1.04E+07  6.67  17.8 Fig. 2. Bioelectrification from residues in relation to national energy demand per year (year 2012)  

Comparative Assessment of Modern Bioenergy Potential in Thailand &amp; Kenya

http://orbit.dtu.dk/ws/files/123457706/Ackom_Hawaii_24_26_Sept._2015.pdf

Comparative Assessment of Modern Bioenergy Potential in Thailand & Kenya

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Online Research Database In Technology

Comparative Assessment of Modern Bioenergy Potential in Thailand &amp; Kenya

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Online Research Database In Technology

Comparative Assessment of Modern Bioenergy Potential in Thailand & Kenya