February 2014 - United Nations University

February 2014

The economic and social benefits of biogas generation, solid fuel product, fertiliser, soil amendment and new livelihoods from wastewater management will be a financial incentive to collect and treat waste, forming the basis of a sustainable and affordable wastewater management framework.

Conserve and Protect the Environment Improve water quality Reduce dependency on forests Improve quality of life Stimulate economic growth Finance sanitation coverage

Rationale Uganda is actively reducing environmental pollution Untreated human waste is a significant contributor to

this pollution Human wellbeing and economic growth are suffering

from lack of sanitation services, particularly in rural Uganda

Indoor air quality is a significant source of morbidity Deforestation is threatening environmental integrity Improved sanitation saves lives, particularly of new

mothers and children

GCC Initiative: Context Lack of appropriate treatment of human waste is

contributing to morbidity and mortality Economic benefits of nutrient recycling, biogas

generation, soil amendment and new livelihoods from wastewater management can provide a financial incentive

Leapfrog traditional approaches by combining wastewater collection services with cutting edge technologies for biogas production and nutrient recycling

From Waste to Wealth Feasibility assessment of anaerobic digestion

Training in biomethane potential assay protocol Baseline survey and understanding potential socio-

cultural facilitators and barriers Business model approved by multi-stakeholder

representatives Understanding of distribution of costs and benefits Engaged participants and potential market

Biogas

Cooking Lighting

Compression

Convert to Electricity

Drying to Solid Fuel

Bio-Slurry Residual

Anaerobic Digestion to get Value from Waste

Organic Wastes

Biodigester

Anaerobic Digestion to get Value from Waste Biogas

Cooking Lighting

Compression



Bio-Slurry Residual

Organic Wastes

Biodigester


Organic Wastes

Biodigester

Reduced water related illness

Reduced drinking treatment water

costs

Reduced water pollution

Skilled labor jobs, R&D

Profit Improved sanitation

Private & research sector growth


Cooking Lighting

Compression



Reduced physical burden


costs

Reduced use

Saved income (domestic use)

Decreased land degradation

Income for sold gas

Women time for economic labor

Increased human productivity

Reduced food, water and respiritory diseases

Forest conservation

Improved water quality & quantity



Bio-Slurry Residual


Bio-Slurry Residual

Reduced chemical pollution

Increased crop production

Increased soil production

Income for sold fertilizer

Reduced pathogens &

diseases

Increased nutrition

Decreased smell and air pollution

Income for crops

Reduced physical burden

Increased human productivity



Bio-Slurry Residual


costs

Skilled labour jobs

Time for economic labour

Improved wellbeing

Income from fuel

Saved income

Reduced wood use

Decreased land degradation

Forest conservation

Improved water quality & quantity

Accomplishments to Date

Training of 5 scientists in Entebbe and Kampala Donation of equipment for BMP testing

Building capacity

What exists? Identification of actors Lessons learned Next steps

Baseline assessment

Development of 5 scenarios of implementation of biogas production

Scenarios

Costs / benefits of AD Draft national framework and delivery structure Case study

Draft of framework

A Presentation of the Waste to Wealth Baseline Survey Findings

Objectives of the study • Identify the actors involved in converting waste to

wealth (location, activities they engage in) 1

• Conduct a SWOT analysis 2

• Identify best practices and the most feasible waste to wealth options 3

• Establish the next steps to support scale up of the waste to wealth concept in Uganda 4

Methodology Literature review (national & international) Data collection tool development Key informant interviews

Heifer International, NEMA, NWSC, Town Councils with CDM projects, researchers focusing on anaerobic digestion

Field visits, observations and interviews in Central, Eastern and Northern Uganda

Collection and analysis of materials from central and Northern Uganda

Findings: Biogas Promotion Major actor is Uganda Domestic Biogas Project in

partnership with: CARITAS Uganda in Northern Uganda TALLY and VI Agroforestry in the central region Ankole Private Sector Foundation, Uganda Cooperative

Primaries Ltd and Joint Efforts to Save the Environment (JESE) in western Uganda

Tororo Local Government, Samaritan Purse, TEDDO, Young Women Christian Association, NAADS and Model Village in Eastern Uganda

Findings: Other Actors World Vision Uganda Eco-Fuel Uganda and Centre for Participatory

Research and Development (briquette manufacturing) Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Makerere in partnership with Department of Water and Sanitation in Developing countries (industrial fuel as a replacement for traditional biomass)

Findings: Projects Visited 10 biogas plants 1 briquette

initiative 2 biogas role stoves 1 biogas &

briquettes 1 biowaste

electricity plant

Findings: Feedstocks Even though farmers

are trained on the use of human excreta as an additional feedstock material in the production of biogas, acceptability is limited by their socio-cultural discourse

No functioning biogas system utilises human excreta alone

Marketability of Waste to wealth Concept • Market readily available • Scale up limited by high initial investments • 4m3 biogas plant costs UGX 1.58M (USD630)

Social Cultural Acceptance • Low if users have to mix human excreta in the digester • Biogas toilet has been embraced in a few areas in Soroti,

Amuria and Moroto

IEC Materials • Limited availability of IEC materials (general information

and cost) in Central and Northen Uganda • Language limited to English and too lengthy and wordy

Technology and Capacity of the systems • Fixed dome is the predominant technology option • Common capacities include 4m3 (15% usage), 6m3

(80% usage) and 13m3 (5% usage) • Capacity dependent on the number of livestock

available and financial capacity of the potential user

• Low usage of the 4m3 despite the low cost associated with it is due to the limited energy produced

SWOT analysis Strengths Weaknesses Biogas systems sustainable

under dry and wet conditions Bio-slurry source of fertiliser

for agriculture No smoke associated with

biogas (eliminate in-door air pollution)

Biogas saves time and income compared to traditional biomass

Provides a cheaper alternative source of energy

Lack of livestock to provide the cow dung needed

Lack of technical knowledge to operate the system

Accessories used for cooking and lighting are not readily available

High initial investment cost Low O&M by the communities Limited IEC materials Land requirements/restrictions

in peri-urban areas

SWOT analysis Opportunities Threats Potential source of electricity

for charging phones and cooling milk

Employment opportunities Production of biogas for

commercial use Provision of better drying

mechanisms for bio-slurry and use for fertilizer

Poor community perception of biogas being unhygienic

Disposal of bio slurry has high labour requirements

High initial investment cost Preference of solar systems as

the daily demand in terms of follow up and labour are minimal

Initial Investment costs

Plant Size Estimated cost in UGX

4m3 1,580,000- 1,680,000

6m3 1,930,000- 2,030,000

9m3 2,190,000- 2,290,000

13m3 2,630,000- 2,730,000

Next Steps for Scaling Up Awareness raising and sensitization, particularly for

systems using faeces as feedstock material Support in the development of low-cost digester design Support to other initiatives, e.g. production of fuel

briquettes Provision of incentives such as micro-finance loans to

finance anaerobic digestion construction Target schools (both primary and secondary) and

tertiary institutions as well as prisons

Next Steps for Scaling Up Training of a critical mass of biogas experts at various

levels Technician level Certificate level Advanced qualification e.g. Masters and PhD level

Documentation and dissemination of good practices

Urban Informal settlement Informal settlement with offsite AD Rural Institutional Institutional with additional feedstocks

Value Products from Anaerobic Digestion Biogas Bio-Slurry 60% methane Directly burned as a cooking

or lighting source Utilized at larger scale in

Combined Heat and Power, converted to electricity and heat

Can be compressed, bottled and sold as a fuel commodity

Fertilizer source - Current $20-40 /tonne dried

($ 0.018 /lb) Solid Fuel ~ $0.06 /lb

The Value of Bio-Slurry as Solid Fuel

Every lb of dried bio-slurry offsets 0.5 lb of

charcoal

Charcoal Calorific Value – 12,800 btu/lb Marketplace Charcoal

pricing: $0.12 – 0.15 /lb

Dried Bio-Slurry Calorific Value – 6,800

btu/lb Target Dried Biosolids:

$0.06 /lb

Urban Scenario Biogas

548 kW Utilize in plant

Dry cake 2892 kg/d Coal offset or

fertilizer $115 /d for

Fertilizer

Informal Settlement Scenario Biogas

14 kW Local use in

Community Dry cake

265 lb/day $17 /day as a

charcoal offset

Informal settlement – Offsite AD Scenario Biogas

55 kW Potential for

compression for sale

$42/day Dry Cake

1,060 lb/day $68 /day as a

charcoal offset

Rural Scenario Biogas

28 kW Supply to local

clinic Pay for use

Dry Cake 530 lb/day $64 /day as a

charcoal offset

Institutional Scenario Biogas

6 kW Local use Potential to offset

electricity use Dry Cake

106 lb/day $7 /day as a

charcoal offset

Rural with additional feedstock - Kiyindi Biogas

101 kW Utilize in Clinic +

pay for use Potential to

Compress Dry Cake

835 lb/day $189 /day charcoal

offset

5

1.1

2.9

0.7 0.99

4.9

0.6 0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Urban Informalsettlement

Informalsettlement -Offsite AD

Rural Rural -additionalfeedstock

Institutional Institutional- Offsettingelectricity

Payb

ack

peri

ods

(yea

rs)

Cap

ital

inve

stm

ent o

r Ann

ual R

even

ue

(USD

$)

Capital (USD$) Annual Revenue (USD $) Payback (years)

AD Scenarios Evaluated

42

National supporting framework Delivery structure Next steps

Ideal AD Technology Delivery Structure

Customer

Local information center to determine AD plant

feasibility

Digester financing

Feasible Infeasible

Alternative option

Digester construction

After sales service

Financial Institutions

Gov. AD funding NGO funding

R & D

National Advisory Committee

NGO, CBO support

Private sector led education and marketing

Gov. funding

NGO funding

Manufacture

BDS Standards Body

Installer

Custom mason

Manufacture

Custom mason

Regional Coordinating Committees G

over

nanc

e Fi

nanc

ing

Impl

emen

tatio

n

Ideal AD Technology Delivery Structure

Customer

Local information center to determine AD plant

feasibility

Digester financing

Feasible Infeasible

Alternative option

Digester construction

After sales service

Financial Institutions

Gov. AD funding NGO funding

R & D

National Advisory Committee

NGO, CBO support

Private sector led education and marketing

Gov. funding

NGO funding

Manufacture

BDS Standards Body

Installer

Custom mason

Manufacture

Custom mason

Regional Coordinating Committees G

over

nanc

e Fi

nanc

ing

Impl

emen

tatio

n

Next Steps and Workshop Objectives

Finalising the national framework strategy

Identifying lead organisations and individuals

Developing a multi-stakeholder implementation strategy (Phase II)

Governance Finance Implementation

Framework strengths Gaps and needs Opportunities

Key considerations Key objectives

Phase II - Key Considerations Environmental protection Wealth creation Human health and wellbeing Appropriate and sustainable solutions Public sector leadership in large urban centres Recognition that solutions require financial offsets to

be sustainable, especially in informal settlements and other under-resourced areas

Phase II – Possible Objectives Build evidence of costs and benefits (social and economic)

of utilisation of AD for sanitation coverage scale up through pilots Large urban (value added?) Informal settlement * complex (value added?) Rural town * increasing Rural small settlement* Institution – prison ** receptive Institution – school (?value added?)

Demonstrate sustainable financing model(s) – financial viability Subsidies Microfinance PPPs Reinvestment of AD profit for O&M; service expansion*

Phase II – Possible Objectives

Develop and showcase ability to market AD products Build demand and social acceptance Education and outreach materials

Build national capacity to develop technical capacity

required for AD scale out Certification curriculum development and approval Vocational training for prisoner re-integration

To be assigned

Do you agree with draft objectives? What other objectives would you include? What are priority pilot/demonstration types? What are key challenges? Who is missing from the discussion?

Documents

February 2014 - United Nations University