Revision as of 15:15, 23 March 2009 by
***** (***** | *****)This guide to planning is intended to serve agricultural extension officers as a comprehensive tool for arriving at decisions concerning the suitability of locations for family-sized biogas plants. The detailed planning outline has a data column for entering the gathered information and a rating column for noting the results of evaluation.
Evaluation criteria are:
- + Siting condition are favorable
-
- o Siting condition are unfavorable, but
- a) compensable by project activities
- b) not serious enough to cause ultimate failure
- - Siting condition are not satisfactory
Despite its detailed nature, this planning guide is only a framework within which the extension officer should proceed to conduct a careful investigation and give due consideration, however subjectively, to the individual conditions in order to arrive at a locally practical solution. By no means is this planning guide intended to relieve the agricultural extension officer of the responsibility to thoroughly familiarize himself with the on-the-spot situation and to judge the overall value of a given location on the basis of the knowledge thus gained.
Detailed planning guide for biogas plants
Initial situation
|
|
Data
|
Rating
|
| Addresses/project characterization
Plant acronym:
Address of operator/customer:
Place/region/country:
Indigenous proj. org./executing org.:
Extension officer/advisor:
General user data
Household structure and number of persons:
User's economic situation:
Crops: types, areas, manner of cultivation:
Non-agricultural activity:
Household/farm income:
Cultural and social characteristics of user:
Problems leading to the "biogas approach"
Energy-supply bottlenecks:
Workload for prior source of energy:
Poor soil structure/yields:
Erosion/deforestation:
Poor hygiene and other factors:
Objectives of the measure "biogas plant"
User interests:
Project interests:
Other interests:
|
|
|
Natural / Agricultural conditions
|
|
Data
|
Rating
|
| Natural conditions
Mean annual temperature:
Seasonal fluctuations:
Diurnal variation:
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Subsoil
Type of soil:
Groundwater table, potable water catchment area:
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Water conditions
Climatic zone:
Annual precipitation:
Dry season (months):
Distance to source of water:
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Livestock inventory (useful for biogas production)
Animals: kind and quantity:
Type of stable:
Use of dung:
Persons responsible for animals:
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Vegetable waste (useful for biogas production)
Types and quantities:
Prior use:
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Fertilization
Customary types and quantities of fertilizer/areas fertilized:
Organic fertilizer familiar/in use:
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Potential sites for biogas plant
Combined stable/biogas plant possible:
Distance between biogas plant and livestock stable:
Distance between biogas plant and place of gas consumption:
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Overall rating 1
|
|
- o +
|
Balancing the energy demand with the biogas production
|
|
Data
|
Rating
|
| Prior energy supply
Uses, source of energy, consumption:
- Anticipated biogas demand (kwh/day or l/d)
- for cooking:
- for lighting:
- for cooling:
- for engines:
- Total gas demand
- a) percentage that must be provided by the biogas plant:
- b) desired demand coverage:
Available biomass (kg/d) and potential gas production (l/d)
- from animal husbandry
- pigs:
- poultry:
- cattle:
- Night soil
-
- Vegetable waste (quantities and potential gas yield)
- 1.
- 2.
- Totals
- biomass and potential gas production
- a) easy to procure:
- b) less easy to procure:
Balancing
Gas production clearly greater than gas demand
-> positive rating (+)
Gas demand larger than gas production
-> negative rating (-); but review of results in order regarding:
a) possible reduction of gas demand by the following measures
->
b) possible increase in biogas production by the following measures
->
If the measures take hold:
-> qualified positive rating for the plant location (o)
If the measures do not take hold:
-> site rating remains negative (-)
|
|
|
| Overall rating 2
|
|
- o +
|
Plant Design and Construction
|
|
Data
|
Rating
|
| Selection of plant design
Locally customary type of plant:
Arguments in favor of floating-drum plant:
Arguments in favor of fixe-dome plant:
Arguments in favor of other plant(s):
Type of plant chosen:
Selection of site
Availability of building materials
Bricks/blocks/stone:
Cement:
Metal:
Sand:
Piping/fittings:
Miscellaneous:
Availability of gas appliances
Cookers:
Lamps:
...
...
|
|
|
| Overall rating 3
|
|
- o +
|
Plant operation / maintenance / repair
|
|
Data
|
Rating
|
| Assessment of plant operation
Incidental work:
Work expenditure in h:
Persons responsible:
Rating with regard to anticipated implementation:
|
|
- o +
|
| Plant maintenance
Maintenance-intensive components:
Maintenance work by user:
Maintenance work by external assistance:
Rating with regard too anticipated implementation:
|
|
- o +
|
| Plant repair
Components liable to need repair:
Repairs that can be made by the user:
Repairs requiring external assistance:
Requisite materials and spare parts:
Rating with regard to expected repair services:
|
|
- o +
|
| Overall rating 4
|
|
- o +
|
Economic analysis
|
|
Data
|
Rating
|
| Time-expenditure accounting
Time saved with biogas plant
Time lost due to biogas plant
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Microeconomic analysis
Initial investment:
Cost of operation/maintenance/repair:
Return on investment: energy, fertilizer, otherwise:
Payback time (static):
Productiveness (static):
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Quality factors, useful socioeconomic effects and costs
Useful effects: hygiene, autonomous energy, better lighting, better working conditions, prestige:
Drawbacks: need to handle night soil, negative social impact:
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Overall rating 5
|
|
- o +
|
Social acceptance and potential for dissemination
|
|
Data
|
Rating
|
| Anticipated acceptance
Participation in planning and construction
Integration into agricultural setting:
Integration into household:
Sociocultural acceptance:
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Establishing a dissemination strategy
Conditions for and chances of the professional-craftsman approach:
Conditions for and chances of the self-help oriented approach:
|
|
- o +
- o +
|
| General conditions for dissemination
Project-executing organization and its staffing:
orgnaizational structure:
interest and prior experience in biogas technology:
Regional infrastructure for
transportation:
communication:
material procurement:
Craftsman involvement, i.e.
which acitivities:
minimum qualifications:
tools and machines:
Training for engineers, craftsman and users:
Proprietary capital, subsidy/credit requirement on the part of
user:
craftsmen:
Rating:
|
|
- o +
|
| Overall rating 6
|
|
- o +
|
Summarization
Siting conditions
|
|
No.
|
Rating
|
| Natural/agricultural conditions
|
1.
|
- o +
|
| Balancing the energy demand and the biogas production
|
2.
|
- o +
|
| Plant design and construction
|
3.
|
- o +
|
| Plant operation/maintenance/repair
|
4.
|
- o +
|
| Economic analysis
|
5.
|
- o +
|
| Social acceptance and potential for dissemination
|
6.
|
- o +
|
Overall rating of siting conditions
Back to "Biogas Portal"
