Daniel Mulat (PhD) Framework to quantify GHG mitigation & socio-economics benefits of manure biodigesters in East Africa 29/06/2024 Nairobi 2 Agricultural emissions: Poor livestock manure management generate considerable GHG emissions. Energy crisis: Over 2B people, including 900M in sub-Saharan Africa, rely on fuelwood. This contributes to deforestation, indoor air pollution and related health issues (4M deaths annually), costing the global economy US$2.4 trillion. Poor waste management: Inadequate sanitation affects 779 million in sub-Saharan Africa, with substantial solid organic waste mismanagement; manure also carries disease risks 2 Manure Biodigester A multi-dimension solution for a multi-dimension challenge Unsafe & unecological cookingLivestock manure Clean energy Organic fertilizer Converts manure and other organic waste into clean biogas energy and safe organic fertilizer: addresses energy needs, improves health, reduces GHG emissions and promotes sustainable waste recycling THE SOLUTION: Biodigester technology THE CHALLENGE Technical potential: • 150M developing countries Current installation: • 40M+ in China & India • 1M in Asia 100K in SSA Africa Potential for 32M units THE OPPORTUNITY 33 Manure Biodigester Biodigesters in smallholder farms An economical, healthy and environmentally sound solution CGIAR IMPACT AREAS The two products (clean energy and organic fertilizer from Manure Biodigester) address all of CGIAR's impact areas and directly contribute to 7 SDGs Cheaper, new biodigester innovation 44 Manure Biodigester MRV Framework to assess GHG & socio-economic benefits Climate Livelihood Ecosystem Health Gender Education Access to energy Reduction of Kyoto-GHGs: CO2, CH4, N2O Increase of people having access to clean fuels and technology Expenditure savings from the substitution of solid fuel Reduction of forest degradation and localized deforestation Averted DALYs resulting from 5 HAP-related diseases Proportion of time saved for women Reduction of fuel collection time by children that can be used for school Reduction of opportunity cost of time spent on cooking + firewood collection Reduction of short- lived pollutants: BC, OC Reduction of other short-lived climate pollutants Increase/decrease of employment (biogas vs. current jobs in wood fuel value chain) Expenditure savings from the substitution of synthetic fertilizer Agricultural productivity from habitat degradation & combustion of dung as fuel Environmental impacts (e.g., smog, acid rain, freshwater pollution) Reduction of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides due to digestate use Reduction of non- HAP illnesses (burns, physical ailments due to firewood collection) Improved sanitation, pathogen & odor reduction Usage of time saved for productive activities & leisure Shifting of gender norms; men taking on cooking tasks Proportion of time students extend their study time at night Quantified + monetised Not quantified 55 Manure Biodigester MRV Framework to assess GHG & socio-economic benefits Climate Reduction of Kyoto-GHGs: CO2, CH4, N2O Ethiopia: 3.75 tons CO2e yr-1 Kenya: Ongoing 10-20 US$ carbon revenue per ton CO2e yr-1 MRV for GHGs mitigation: 1) Developed digital activity data collection tool & excel spreadsheet to calculate carbon offset using IPCC’s TIER 2 approach) 2) Improving the accuracy of GHG mitigation calculation by direct measurement of (a) Bo that represents manure management system in East Africa and (b) amount of methane leakage from typical biodigesters in East Africa 3) Testing digital biogas meter to increase the integrity for carbon market vs traditional survey method Activities 1 and 2a are completed, while activities 2b and 3 are ongoing 66 Manure Biodigester MRV Framework to assess GHG & socio-economic benefits Climate Reduction of short- lived pollutants: BC, OC Quantified + monetised Not quantified 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 1 10 100 1000 C O (p pm ) PM 2. 5 ug /m 3 CO(ppm) PM2_5(ug/m3) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 C O (p pm ) PM 2. 5 ug /m 3 Time in Hr PM2_5(ug/m3) CO(ppm) 77 Manure Biodigester MRV Framework to assess GHG & socio-economic benefits Livelihood Expenditure savings from the substitution of solid fuel Reduction of opportunity cost of time spent on cooking + firewood collection Increase/decrease of employment (biogas vs. current jobs in wood fuel value chain) Expenditure savings from the substitution of synthetic fertilizer Quantified + monetised Not quantified Cost (in birr) Investment cost 35000 Total cost 35000 Benefit (in birr) Expenditure savings from reduction of dirty fuel (Firewood, Charcoal and Kerosene) with digestate 8096.77 Expenditure savings from reduction of synthetic fertilizer with digestate 2196.48 Toilet connect to a digester - saved cost of toilet construction 376.44 Time saved 3193.75 Total Benefit 13863.44 Discount rate (%) 10 Benefit cost ratio (BCR) 2.01 Net present value (NPV) 70446.43 Discounted Payback period (year) 3.06 Payback period (year) 2.52 Average price of 1kg of firewood=4.56birrr; 1kg charcoal=9.89; 1lit Kerosen=77.70birr; working time paiment for 1hr =8.75birr; 1 USD is 57.3 birr 88 Manure Biodigester MRV Framework to assess GHG & socio-economic benefits Ecosystem Reduction of forest degradation and localized deforestation Agricultural productivity from habitat degradation & combustion of dung as fuel Environmental impacts (e.g., smog, acid rain, freshwater pollution) Reduction of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides due to digestate use Quantified + monetised Not quantified Variables Biogas-users Non-biogas users Reduction P value Mean±SD Mean±SD % Firewood 177.3±48.7 266.4±75.6 33.4 0.000 Charcoal 27.9±17.5 46.4±34.8 39.8 0.000 Kerosene 0 1.1±0.6 100 0.000 Firewood (kg), charcoal (kg) and kerosene (L) consumption trends of household per month Reduced deforestation: >1.5 ton of wood saved per year per digester 99 Manure Biodigester MRV Framework to assess GHG & socio-economic benefits Health Averted DALYs resulting from 5 HAP-related diseases Reduction of non- HAP illnesses (burns, physical ailments due to firewood collection) Improved sanitation, pathogen & odor reduction Daily average PM2.5 concentration in a kitchen exclusively cooking with firewood (red dotted line is WHO limit 25 µg/m³) Daily average PM2.5 concentration in a kitchen exclusively cooking with biogas (red dotted line is WHO limit 25 µg/m³) IA pollutants µg /m3 Only used firewood Only used biogas Reduction (Avg_W - Avg_B) Percent reduction Estimated aDALYs (per year per 10,000 Biogas users Avg_W (13 days=312-hrs) Avg_B (13 days=312- hrs) PM2.5 78.5 9.3 69.2 88% 511 PM10 94.2 9.9 84.3 89% PM1 61.2 8.0 53.2 87% CO 6.9 3.1 3.8 55% CO2 495.8 559.0 -63.2 -13% 1010 Manure Biodigester MRV Framework to assess GHG & socio-economic benefits Health Averted DALYs resulting from 5 HAP-related diseases Reduction of non- HAP illnesses (burns, physical ailments due to firewood collection) Improved sanitation, pathogen & odor reduction Variable Significantly reduced Reduced Not reduced I don’t know Frequency Percent Frequenc y Percent Frequency Percent Frequenc y Percen t Biogas plant contributed to reduce incidence of Eye infection 41 62.1% 23 34.9% 0 0.0% 2 3.0% Biogas plant contributed to reduce incidence of respiratory diseases 42 63.6% 23 34.9% 0 0.0% 1 1.5% Biogas plant contributed to reduce cause of cough 41 62.1% 22 33.3% 0 0.0% 3 4.5% Biogas plant contributed to reduce incidence of fire related injury 35 53.0% 25 37.9% 1 1.5% 5 7.6% Biogas plant contributed to reduce incidence of mosquitos caused diseases 39 59.1% 24 36.4% 1 1.5% 2 3.0% Biogas plant contributed to reduce incidence of nuisance 38 57.6% 25 37.9% 0 0.0% 3 4.5% 1111 Manure Biodigester MRV Framework to assess GHG & socio-economic benefits Health Averted DALYs resulting from 5 HAP-related diseases Reduction of non- HAP illnesses (burns, physical ailments due to firewood collection) Improved sanitation, pathogen & odor reduction Digester design No of households Total Coliform, TC (log10) Fecal Coliform, FC (log10) %reduction after digestion Fresh manure Bio-slurry Fresh manure Bio-slurry FC TC Toilet connected 12 6.28±0.14 5.64±0.1 8 5.65±0.31 4.53±0.65 86.94% 74.95 % Non connected 8 6.22±0.18 5.64±0.1 4 5.50±0.60 1.96±2.11 99.14% 71.69% • The level of pathogens in manure significantly reduced after biodigester treatment, with Fecal coliform decreasing by 87% - 99% and Total coliform by 72-75.0%. • Five non-toilet connected and one toilet-connected digester users had no detectable fecal coliform was found after biodigester treatment. 1212 Manure Biodigester MRV Framework to assess GHG & socio-economic benefits Gender Proportion of time saved for women Usage of time saved for productive activities & leisure Shifting of gender norms; men taking on cooking tasks Quantified + monetised Not quantified Time saved by women from reduced cooking time 69.70 minutes/day 8hrs/week 3%4% 38% 35% 4% 14% 2% Time saved used for Literacy classes Recreation Social works Agricultural Work Study Income generating Activity Focus Group Discussion “My husband can cook tea and coffee, and warm food for himself when I am not at home since it’s easy to light the fire and there is no smoke” 1313 Manure Biodigester Conclusion Manure-fed household biodigesters offer numerous benefits: • Kyoto-GHGs Mitigations: Significant reduction in greenhouse gases with proven carbon market revenue • Multiple Co-Benefits: Include improvements in climate, health, gender equality, livelihood, ecosystem, and education • Next steps: Develop a robust, verifiable, cost-effective, and scalable MRV system to quantify GHG mitigation for carbon finance and the co- benefits with the goal of monetizing them for impact investment 1414 Manure Biodigester Acknowledgments Slide 1 Slide 2 Slide 3 Slide 4 Slide 5 Slide 6 Slide 7 Slide 8 Slide 9 Slide 10 Slide 11 Slide 12 Slide 13 Slide 14