Wate ter r qu quan antity tity an and d qu quality ality implicatio implica tion n of of bio biofue fuel pr prod oduc uctio tion: n: A A case ca se stu study dy of of t the he Khlon Khlong Phlo Phlo Wate tersh shed ed in in Tha hail ilan and d Prof. MUKAND S. BABEL Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Thailand and Kyoto University (KU), Japan msbabel@ait.asia and msbabel@gmail.com
What is Biofuel? o Biofuels: solid, liquid or gaseous fuels derived from organic matter/biomass o Biofuels: primary and secondary o Primary: fuel wood in unprocessed form used for heating, cooking or electricity production o Secondary: bioethanol and biodiesel produced by processing biomass and used in vehicles and various industrial processes o Secondary biofuels categorized: first, second and third generation based on type of processing technology, type of feedstock o or their level of development 2
What is Biofuel? 3 (Dragone et al., 2010 modified from Nigam and Singh, 2010)
Why Biofuels? o Biofuels are promoted by many countries (USA, Brazil, China, India, Thailand, Malaysia etc.) to: cut down fossil fuel consumption, o decrease oil imports, o reduce greenhouse gas emission, and o reduce the poverty level of rural o communities. 4
Bio-ethanol production statistics Energy share in Bio-ethanol production gasoline (million litres) type fuel use (%) Country 2009-11 2009-2011 2021 2021 average a average a United States 47,617 82,610 5.4 10.9 Brazil 25,331 51,305 47.1 64.3 China 8,094 10,058 1.8 1.3 EU27 6,424 15,747 2.7 8.3 India 1,976 4,194 Canada 1,565 1,992 2.6 3.4 Thailand 777 2,102 Japan 102 104 Rest of the world 6,333 12,290 Total 98,219 180,402 5.9 10.8 Source: OECD/FAO (2012); a estimated value 5
Bio-ethanol production statistics Source: OECD/FAO (2012); Bnl means Billion Liters Main producers: USA, Brazil, EU & in developing countries: China and India 6
Bio-diesel production statistics Biodiesel production Energy share in diesel (million litres) type fuel use (%) Country 2009-11 2009-11 2021 2021 average a average a EU27 10,436 19,864 5.1 8.5 United States 2,834 5,083 0.9 1.5 Australia 641 727 3.1 3.1 Argentina 2,231 4,204 3.2 4 Brazil 2,015 3,205 4 4.6 Thailand 664 1,339 Malaysia 563 956 India 330 1,297 Columbia 431 917 Canada 147 552 0.7 1.6 Rest of the world 1,030 3,451 Total 21,322 41,595 2.5 3.8 Source: OECD/FAO (2012); a estimated value 7
Bio-diesel production statistics Source: OECD/FAO (2012); Bnl means Billion Liters Main producer: EU & other players: Argentina, USA, Brazil, Thailand and Indonesia 8
Biofuels production by 2021 Source: OECD/FAO (2012) Ethanol: Apart from USA, Brazil & EU, China, India and Thailand are expected to contribute to world production by 2-3% each by 2021 9
Food/feed and biofuel use Source: OECD/FAO (2012) o Expanding biofuel sector absorbs larger share of crop production 10
Land-use change and Biofuels 11
Biofuel policies in Thailand o Plans to increase the share of renewable energy in the total energy consumption from 0.5% in 2002 to 20.3% (4.1% from biofuel) by 2022 o Plans of expanding the oil palm land cover to 1.6 million ha by 2023 (Siriwardhana et al., 2009). o Orchard replacement by oil palm for biofuel already happening in the northern, northeastern, eastern and southern regions 12
Rationale Biofuel “as an alternative to fossil fuel” o 57 billion L to 221 billion L in 2021 o Thailand: 5 billion L by 2022 o Land use change for biofuel o production Impact on water resources and the o aquatic environment, esp. nutrient cycle and water quality leading to eutrophication Before After Severe impacts on hydrological o processes but the quantification is complex Need of scientific assessment of o regional feedstock production implication for sustainability 13
Objectives Analyze the potential impact of land use change due to biofuel production on the hydrology and water quality of watershed Specific objectives: Estimate water footprints of biofuel and o biofuel energy Evaluate impact on annual and seasonal o water balance Quantify impact on water quality o 14
Study Area Location: o Khlong Prasae o Rayong o 12 0 57’ -13 0 10’N o 101 0 35’ -101 0 45’E Area: 202.8 km 2 Rainfall: 1,734 mm Temp.: 27 to 31 0 Humidity: 69 to 83% Elevation: 13 to 72 m msl Land use: Agri. (66%) Forest (33%) Soils: S – Cl - L S – L Khlong Phlo Watershed 15
Water footprint: Methodology Step 1: Water footprint of crops (WF CP ) Effective Rainfall Climatic Parameters Reference crop ET Crop Coefficient Green WF CP Crop ET Irrigation requirement Blue WF CP Pollutant emission Grey WF CP Agreed water quality Step 2: Water footprint of biofuel (WF B ) Green WF CP Green WF B Biofuel Blue WF CP Blue WF B conversion rate Grey WF CP Grey WF B Step 3: Water footprint of biofuel energy (WF BE ) Green WF B Green WF BE Energy Blue WF BE Blue WF B of biofuel Grey WF B Grey WF BE 16
Formulae used for water footprint (WF) Green WF = min (Evapotranspiration, Effective Rain) Blue WF = Irrigation requirement Grey WF = max (Pollutant released/Permissible limit) WF CP = Water use for crop production / crop yield WF B = WF CP / biofuel conversion rate WF BE = WF B / energy per liter biofuel Energy /L biofuel = HHV X density HHV: higher heating value 17
Impact on water balance and water quality: Methodology (SWAT), Pre-processing Phase 1 4 2 & & 5 3 7 6 & & & & 10 8 & & 9 11 & & 14 12 & & 13 & & 15 & Drainage Sub-watersheds DEM Hydrological Response Units Land use Soil 18
Impact on water balance and water quality: Methodology (SWAT), Processing Phase Meteorological data Management data Hydrological Response Units Model calibration Model evaluation and validation Land use change Scenarios simulation scenarios Evaluation • Water balance • Water quality 19
Data collected Meteorological data: Data Frequen uency Perio iod Source ce Rainfall Daily 1984-2006 RID/TMD Temperature Daily 1984-2006 TMD Wind speed Daily 1984-2006 TMD Relative Humidity Daily 1984-2006 TMD Sunshine duration Daily 1984-2006 TMD Discharge Daily 1984-2006 RID Sediment load Daily 1997-2005 RID Spatial data: Data Type Source ce DEM 30 m resolution http://www.gdem.aster. or.jp Land use map 1:25,000 m LDD Soil map 1:100,000 m LDD Drainage map RID Additional data: Data Source ce Soil properties LDD, www.iiasa.ac.at Fertilizer use DOA, www.fao.org/ag/agl/fertistat/fst.fubc.en.asap Cropping pattern Farmers , DOA of Thailand 20
Land use (2006) Area Code Land Use Perce cent 2 km km 3 Rice 1.82 0.90 8 Cashew Nut 4.84 2.39 9 Cassava 9.88 4.87 21 Evergreen Forest 66.36 32.73 27 Deciduous Forest 0.05 0.03 41 Institutional Land 0.51 0.25 43 Water bodies 0.89 0.44 47 Residential 0.28 0.14 57 Wet Land 0.01 0.01 64 Orchard 27.96 13.79 67 Oil Palm 1.12 0.55 70 Rubber 85.12 41.98 82 Range grass 1.83 0.90 89 Sugarcane 2.11 1.04 202.80 100.00 Total 21
Land use change scenarios A. Oil Palm expansion (Biodiesel) Scenario A5 Scenario A1 Scenario A2 Scenario A3 Scenario A4 - Orchard + - Orchard to Oil - Rubber to Oil - Orchard + Rubber to Oil - Forest to Oil Palm Rubber+ Forest to Palm Palm Palm Oil Palm - Oil Palm <1 to - Oil Palm <1 to - Oil Palm <1 to - Oil Palm < 1 to 59% 33% - Oil Palm <1 to 17% 43% 91% B. Cassava expansion (Bio-ethanol) Scenario B5 Scenario B1 Scenario B2 Scenario B3 Scenario B4 - Orchard + - Orchard to - Rubber to - Orchard + Rubber to - Forest to Cassava Rubber+ Forest to Cassava Cassava Cassava Cassava - Cassava 5 to 38% - Cassava 5 to 21% - Cassava 5 to 47% - Cassava 5 to 63% - Cassava 5 to 96% 22
Land use change scenarios C. Sugarcane expansion (Bio-ethanol) Scenario C5 Scenario C1 Scenario C2 Scenario C4 Scenario C3 - Orchard + -Orchard to - Rubber to - Forest to - Orchard + Rubber to Rubber+ Forest to Sugarcane Sugarcane Sugarcane Sugarcane Sugarcane - Sugarcane 1 to - Sugarcane 1 to - Sugarcane 1 to - Sugarcane 1 to 59% - Sugarcane 1 to 17% 43% 34% 92% D. Combined expansion Scenario D1 Scenario D2 Scenario D3 Scenario D4 - Orchard to Oil Palm + - Rubber to Oil Palm + - Orchard to Cassava + - Rubber to Cassava + Cassava Cassava Sugarcane Sugarcane 23
Results and Discussion
Water footprint of crops (WF CP ) Oil Palm Cassava Sugarcane 85 m 3 /t 42 m 3 /t 12 m 3 /t 420 m 3 /t 106 m 3 /t 80 m 3 /t 775 m 3 /t 306 m 3 /t 142 m 3 /t o Sugarcane has low water footprint due to higher yield o WF CP sensitive to yield 25
Water footprint of biofuel (WF B ) Oil Palm Cassava Sugarcane 6000 800 Grey WF L of Grey water/L of biofuel 700 L of water/ L of biofuel 5000 Blue WF 600 Green WF 4000 500 3000 400 300 2000 200 1000 100 0 0 Oil Palm Cassava Sugarcane 5% 10% 15% 20% Pollutant Loading to surface water o 5800 L for oil palm = 1 L of biodiesel o 2500 L for cassava and 3400L for sugarcane = 1 L of bio-ethanol o Grey water contributes 5-17% for cassava, 3-9% for sugarcane and 3-12% for oil palm 26
Recommend
More recommend
