agricultural waste-15 khanh day1 session5

7/31/2019 Agricultural Waste-15 Khanh Day1 Session5

1/15

Management of Agricultural

Waste and potential for co-benefits

ang an

Nguyen Hong Thanh

n s ry o gr cu ura an rura eve opmen

Haiphong, July 2010

. urren s a us oagricultural wastemana ement in

Vietnam2. Agricultural waste

managemenpolicies

-. benefit fromagricultural wastemanagement

4. Recommendation


2/15

GDP (gross domestic

production) 22,09 % (2008),20 % (2009)

About 70 percent of thepopulation live in rural villages

agriculture

Total rice area was about 7,3million ha, and rice productionwas about 38,7 million tons,estimated in 2009 is about 39,2

million tons.

Vietnam is one of the topcountries export rice in the

rop res ue agricultural wastes - after harvesting rice straw,

, , ,cassava stem, coconut shell and leaves, etc,

a ro-industrial residues i.e. residues that areresulted from following processing on rice husks,biogases, cassava peels, peanut shells, coffee

,

Hazardous wastes: excess fertilizers and

Animals wastes


3/15

Current status and problems

of utilization of Crop residues

rop res ue s over

million tons per year

Organic source byburning and burying

Cattle feed

Animal-pen padding

Mushroomproduction

oo ng

Utensil making

Current status and problems of

utilization of Crop residues

The comprehensive utilization rate ofcrop residue is rather low, a large Sources Million tons

num er o em was a an one orunreasonably usedPaddy straw 61.9

Rice husk 5.6

Environmental issues: water pollution,air pollution, global warming, negative

Maize husk 4.8

Cassava

stem

0.6

effects to human health Cane trash 1.5Bagasse 5.0

Peanut shells 0.1

Easily causing fires, traffic accidents,

effecting the road traffic safety Peanutleaves 5.7

Coffee husk 0.3.


4/15

The management practice model of crop

residues

Feed utilization

silageBio-gas

production

Straw

cro a s orage

Feed directlyStraw power

GasificationResourceUtilization

esourc Fertilizer utilization

Bio-charReturning to field

directly

s

Direct burning

Industrial rawRaw materials of

e urn ng ofield indirectly

Cultivation ofedible fungi

materials

Buildingmaterials

Ways of utilization of straws resourcesWays of utilization of straws resources

In general, enterprises have concerned about wastemanagement, however, investment level in

sources. At present, there are 114 factories has usedclean technolo and 16 enter rises have built andapplied ISO 14001

Mostly waste from processing in traditional villages isreason of environmental pollution


5/15

Hazardous pesticide and

fertilizer management

s ng o pes c e an er zer as een ncreas ng rap y.

1986 1990: 13.000 15.000 ton/year pesticide, averageused 0, 4-0,5 kg ai / ha

1991 2000: 20.000 30.000 ton/year pesticide, averageused 0,67-1,0 kg ai/ha

U to now: 33.000 to 75.000 tons/ ear

Over 90 per cent of pesticides sprayed were insecticides. Of thepesticides used, nearly 20 percent are classified by the World

.

in whole country, there are 69.237,236 kg and 43.574,179 litpesticides need to be treated and 69.640,282 kg of chemical

,

there are no particularly regulations on collecting packages ofpesticides.

Hazardous pesticide and

fertilizer management

Average using of fertilizer is 195 kg NPK per ha

, ,

compared to 1985

The efficiency of using fertilizer is only 30-50% and rest of themis absorbed into the soil or water


6/15

.and 17.129 meat production

centrals, total wastes estimatedat 73 m on tons per year.

.tons of manure wastes. Takinginto account other wastes, such

, ,etc, the total livestock wastes is

around 73 mill. tons per year

No Animal Quantity (1/8/2007)Average waste animal/per

one animal/ per dayTotal solid waste animal per

year (kg)

1 Cow 6724703 10 24.545.165.950

2 Buffalo 2996415 15 16.405.372.125

3 Pig 26560651 2 19.389.275.230

4 Poultry 226027.1 0.2 16.499.978.3

5 Coat 1777638 1.5 973.256.805

6 Horse 103481 4 151.082.260

7 Deer 31539 2.5 28.779.337.5

Total: 61.509.431.686

,


7/15

it is only 40% of total solid waste were treated and rest of them were discharged. 2, 2

it is a notable contributing factor to global warming and climate change.

there are only 12% of total centrals built a waste water treatment system and 74 % ofapplied Bioagas and composting as main treating method

Up to now, more than 100,000 biogas systems have been built, most of them are of.

are constructed in recent years.

Economic sector

Industry, 3,800 , 4%

Change of land use

and forestry ,

19,380 , 19%

Wastes, 2,500 , 2%

Agriculture, 52,450 ,

50%Energy, 25,600 ,

25%

Equivalent kt CO2 (CO2 + CH4 + N2O)

Source: Monre, 1994


8/15

Law on environmental protection, 2005

National strategy on Environmental Protection up toyear 2010 and Vision to 2020

Decree No. 59/2007/N-CP dated April 9, 2007 of

solid waste management activities, the right and duty

of the erson related solid wastes

Directive No. 36/2008/CT-BNN dated February 20, 2008 by Minister ofAgriculture and Rural development promulgating the plan on protectingthe environment in agricultural sector, in which major missions are

en ca on an rea men was e n or g na source, eve opmen animprovement waste treatment technology, primarily, encouragement inreusing and recycling agricultural waste.

rcu ar o 38 2010 - ate une 28, 2010 an come ntoforce on August 12, 2010 by Minister of Agricultural and ruraldevelopment has assigned management of pesticides in which

.

Official letter No. 2835/BNN-KH dated September 07, 2009 by Ministerof Agricultural and rural development approving development plan from

- n gr cu ture sector an rura eve opment. s ocument

identified specific goals need to be reached in next five years. Inhubandry field, aim is minimizing environmental pollution and building

- .


9/15

Lack of detailed regulations on agricultural wastes managementfor environmental protection, especially specific decree underLaws, circular to guide implementation.

Agricultural environmental management system has justestablished since 2008 while responsibility of functional

,environmental dimension is ignored.

There is not yet detailed policy addressing advantages wheninvesting into this sector

Limited awareness of agencies, enterprises and communities

about otential of a ricultural wastes Limited technologies

Opportunities for approach 3R on

agricultural management wastes

global climate change;needs to reduce the amount of agricultural wastes

Low awareness on environmental issues and potential benefitsof agricultural wastes

government agencies, business sector, and the general public;

biomass and biogas;

biological decomposition and new technologies potentials ofnew environmental sound products;


10/15

Vietnam is implemented by the Department of Livestock Production

(DLP) of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) incooperation with the Netherlands Development Organization (SNV)

Overall objectives of the Project: Installing effectively domestic biogas technology eve op ng a v a e commerc a ogas sector Contributing to rural development and environmental protection via

provision of clean and affordable energy to rural households

Creating of jobs for rural labor Reducing of greenhouse gas emissions

Aiming to install 166,000 biogas systems by the end of 2012, theprogrammer has so far installed some 88,000 systems

-

Co-benefits refers to multiple benefits in different fields resulting from one policy,strategy or action plan

Source: http://www.kyomecha.org/cobene/e/cobene.html


11/15

-

-climate change perspective:

additional benefits beyond GHG

-regional/local perspective:

additional GHG reductionsre uct ons resu t ng rom c matechange mitigation measures

resu t ng rom measures a meto address

Reduced air pollution

Associated health benefits

Development issues, such as airpollution and associated health

mprove energy secur y rougreduced energy costs anddependency on oil imports

,and security and other socio economic problems

ncrease access to energy

Sources: Sophie Punte, Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities Center (CAI-Asia), January 2009

-

ene s:

For biogas users ex enditure saved b the substitution of other ener

sources with biogas (if applicable, income from the sale ofbiogas) Instead of wood: saved 240.000 Vnd per month nstea o coa : save 160.000 n per mont Instead of gas: saved 800.000Vnd per month Calculated followed the price in 11/2007: total expenditure

,

expenditure saved by the reduction of using chemicalfertilizers ( If applicable, income from the sale of bio-fertilizer) estimated about 1,9 million Vnd per month

Time saved for colleting and preparing previously used fuel

materials estimated opportunity cost about 2,3 million Vnd permonth

,


12/15

-

The benefits for the

environment

Item of benefit Amount

CO2 emission 176 thousand ess consump on on

firewood lessforestation

reduction tones per year

Reduced CO2emission

Number ofbeneficiaries

440,000 people

Total reduced CO2 emissionper year = 88.000 plants x 2tones of CO2 saving per plant

=Saving 591,6 million

,year

energyconsumption

Animal dung

Biogas plant


13/15

-

- Reduced smoke inside kitchen and enhanced health by

improving sanitation, hygiene, living conditions ga ng c ma e c ange increased yield by using bio-fertilizer Improved soil quality by using bio-slurry Reduced pressure on forests Reduced work load for women and children enhance

education opportunities and cultural knowledge Provisied of skill enhancement and employment for rural

areasCo-benefits

Developmentneeds GHG reduction

Major Developmental Challenges with Potential Co-

benefits on agricultural waste in Vietnam

Financial economical barriers:

For mostly farmers, cost for biogas installation is

high, in some cases, it is probably the largestinvestment made by a farmer

ac o suppor ve mec an sms or armers oaccess to credit

adversely affected the farmer's affordability


14/15

Major Developmental Challenges with Potential Co-

benefits on agricultural waste in Vietnam

Technical barriers

Research & Development: lack of research and development

improve efficiency and additional end uses for income-generating activities;

Orientation of the construction companies: the companiesengaged in plant construction have some negligence aboutthe quality control and after-sale-service.

Policies barriers and social awareness

Lack of detail regulation on renewable energy and incentivemechanisms to users and business operate in biogas field

Low awareness on potential co-benefits on biogas projects

omp e e ega ramewor or manag ng agr cu ura was es,approach 3R should be considered as a priority orientation.

Research and Development of biogas/compost fertilizer

production is encouraged for reducing environmental pollutionand effective exploitation of clean energy

Improve knowledge and awareness of community

Enhance financial for managemental activities and scienceresearch

Create olic forums to discuss co-benefits a roach withparticipation from decision-makers at different levels ofgovernance (regional, national and local)..

-


15/15

agricultural waste-15 khanh day1 session5

Documents