biofuels of india

7/30/2019 Biofuels of India

1/18

Journal of Scientific & Industrial ResearchVol. 62, January-February 2003, pp 106-123

Biofuels of India

Tata Energy Research Institute, Darbari Seth Block, Habitat Place, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110 003

Biofuels play an important role in meeting energy requirements in the world and its position in the context ofdeveloping countries like India is rather vital. The present paper attempts to provide an overview of the resource base,conversion technologies, and emerging end uses and research needs in the overall context in India. Authors also observe that theefforts made in India in modern biomass utilization in the last two decades have not succeeded with the desired level ofachievements. Though several alternative techniques/technologies for efficient use of biofuels have been developed, however,they are yet to transform into acceptable package of product with the mechanisms to disseminate them through manufacturer andmarket network to the end users.

Author for communication.E-mail: [email protected]

1.0 Introduction

Biomass was the chief source of fuel in the

pre-industrial revolution world and is still quite

important in any developing countries, such as India.

Worldwide, photosynthetic activity is estimated to

result in energy amounting to approximately 3000

billion GJ annually in the form of biomass of which

about 10 per cent of it is used for animal feed,

fertilizer, fuel or feedstock (Alexandrov et al. 1999).

The remainder serves the essential purpose of

moderating climate, recycling water and essential

nutrients, and performs a host of other ecosystem

functions, which are vital to human well being.

Although biofuels account for only 12 per cent

of the global energy requirements in terms of total

energy content, they cater to the largest section of

energy users. It is estimated that about two-thirds of

households in the developing countries are still

dependent on biofuels for cooking and heating, and

many of these households use open fires or poor

quality stoves (Capsule Report Jan 1999).

The 1973, oil crisis and the more recent global

climate change concerns brought into focus sharply the

post-industrial revolution conflict between economic

development and energy sustainability. It has been

shown again and again that the best way of resolving

this conflict is by promoting energy conservation and

renewable energy utilization. The importance of

biomass as a renewable energy resource, especially in

its prevalent form of stored chemical energy, as opposed

to solar and wind energy which fluctuate widely, has

increased in recent years. This can be observed not only

in developing countries like India, but also in industrially

developed countries, such as Netherlands, Germany,

Finland and Sweden. The focus on biofuels has

increased since it is net zero contributor to carbon

dioxide. In addition, the global obligations to reduce

carbon dioxide emissions have renewed interest in the

biofuels. The present paper attempts to provide anoverview of the resource base, conversion technologies,

and emerging end uses and research needs in the overall

context of modern biomass utilization in India.

2.0 Biomass in India: Resource Base, End Use

Efficiency and Emission Characteristics

Most of the developing countries depend heavily

on biomass for their energy needs and India is no

exception. An estimated 220 mt of firewood is used for

cooking in rural areas and about 160 mt of non-fodder

agricultural residues every year in the country. In

general, firewood consumption would show a steady

increasing trend (Ravindranath and Hall, 1995).

Questions of sustainability of such high consumption

levels had been raised in the past, but it appears that

most firewood comes from a variety of local trees and

shrubs, chiefly Prosopis juliflora (locally known as

Jali), grown on private land, community lands,

roadsides and wastelands. Though deforestation due to

high dependency on firewood for cooking is of concern


2/18

KISHORE & SRINIVAS: BIOFUELS OF INDIA107

in select areas in the country, there is not much

evidence to suggest that firewood use is contributing

significantly to forest loss at the national level. In fact,

satellite data shows that forest cover has increased

marginally in recent yeas, probably due to increased

regulation, better forest management and afforestationprogrammes such as Joint Forest Management. Thus

the current solid fuel resource stands at about

380 million t/y. In comparison, the coal production is

about 270 mt and lignite production is 19.5 mt, adding

up to about 290 mt of solid fossil fuel production per

annum. Considering that the calorific values of several

biomass residues are comparable to those of high-ash

coals, produced predominantly in India, it can be said

that the solid biofuel resource is at least as big as the

solid fossil fuel resource.

Another bio-resource in India is cattle dung.

Nearly 600 mt of wet dung is produced annually from

a livestock population of about 288 m (cattle and

buffaloe) (TEDDY 2000/2001). Table 1 shows that

the livestock population is also growing, though the

rate of growth is low. This means that the wet dung

would be available as a sustainable resource. If all this

dung can be converted into biogas, the gas

Table 1- Growth of cattle and buffaloes (million)

Year Cattle Buffaloes Total

1972 178.3 57.4 235.7

1977 180.1 62.0 242.1

1982 192.4 69.8 262.2

1987 199.7 76.0 275.7

Source: TEDDY (TERI Energy Data Directory &Yearbook) 2000/2001

production would be 36 bcM/y. If organic wastes such

as sewage, municipal solid waste, and distilleries can

also be taken as feedstock for gas production the total

biogas potential would be 36.8bcM/y. In comparison,

19.3 billion m3 of natural gas and 3.42 mt of LPG were

consumed in 1994-95. In terms of heat energy, thisamounts to 0.975 exa joules (1 EJ = 1018 J)/y, whereas

the biogas production potential is 0.693 EJ/y. Thus the

biogas potential, at nearly 70 per cent of the current

gaseous fossil fuel consumption levels, is too large to be

ignored. Biomethanation would also produce about 96

mt of manure. In comparison, the chemical fertilizer

consumption in 1997-98 was 16.4 mt. The fossil fuel

and bio-resource base of India is summarized in Table 2.

One major drawback of biofuel use is that these

fuels are used in traditional stoves and furnaces, whichare inherently inefficient. It is well known that

conventional mud stoves operate with thermal

efficiencies of the order of 10 per cent or less. Nearly 40

per cent of 15 m unorganized enterprises consume

biofuels in India (Sarvekshana, 1995) [Unorganized

enterprises are those which are not registered under the Small

Industries Development Organization of India]. Though

considerable number of registered small industries also

consumes biofuels, accurate information is not available

on the number of such enterprises and the quantum of

fuels consumed. Survey of some biomass using

enterprises (Kishore & Rastogi, 1987; Mande et al.,

1999; Mande et al., 2000) and available data show that

the end use efficiencies of devices used in such

enterprises is also quite low. An estimated 20 mt of

biomass is used in traditional rural enterprises (Kishore,

1999). A partial list of biomass using enterprises is given

in Table 3.

Table 2 - Fossil fuels and Bio-resource base of India

Conventional Fuels Biofuels

Coal Production (1995-96) 270.0 mt Fuel wood used (1994-95) 220 mt

Lignite Production (1994-95) 19.5 mt Crop residue production (1994-95) 160 mt

Total solid fuels 289.5 mt Total 380.0 mt

Natural gas (1994-95) 19.30 bm3 Biogas from cattle dung (potential) 36.23 bm3

LPG Produced (1994-95) 2.80 mt Biogas from Sewage (potential) 0.29 bm3

LPG imported 0.62 mt Biogas from MSW (potential) 0.24 bm3

Biogas from other wastes (potential) 0.05 bm3

Total 36.8 bm3

Total gas energy 0.975 EJ/yr (1 EJ= 1018J) Total gas energy (ultimate potential) 0.693 EJ/yr EJ= 1018J)

Source: V V N Kishore, Lecture notes on biogas technology, prepared for Renewable Energy Updating Workshop for FMNESstaff, Pondicherry, June 1997


3/18

J SCI IND RES VOL 62 JANUARY-FEBRUARY 2003108

Thus, though the bioresource base of India issubstantial, its contribution to useful energy is low. Anindirect consequence of the low energy use efficiency isthat the carbon emissions would be high. [Useful energy isthe energy that is ultimately used for the end application. For

example, in water heating the heat content of hotwater is the useful

energy while the heat content in the fuel that was fed is the input

energy]. The ratios of carbon content to calorific value ofseveral fuels including biofuels and bioderived fuels areshown in Figure 1(a) and it is apparent that, except forhydrogen rich fuels like natural gas, the carbon emitting

potential of all fuels

Table 3 - Biomass using industries/enterprises in India

Industry Specific fuelwood consumption(approximate)

Total firewood consumption per annum- estimated(number of units)

Halwai (khoya making etc.) - Not known

Distilleries - -

Lime making 0.34 kg/kg limestone Not known

Surkhi 0.1 0.1 kg 0.1 kg/ kg dry clay Not known

Khandsari units - -

Brick making 8-10 kg for 100 bricks Not known

Roof tile making - -

Potteries 0.5-1.5 kg/kg final product Not knownExtraction of animal tallows 6 kg/kg tallow Not known

Beedi manufacture - Not known

Coconut oil production 0.075 kg/kg oil Not known

Rice par-boiling 0.1 kg/kg raw paddy Not known

Hotels, hostels etc. - Not known

Preparation of plaster of Paris Not known Not known

Charcoal making 4 kg/kg charcoal Not known

Tyre retreading Not known Not known

Soap manufacture 250-300 kg/batch of 400-500 kg Not known

Paper and paper board products Not known Not known

Rubber sheet smoking 1 kg (per kg fresh latex) Not known

Ceramic industry - -Refractories - -

Bakeries 0.7 kg/kg of output Not known

Vanaspati ghee 0.67 kg/kg ghee 0.63 mt

Foundries - 45,000 t

Fabric printing of sarees and cloth 0.2 kg/m of cloth 1.72 mt

Road tarring 23 ton/km 370,000 t

Fish smoking - 20,000 t

Tobacco leaf curing* 4-10 kg/kg cured tobacco 4,38,000 t/y (43,000 tobacco barns in Karnataka State, Over60,000 units in Andhra Pradesh)

Tea drying 1.0 kg/kg dry tea 0.25 mt annually

Cardamom curing - 75,000 t/y

Silk reeling 17-25 kg/kg silk yarn 220,000 tons annually (25000 cottage/filature units and33,000 charka reeling units)

Silk dyeing 3 4 kg/kg of silk processed

Cotton dyeing 1 kg/kg of material processed (1000 cotton processing units in Tiruppur cluster, numbers inother places is not available)

Puffed rice making 0.75 kg/kg of paddy processed 120,000 tons of paddy husk annually in Karnataka statealone (5,500 in Karnataka)

Lead recycling cemations 300 kg/body Approximately 1.7 mt

Source: FAO field document no. 18 and Indian wood and biomass energy development project, project document submitted by TERI toFAO, Surveys conducted by TERI, September 1994

Note:Numbers in the paranthesis are number of units* firewood is used predominantly in barns in Karnataka, while in Andhra Pradesh, Coal is being used predominantly

Most of the above industries are prevalent in all parts/ states in India. But, the estimates in some cases are available only in some states


4/18


is comparable. The ratios of carbon emissions per unit

of useful energy, which take into account the device

efficiency [Device efficiency is a part of the overall efficiency of

a product. For example, the device efficiency of a cookstove does

depend on the type of vessel used. In such case, the device

efficiency refers to the efficiency of the vessel that is transferring

the heat to the contents in the vessel], are shown in Figure1(b) and it is obvious that traditionally used biofuels

emit nearly ten-times more carbon into the atmosphere

per unit of useful energy.

One might argue, since biofuels do not

contribute to net carbon emissions the issue of end use

energy efficiency is not very important. But considering

the fact that biomass is probably harvested

unsustainably in some areas of the country and that the

national forest cover is substantially lower than the

desired level, more efficient utilization of biomass willdefinitely enhance the sink effect of forests. Seen

from this angle, biofuel conservation should get at least

as much importance as afforestation.

A second issue related to biomass combustion

in traditional devices is concerned with products of

incomplete combustion (PIC), chiefly carbon

monoxide, methane, total non-methane organic

compounds (TNMOC) and N2O. These greenhouse

gases have higher global warming potentials (GWPs)

and it has been shown that their CO2 equivalent

contribution is nearly the same as the actual CO2

emitted (Hayes and Smith, 1994). Results of a study

conducted for 28 stove-fuel combinations in India

(Smith et al., 2000) clearly establish that the currently

practiced biomass cycles are not GHG neutral. In fact

the study highlights the win-win situation achievable bypromoting use of modern biofuels like biogas and

producer gas.

3.0 Biomass Conversion Technologies and

Processes

An overview of current status of conversion of

biomass into useful energy might involve one or more

of the following processes:

(i) Physical processes, such as drying, size reduction,and agglomeration (briquetting, pelletisation)

(ii) Thermochemical processes, such as directcombustion, pyrolysis and gasification

(iii)Biochemical processes such as fermentation, andbiomethanation.

3.1 Physical Processes

Physical processes are more or less pre-

processes. For example, drying and size reduction are

important pre-requisites for biomass briquetting and for

gasification. The preparation of dung cakes by mixing

dung and agro-residues followed by sun drying is an

age-old process. Utilization of dung cakes for cooking

has two disadvantages: First the fertilizer value of dung

is lost and secondly the efficiency of cooking devices

(such as Hara, used extensively for simmering of milk

in North India) is among the lowest. Also, the burning

of dung cakes causes the highest emissions among the

biofuels (Smith et al., 2000). Some attempts have been

made to replace dung cakes with briquettes of agro

residues, which will be discussed subsequently.

Briquetting of biomass is getting established as

an enterprise in India. The growth of briquetting plantsin recent years is encouraging. However, biomass


5/18


briquetting is still not well understood in a scientific

sense and is thus a promising area of R&D. This will

also be discussed subsequently.

3.2 Thermochemical Processes

Thermochemical processes can be broadlyclassified as combustion, gasification and pyrolysis,

depending on the air-fuel ratio, which is highest for

combustion and lowest for pyrolysis. Each of the three

thermochemical processes, development and

conclusions in the Indian context are explained

subsequently:

Cookstoves constitute the largest number of

combustion devices for biomass, and there is a large

variation in traditional stoves. Improving the thermal

efficiency of cookstoves and reducing the emissionshad been a major concern since the past two decades.

The national programme of improved chulhas (NPIC),

which was launched in 1985 by MNES, evokes a

somewhat mixed response concerning its success

mainly because the benefits are not easily quantifiable.

A recent review of the projected and realistic benefits

of NPIC is provided by Kishore and Ramana (2001). It

is increasingly being felt that improved chulhas are

liked mainly because of their smoke removing

capability rather than fuel saving. Though thermal

efficiency figures of up to 45 percent have been reported in laboratory studies (Mukunda

et al. 1988) improved cook stoves seldom gave

consistently high fuel saving in the field. Cookstoves

generally have lower combustion efficiencies and high

heat losses, especially through flue gases. Scientists

have generally adopted following strategies: (i)

Improves combustion by providing a grate, (ii) Reduces

flue gas loss by control of combustion air, and (iii)

Increases heat transfer by providing more surface

(increase the number of pots). Some designs have

concentrated on increasing the temperature of fire zone

by providing insulation, thereby trying to increase

radiative and convective heat transfer to the pot. The

control of combustion air is probably the trickiest affair.

As all cookstoves operate on natural draft, and as

sufficient opening has to be given for mending the fire

and feeding the fuel sticks, the only way to reduce the

uncontrolled draft is to provide resistance in the flow

path of flue gases. The problem with this strategy is that

it will work best for a particular value of burning rate,

vessel dimension, etc. (fixed design point) and will farepoorly at off-design operation. As cookstoves can

seldom be operated at a fixed design point, it is quite

difficult to get consistently high performance at all

power levels. To design a solid-fuel burning stove

with: (i) High turn down ratio (ratio of maximum and

minimum burning rates) (ii) High degree of control of

air and (iii) High efficiency throughout the range ofpower levels; without relying excessively on increasing

the heat transfer area and restricting the size and shape

of the fuel, it is an engineering challenge. An early

realization of this fact would help in shaping future

programmes aimed at conserving firewood.

Improving the efficiency of larger biomass

burning systems is far more feasible. Thus, improving

the power generation capacity of existing bagasse-

burning generation plants in sugar mills by

incorporating high-pressure boilers, was found to bequite feasible.

Consequently, the bagasse cogeneration

programme of MNES has been quite successful. Power

generation from biomass, using fluidized bed boilers

for rice husk, e.g., has also been reasonably successful.

The total installed capacity of power generation based

on biomass combustion is about 34 MW at present

(MNES Annual Report 1999-2000). The potential

power generation capacity, however, is estimated to be

17,000 MW.Biomass gasification is a process that produces

a mixture of CO, H2 and methane, CO2 and N2 (called

producer gas) through a combination of

thermochemical reactions including the reduction

reaction (CO2 + C 2CO), shift reaction (CO + H2O

CO2 + H2), the methanation reaction (C + 2H2

CH4), and the water gas reaction (C + H2O CO +

H2). The producer gas has been classified as low btu

gas (calorific value is not generally constraint for

designing highly efficient combustion devices or for

using the gas in IC engines). Thermal efficiencies of up

to 50 per cent (higher if waste heat recovery is done)

have been achieved in producer gas burning equipment.

As the adiabatic flame temperature, of producer gas is

about 1200C, it is generally thought that it is not

suitable for process heat applications involving high

temperatures such as brick and tile manufacturing, steel

re-rolling, lime boilers But combustion of pre-mixed

gases with pre-heated air can produce flame

temperatures in excess of 1700C. Similarly, power

conversion efficiencies comparable to diesel or petrolengines have been obtained in producer gas engines


6/18


without much derating with better control of

combustion attainable for gaseous fuels. It is thus

possible to achieve high thermal efficiencies and low

emissions, thereby making producer gas comparable

with petroleum fuels such as furnace oil, LDO and

LPG. The producer gas route of utilizing biomass isgaining importance, especially for process heat

requirement of small enterprises and for decentralized

power generation. These emerging applications are

discussed in section 4.

The programmes of MNES aimed at promotion

of gasifiers, however, seem to have achieved only a

limited success. A programme launched in the late

eighties to promote gasifier-based irrigation pumping

systems under a heavily subsidized scheme did not take

off. Similarly, it was found in a survey at a state level

that majority of gasifier installations were not in use

(TERI Report 1999). Nevertheless, interest in biomass

gasification, especially at the individual entrepreneur

level, is picking up in the recent years.

A major limitation of gasifier promotion in

India, is that the designs, which have been developed so

far, use only firewood. Though some manufacturers

claim to have developed gasifiers operating on rice

husk, etc., there is no evidence to suggest that the

systems are operating consistently for long periods and

without major operation problems such as water

pollution due to cleaning of raw gas. All R&D efforts to

develop gasifiers with multifuel capability and for

powdery biomass gasification have not yet yielded the

desired results.

The third major thermochemical process,

pyrolysis, mainly consists of heating biomass to high

temperatures with a limited supply of air, primarily to

initiate combustion, and to maintain temperatures

required for pyrolysis. For most biomass materials,

pyrolysis occurs between 400 to 500C (biomasscharacterization, IIT, Delhi). The most extensive

application of wood pyrolysis is charcoal making. The

use of charcoal for applications such as institutional

cooking, cloth ironing, CO2 manufacture, beedi

processing, lead recovery from used batteries, smithy,

silk yarn re-reeling appears to be quite extensive, but

not well documented. There are over 400,000

unorganized enterprises consuming charcoal for

meeting their energy needs in India (Sarvekshana,

1990). The most commonly used charcoal producing

methods in the developing countries are simple pit kilnsand woodpiles covered with earth or vegetation (Vimal

& Tyagi, 1988). Fairly large chunks of wood are

required and carbonization takes from days

to-weeks depending on the size of the pile. Typically, 8

to 12 t of wood is required to produce 1 t of charcoal,

using covered-pile methods. Since charcoal has heat

content roughly double that of air-dry wood on a weightbasis (30 GJ/t as opposed to 15 GJ/t for air dry wood),

the energy efficiency of charcoal production using

traditional methods is in the range of 17 to 29 per cent

(Hall et al., 1992). As large chunks of wood are used

for charcoal production (as against twigs and branches

for cooking), and as these come only by clean felling of

trees, one has reasons to assume that almost all the

wood going for charcoal making is harvested

unsustainably, resulting in thinning of forest cover. The

marketing networks for charcoal also seem to have

been well established. Hence, it is highly desirable to

develop: (i) Charcoal kilns with high efficiency and (ii)

Charcoal substitution materials (such as char briquettes

from agro or forest residues). Improvements in

conversion efficiency can be achieved using more

sophisticated kilns made by brick, concrete or metal.

Portable steel kilns, e.g., are operational in several

African countries. In India also, the Institute of

Engineering and Rural Technology (IERT), Allahabad,

has designed a portable metal kiln (Vimal & Tyagi,

1988) for charcoal production, but it does not seem tohave been commercialized. Several large and more

sophisticated devices have also been built. These

include various continuous kilns with retorts, which

collect the liquid products and recycle the gaseous

components. Most of them require fairly small-sized

feed material but are useful for producing charcoal

from waste, such as saw dust and bark. Roughly 60 per

cent of the energy in the feed is retained (Bungay,

1991). These plants, however, cost several million

dollars to build, and are probably not appropriate in

Indian conditions. A comparison of the efficiency, costand lifetime of some of the main types of charcoal

making systems is given by Sinha & Kishore (1991).

TERI (1992), has reported use of a downdraftgasifier with a grate-shaking mechanism to producecharcoal continuously, but the technique has not beendeveloped further. A recent innovation is the reverse-downdraft gasifier to produce both charcoal and gas,which seems to have promise for rural enterprises. Aprocess for production of charcoal-like material, calledPARU fuel, had been developed by IIT, Delhi andreleased for commercialization, but seems to havefailed as an enterprise. There were some attempts to


7/18


produce activated char from biomass, which can fetch ahigh price, but these have not been translated intocommercial ventures. Process to produce pyrolysis-oils or liquid fuels from biomass are also available(e.g. in Canada), but these are yet to be commercialized

on a large scale.Incineration is also a variant process ofpyrolysis, and has been tried in the past for producingpower from municipal solid wastes in Delhi. However,this plant never seems to have worked satisfactorily andhas been subject of considerable inter-governmentallitigation. Surprisingly, there had been very littlediscussion on the scientific and technological merits orotherwise of the application of incineration process fortreating municipal solid wastes.

3.3 Biochemical Processes

Biochemical processes involve the use ofmicrobes and biochemical techniques to produce liquidor gaseous products (fuels in the context of this paper)from organic matter. One of the most important

examples of biochemical processes is ethanolproduction.

A variety of crops can be used as feedstock forproduction of ethanol from fermentable sugar usingyeast, such as sugar cane, sweet sorghum, cassava andvarious cereal crops (Table 4). The most widely usedfeedstocks, however, are sugar and starch.

The use of feedstock containing starch andcellulose for the purpose of ethanol production requiresthe conversion of these materials to fermentable sugarfollowing which the fermentation step yields thedesired ethanol grade after the distillation process.

When grain-containing starch is to be used asfeedstock, the preparation for the fermentation processinvolves enzyme propagation, from starch breakdownto fermentable sugars, followed by the yeastpropagation. In comparison, conversion of cellulosicmaterials to fermentable sugars, the conversion processto starch is fairly simple. Two inherent characteristicsof biomass result in the problem of convertingcellulosic material: cellulose is difficult to convert toglucose sugars which are easy to convert to ethanolwhereas hemicelluloses can be easily converted toxylose is difficult to ferment to ethanol (Department of

Energy, 1990).The process of ethanol fermentation involves

the conversion of simple sugars to ethanol and carbon

dioxide by yeasts. Biochemically, it is highly efficientand virtually all energy in the sugar retained in theethanol produced (Hall et al., 1982). Removal ofethanol from fermentation broth is usually performedusing distillation techniques, which is an energy-intensive step since the maximum concentration ofethanol obtained from the broth is only in the range of10 to 20 per cent.

When sugar crops such as sweet sorghum andsugarcane are used for ethanol production, sugary

Table 4 - Ethanol yields from selected biomass Carbohydrate rich plants

Raw material Possible production (t/ha) Carbohydrate content (percent)

Ethanol yields (L/t)

Beet 40-50 16 90-100Sugarcane 50-100 13 60-80Maize 4-8 60 360-400Wheat 2-5 62 370-420Barley 2-4 52 310-350Grain sorghum 2-5 70 330-370Potatoes 20-30 18 100-120Sweet Potatoes 10-20 26 140-170Ligno-cellulosic raw material Dry matter t/ha Ethanol yields L/tSoft woodDilute acids 9-15 190-220Concentrated acids 9-15 230-270Hard woodDilute acids 9-15 160-180Concentrated acids 9-15 190-220StrawDilute acids 1.5-3.5 140-160Concentrated acids 1.5-3.5 160-180

Source: adapted from OECD, 1984


8/18


juices can be tapped from the plant and

fermented directly. After extraction the bagasse residue

can be burnt to fuel subsequent distillation steps.

Starch crops, such as cassava and cereal crops,

can also be used, although the starch must be brokendown to simple sugars before fermentation, using the

sacharification process. This involves mixing the

substrate with water, heating it and then subjecting it to

enzymic hydrolysis. Because starch crops produce no

byproduct that is equivalent to sugarcane bagasse, an

external energy source is required to fuel the distillation

process. The use of other renewables, such as wood

from plantations and use of solar energy (as the boiling

point of ethanol is 78C, the use of solar distillation is

possible) is the logical solution to this problem. If oil

were used the amount of energy required would be

equivalent to the quantity of ethanol produced.

Sugar and starch crops for ethanol production

have potential in regions where large areas of

reasonably fertile land are under-utilized. Sugarcane

and sweet sorghum are the main examples of crops

containing sugar. Under suitable agro-climatic

conditions, using modern agricultural methods, these

crops yield up to 50 and 35 t/ha, respectively. Moreover

the sugars they contain are directly fermentable to

ethanol and yield bagasse as a byproduct. Bagasse can

be used as a fuel for the energy-intensive ethanol

distillation process, thereby improving the overall

energy balance. The main disadvantage of these crops

(particularly sugarcane) is that they require land and

adequate irrigation for high yields (Hall et al., 1982;

Vimal and Tyagi, 1988).

The primary starch crop of interest is cassava.

Though a variety of other plants such as sweet potatoes,

corn, rice and other cereals can be converted to ethanol,

but their value as foodstuffs makes them unavailable

for ethanol production. Cassava has the advantage of

being tolerant to poor soil and adverse weather

conditions. Another potential feedstock for ethanol

production is surplus molasses from existing sugar

production facilities. Every tonne of cane sugar

produced, results in approximately 190 L of molasses

as a byproduct. This contains 50-55 per cent

fermentable sugars and yields about 280 L of ethanol

per tonne of molasses when fermented (Hall et al.,

1982). Only in remote sugar production facilities(where it is wasted because of high transportation costs)

does converting molasses to ethanol appear feasible. In

India, molasses is a valuable input to the chemical

industry and therefore may not be available for

alternate uses (Vimal and Tyagi, 1988).

As mentioned earlier, the conversion of woody

biomass and grasses with significant cellulosic and

hemicellulosic material to ethanol is a difficult process.

Significant R&D efforts are being devoted to improve

conversion processes to increase the yields of ethanol,

using such feedstocks. The US Department of Energy,

e.g., hopes to achieve the overall goal of producing

ethanol at $ 0.14/L by the turn of the century. The 1989

production cost was placed at $ 0.32/L, whereas the

1979 production cost was $ 0.86/L (DOE, 1990).

The use of ethanol as a source of energy is,

however, a debatable issue in the Indian context, as it

does not appear to be economical. Detailed techno-

economical calculations are yet to be made to examine

the feasibility of using ethanol as a blend of petrol or

for use in advanced power generation system such as

fuel cells. The contribution of ethanol production with a

decentralized power plant would appear attractive, as

the waste heat can be gainfully used in the distillation

process. Such small, decentralized cogeneration

systems will be discussed later.

The second most important biochemicalprocess in the Indian context is anaerobic digestion, or

biomethanation. As mentioned earlier, India has a huge

cattle-dung resource, which is highly adaptable for

biogas production. Anaerobic digestion involves

complex biochemical reactions, but these can broadly

be classified as acidification reactions and methanation

reactions. The complex molecules of biomass are first

broken down to simple molecules; chiefly acetic acid in

the first step and methane is produced from acids in the

second step. The kinetics of methane production is

highly dependent on temperature, methanogen

concentration, and pH. Biogas reactors can range from

a deceptively simple brick and concrete digester to

using cattle dung to highly complicated UASB (Up

flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket) reactors processing

industrial effluent to produce methane. The hydraulic

retention time, and thus the volume of the reactor, can

vary from 100 d (for a rural biogas plant in a cold, north

Indian hilly region) to 24 (for a UASB reactor with well

formed granules).

Considering the potential in the country, MNES

launched several programmes to promote


9/18


biomethanation technology quite early. The earliest

(and probably the largest till a few years ago from

resource allocation point) in the National Programme

for Biogas Development (NPBD) aimed at promoting

biogas plants in rural areas for utilizing the available

cattle dung.

The latest is to promote biomethanation of

urban and industrial wastes, aided by UNDP/GEF, with

financial outlay of about 6 m dollars.

The number of biogas plants installed so far is

about 2.9 million, second only to China. By all official

counts, the NPBD is a success, but the programme is

generally criticized for being dependent solely on

government support. At the rate at which biogas plants

are installed (even without taking into account the

plants becoming non-functional for a variety of

reasons), it would take several decades to realize the

full potential of using cattle dung in rural areas. In spite

of the enormous promise, biogas technology has for

rural economy; the whole programme appears to be

heading for a lame tapering-off. This can probably be

attributed to the failure of MNES to integrate R&D,

technology, entrepreneurship, and financing and social

dynamics into a powerful programme focusing on

business development opportunities. The extremely

limited R&D efforts concentrated primarily onmicrobiological studies and even there, no effective

linkage was established between laboratory work and

field implementation.

The simple biogas digester, just like the simple

chulha, seems to be eluding rigorous scientific analysis

that can lead to an optimal design. In spite of a number

of separate studies on microbial kinetics, residence time

distribution studies (Raman et. al., 1988) heat transfer

analysis (Kishore, 1989) and even rheological studies, a

chemical reactor model of the biogas plant has not been

developed so far. While the theoretical possibility exists

that hydraulic retention time (HRT) of a few days is

possible from kinetic consideration, the actual HRT

remains at 40 d and in spite of so many advances in

materials, cement, brick and metal continue to be the

chief constructing materials.

On the other hand, based on R&D carried out

in advanced countries, chiefly The Netherlands,

concepts such as UASB have evolved and have been

applied for biomethanation of distillery effluents,

tannery effluents, sewage etc. However, no suitable

high rate, or even medium rate, technology has been

developed for solid organic residues like municipal

solid waste (MSW), industrial solid wastes, cattle dung,

poultry waste. A biphasic process involving enhanced

acidification, followed by methanation in a UASB

reactor has been recently developed (Rajeshwari et. al,

2000) but it is yet to be upscaled and field tested.

Composting is also an important biochemical

process. Based on the work done by Excel industries,

some plants have been constructed to produce rich

organic manure from MSW in recent years. However,

as these plants rely on a lot of open area, which

becomes a problem during monsoon, they seem to have

met only a limited success. Reactor composting would

be quite convenient for several residues (e.g. hotel

wastes), but no such work has been initiated so far.

In conclusion, it appears that there are still

largely unexplored or under explored areas for R&D,

product development, process development etc. in the

broad area of biomass utilization and that there has

been very little overlap between field based national

programmes, development of product and technology

and dissemination.

4.0 Modern Biomass Utilization: SomeEmerging End Uses and Research Needs

Modern biomass utilization hinges on usingefficient and environmentally friendly technologies for

conversion of biomass to more convenient forms. In

the Indian context, these technologies can be listed as

follows:

Biomass briquetting/pelletisation. Efficient charcoal making from wood/biomass

residues.

Biomass gasification. Advanced biomethanation.

A host of supporting technologies/systems will

also be required to make full benefit of the conversion

technologies. Some of these are:

A variety of drying equipment for use withdifferent materials to be dried.

Size reduction and agglomeration machinery. Cooling/cleaning systems for producer gas with

particular emphasis on low maintenance and long

life.

Efficient producer gas engines capable of operatingon gas alone.

Optimal or low cost gas storage systems.


10/18


Efficient blowers, compressors etc. Efficient gas burners. Smaller capacity waste heat recovery systems. Low capacity absorption/adsorption cooling

systems operating on waste heat and/or producer

gas. Control systems for gas flow.

A combination of the above

systems/subsystems can be gainfully employed to

tackle a variety of applications ranging from process

heat in industries to small power generation in rural

areas. An attempt is made to classify the promising end

uses and outline the underlying research needs.

4.1 Biomass as a Substitute to Fossil Fuels

Whenever there is an increase in the prices ofpetroleum fuels the demand for alternative fuels/energy

hots up. The last few years witnessed such increases in

prices and there are chances that the scenario might

repeat. The last few years also saw an increase in

demand for biomass briquettes, conversion of oil-fired

devices to wood or biomass fired devices, co-firing of

biomass with coal. The significance of biomass lies in

the economies, as shown in Figure 2. It can be seen

that producer gas from biomass (wood or briquettes) is

an extremely attractive option for process heat as

compared with petroleum derived fuels. As firewood is

not a desirable option in the long run from

sustainability point of view, biomass briquetting would

become an important topic in the coming years.

One of the major problems dogging the

briquetting industry is the wear and tear of machine

parts such as the ram, taper die, wear ring, split die, etc.

Due to the need for constantly replacing the worn out

parts, briquetting plants operate at a low capacity

utilization factor of about 28 per cent (Pachauri et. al.,1994). Attempts in the past to solve this problem by

using different materials for the wearing out parts

yielded only a limited success. It was also observed

that heating biomass or the die reduced wear and tear

(Joshi et. al., 1994). The important point to be noted is

that the best scientific and technical minds of the

country have perhaps not applied their minds to the

problems of the industry. The small entrepreneurs,

with their limited scientific skills have done an

excellent job of finding low cost solutions in a difficult

trial and error process to sustain the enterprise. In order

to pump some advanced knowledge into briquetting, a

small project was recently granted to an entrepreneur in

Maharashtra by the Home Grown Technology (HGT)

programme of DSIR (Department of Scientific and

Industrial Research). In this project, advanced coating

techniques are being tried to improve the life of the

crucial machine parts.

Another problem facing briquetting industry is that

briquettes form well with sawdust alone. Even though

other biomass can be used, sawdust is a necessary

ingredient (at least 50 per cent). This poses a severe

constraint on the industry, as major agro-residues such

as bagasse, rice husk, coir pith etc. will


11/18


have to be left out of briquetting. The peculiar

problems of biomass briquetting seem to warrant an

indepth scientific and engineering research, which has

not been initiated even after two decades of briquetting

in India.

Briquetting plants are located in rural areas for

logistic reasons, but power supply is an acute problem

in these areas. There is no easy solution for this

problem. An approach suggested long back is to install

a gasifier-based power plant for powering the

briquetting machine, and sell both power and

briquettes. However, there are no reliable gasifiers that

can take briquettes as fuel (briquettes are known to

cause clinker problems in gasifiers) and the idea could

never be tried.

Briquettes also do not burn efficiently infurnaces, which were originally designed, and for coal

and burning of briquettes may not be environmentally

sound. All these issues can be examined in detail if

there is a comprehensive and multidisciplinary

programme aimed at large-scale promotion of

briquetting enterprise.

Pelletisation is an alternative to briquetting. It

involves pulverization, steaming, and addition of a

binder and extrusion of pellets. Pelletisation takes

place at a lower pressure and hence problems of wearand tear are drastically reduced. Another ongoing

project of HGT is studying different technical aspects

of pelletisation. The drawbacks of pelletisation are the

need to add a binder, such as molasses and the stability

and shelf-life of pellets, which are known to

disintegrate easily. As mentioned earlier the problems

of briquetting and pelletisation are complex and would

need a multidisciplinary approach.

One important socio-economic aspects of

briquetting is that, nearly 30 per cent of the production

cost of briquettes, which goes towards biomass

procurement, is ploughed back to rural areas where

employment opportunities other than agriculture is

quite meager. Thus, briquetting can, in principle, help

in creating of wealth in rural areas.

Biomass, such as firewood obtained sustainably

from plantation (e.g. rubber plantations), coconut

shells, and cashew shells can probably be directly used

in suitable gasifier systems to replace fuel oil or diesel.

However, experience suggests (Kishore, 2001) that a

gasifier system cannot be just added into an existingend use, but considerable effort goes for integrating

the gasifier with an application. Thus, development of

a complete end use package, which might involve

modifications of some components in the existing

system, is very important to ensure successful

integration. The costs for such field-based R&D-cum-

demonstration are usually quite high and cannot beafforded by the entrepreneur. Hence, there is a need to

take up such projects for a variety of industries such as

crumb rubber manufacture, tea drying, coffee

processing, food processing, lime kilns, mini-cement

plants, lead recovery from used batteries, aluminium

and brass melting, wire enameling etc. In some

enterprises such as tea processing, there is also a good

scope for introducing small cogeneration systems

(Mande and Kishore, 1997), resulting in a much better

utilization of biomass.

4.2 Biomass for Development of Rural Infrastructure

Biomass technologies for decentralized power

generation can be categorized as follows:

Direct burning of biomass to run steam turbines. Direct burning of biomass to run sterling engines. Gasification of biomass to run IC engines and

combined cycle systems.

Biogas production from cattle dung to run ICengines.

Miscellaneous technologies for producing liquidfuel (bio-alcohol, bio-diesel, pyrolitic oil) to run IC

engines.

Earlier attempts of projects related to direct

burning of biomass, such as the dendothermal power

plants in Philippines (Kishore & Thukral, 1993) failed

probably due to a combination of factors related to

technology maturity, biomass collection, organizational

set up, funding. Biomass fired stirling engine system

(Kishore and Sinha, 1991) seemed a sound technology

option for small power generation (< 25 kW) forisolated rural communities and for irrigation pumping.

Lack of financial support for technology improvements

and market development resulted in closing down of

the enterprise.

The first tried out option for small village

power was the biogas system. The community biogas

concept in which cooking gas was produced in a

decentralized manner and distributed to households and

part of the gas used for power generation was a highly

relevant local initiative. But as there were no efforts ontechnology upgradation (for example, in the direction


12/18


of developing high rate reactors, dry digestion etc.) and

enterprise development, the community biogas concept

degenerated into a government run programme and is

finally abandoned. But the concept can be revived in

view of the recent advances in anaerobic digestion.

Processes, such as those described by Rajeshwari et al.(2000), can be scaled up, demonstrated at a village level

through entrepreneurial efforts for production of power,

cooking gas and manure on commercial or semi-

commercial lines. Or the community biogas plant can

itself be upgraded and revamped to involve

entrepreneurs.

A project aiming to utilize oil from non-edible

oil seeds as a substitute for diesel has recently been

initiated in the state of Karnataka, but there is not

enough field experience and operational data toevaluate such a process for technical and economic

viability. Processes for producing pyrolytic oil from

biomass are available, e.g., at Biomass Technology

Group (BTG), University of Twente, The Netherlands

and a proposal to use such oils for gas turbine operation

has been mooted by a Canadian company. Such

projects are yet to be evaluated for detailed techno-

economic feasibility studies.

There are two problems preventing village

power ventures from becoming success storiescommercial. The first one is related to plant load

utilization and the second to the purchasing power of

rural people. The cost of power generation, apart from

other factors, depends critically on the plant load factor

or the number of hours of operation per year at the rated

load. Figure 3 shows the variation of different cost

components with the number of hours of operation for a

typical gasifier-based dual fuel power plant. It can be

seen that, while the diesel and biomass costs remain

more or less constant, the Operation, Maintenance and

Repair (OMR) and interest costs per unit of electricitygenerated are quite high at low plant usage hours. And

yet, this is typically the case for rural loads where

lighting load is low, pumping load is seasonal and no

industrial load centers exist. Thus the final cost of

electricity generated would tend to be high. On the

other hand, the purchasing power of rural people is

quite low in many areas as they are dependent primarily

on agriculture. Also, electricity had been subsidized

heavily for rural areas and hence people are accustomed

to pay very little for it. This situation, however, is

changing slowly due to electric power

regulatory bodies and several state governments are

convinced about the need to raise tariffs. It is thus

imperative that any power producer operating in rural

areas cannot restrict to supply of electricity alone, and

will have to expand the services offered, so that extra

income is generated. Some of the operations which

have the potential to increase the profitability of a rural

energy enterprise and which would help in improving

rural infrastructure at the same time are:

Establishing a briquetting plant. Supply of cooking gas. Making of char briquettes. Cold storage for agriculture produce. Crop drying. Desalination to provide drinking water.

The advantages of setting up briquetting plants

have already been discussed. In the context of rural

power generation, a briquetting plant would serve to

increase the load in factory considerably.

Supply of cooking gas through the

biomethanation route has already mentioned earlier, but

it is also possible to supply piped producer gas for

cooking. A scheme for such a process is shown in

Figure 2 and more than 65 such installations have been

established in China (Sun et al., 1995). There are

several advantages of getting into the business of

cooking gas supply. First, it has a direct bearing on the

quality of life and removes the drudgery of women.

Secondly, it frees biomass from being inefficiently used

and thus makes it available for power generation. Aconceptual scheme of how the biomass burnt at present


13/18


in traditional stoves can be used for providing both

cooking gas and electricity at the national level is

shown in Figure 4. It is evident that by following the

gasifier route, not only all the cooking energy

requirements are met, but also enough biomass would

be available to generate 125 billion kWh of electricity.The current demand in rural areas is not even half this

amount.

The useful energy utilized for the purpose of

cooking is based on the current firewood consumption

of 220 mt/y (TEDDY, 2000/2001) and the traditional

oven is assumed to operate at an efficiency of about 10

per cent (though it is lower than this number in many

cases). This would produce a useful energy of 88 x

1012 kcals of thermal energy. If the biomass is used

through the route of gasification, at a conversion

efficiency of about 70 per cent (wood to gas) and thedevice efficiency of 50 per cent (other than the

gasification, the burner efficiency, etc.), it would not

only meet all the cooking energy requirements (same

useful energy) but also will be able to produce about

125 b kWh of electricity additional. Additionally, if

someformof


14/18


cogeneration is integrated to get process heat as well as

electricity, would further, benefit the situation either in

reducing the fuel consumed or will be able to meet

energy needs in other forms.

If a biogas plant is operated in the samecomplex, as the gasifier power plant the waste heat

from the engine can also be used which increases the

operating temperature of the biogas plant, thus

increasing the gas production rates. There are several

other ways of using the waste heat. It can be used to

run a cold storage operating on the absorption

(ammonia-water) or adsorption (methanol-silica gel)

(Mande et al., 1997) systems. If necessary, the waste

heat can be supplemented by burning part of the gas.

There is a severe shortage of cold storages in the

country leading to spoilage of fruits and vegetables,resulting in distress sales by farmers. The usual

practice is to rent out cold storage space on a daily or

weekly rate. Operation of cold storages thus provides

additional income to the power plant besides increasing

the overall efficiency significantly.

The other post-harvest operation in rural areas

is drying. Crop drying is presently done by open sun

drying, leading to inefficient moisture removal, fungus

infection etc. Crops need drying temperatures in the

range of 55-80C, which can be easily obtained fromengine exhaust by using a gas-air heat exchanger.

Recent experience of using gasifiers for cardamom

curing in Sikkim showed that, not only drying times are

reduced, but also the quality of the dried product is

superior, fetching a higher price in the market. When

the demand for drying is high in drying season, gas can

be used directly for burning to augment the available

waste heat.

Many villages in India suffer from chronic

draught, which aggravates if monsoons fail. Some ofthese villages, especially in Gujarat state, have brackish

water, which is not fit for drinking purposes. A

multistage flash (MSF) distillation system can be used

to produce drinking water from brackish water.

Though the available MSF systems are too large to be

used in a decentralized manner, a 3-or 4-stage system

can be easily developed for such applications. MSF

systems also require temperatures of about 100C,

which can be obtained from waste heat. Another

alternative is to use membrane systems for reverse

osmosis to produce drinking water. These will need

power and hence can be employed as load centres.

A strong case thus exists for a rural power

company to expand its services several-fold, so that any

loss in the selling of power is offset by profits in other

streams. Several thousands of such companies,

operating with a basket of devices and technologies,

can be set up throughout the countryside as a chain.Such a chain of companies would require the following

inputs for steady, profit making operation:

Quality technical and R&D inputs from establishedinstitutes.

A high level of system integration to optimizeoperations.

Mechanisms to ensure supply of biomass and saleof power and other goods and services.

Financing schemes at low interest rates both forinitial and working capitals.

Established NGOs (Non governmentalorganizations) with a good trace record can also get

involved in these activities.

5.0 The Importance of Product Development,Manufacturer and Market Network for

Rural and Small Enterprises

In conventional sense, industrial research

involves either an R&D institute developing and

transferring the technology of a product/process to theindustry or an established industry developing

products/processes for its own upgradation through in-

house R&D or collaboration. The funding patterns for

such R&D activities are also well established. For

small and rural enterprises, however, such conventional

scientific wisdom may not work.

The different between the current practice of

funding and a desirable funding pattern is explained

in Figure 4 (Kishore, et al., 2001, ed. Vipradas). Figure

4 projects a desired trajectory of indigenous technologydevelopment with time as X-axis and development in

the Y-axis to arrive at the matured product. Generally

the development starts with the evolution of an idea that

gets transformed into a laboratory prototype, which gets

R & D funding. In many cases, the support may

continue up to the development of a field prototype

testing. Normally the funds stop almost abruptly as

soon as a laboratory prototype or proof-of-concept

system is demonstrated. It is generally assumed that

the process of transformation of a laboratory prototype

into an industrial product is the job of the entrepreneur.

But the rural and small entrepreneurs are ill equipped to


15/18


carry out this task. In most cases, alternate energy

devices are diffusely spread and its utilization is

problem specific. Here, a laboratory demonstration of a

concept should not be end of the project. The product

has to be successfully interpreted (from industrial

design, manufacturers and also from users point ofview) at the end users level with economic

implications. The product should be reliable [Reliability

is the ability of a product to deliver what it is designed for

consistently], material optimization (proper selection of

material and cost-effective [Material optimization-Often new

products specifically alternate energy devices that are at proof-of-

concept stage suffer from proper material selection and use of

appropriate quantum material that have implications on life of the

product and also on the cost] and competitive [The choice of a

product in most cases is compared to the cost of existing/current

product. Hence the costing should this aspect to be competitive] to

existing practices. Attempts to promote alternative

energy devices, such as gasifier based pumping systems

in India which did not take off at the desired level

perhaps also due to some of the above problems.

An illustration, where some of the above mentioned

problems were addressed, involves a product

development for the silk reeling [An activity where the

cocoons are cooked and reeled to get silk yarn. The owner of such a

unit is generally called as reeler] industry and is shown in

Figure 5. It has been shown (Sunil et al., 2001, ed.

Vipradas) that the viability, user-friendliness, life, etc.

of the product keeps improving from stage-to-stage,

until it becomes strong enough to enter and sustain the

market environment. Substantial ground works in

developing product based on gasifier for cocoon

cooking was undertaken before the actual intervention

was designed. Considerable care was taken in reaching

the product to maturity with appropriate inputs from

various stakeholders (from users, subject experts,

design consultants, manufacturers and backstoppers[Consultants who had the mandate to see to it that the programme is

meeting its designed goal and the activities are running as per plan

and schedule. In addition, they were also involved in technical

assessment of the project apart from other aspects the project]).

Though, original premise for using the gasifier based

system cocoon cooking was, to reduce the fuel

consumption and improve the working condition, due

to lesser pollution in the reeling unit, there were several

other benefits. These include reduction in renditta

(renditta is term generally used in silk industry

essentially

means quantity of cocoons required to produce one kg

of silk), improvement in the quality of silk produced

due to better processing conditions (consistent heat

from gasifier based burner when compared to

traditional oven), increased processing rate (which

could result in saving of labour to do certain work or toincrease the quantity of material processed) and also

reduction in water consumed. The annual monetary

savings due to these improvements are given in Figure

5and the fuel savings in subsequent models of gasifier

based ovens.

Marketing is another important issue to be

understood during the product development stage itself.

Almost any product can be pushed into an artificial

market aided by subsidies, but it is an extremely

difficult task to market a new product in rural areas and

in non-consumer market segment. Identification and

selection of manufacturers, ensuring quality control,

establishing the chain of linkages both for sales and

services, all require financial support, which is not

available at present both to the scientist and to the small

entrepreneur.

6.0 Conclusions

The biomass resource base of India is

comparable to that of fossil fuels. But factors, such as

collection, processing, low end-use efficiency of


16/18


conventional devices, and insufficient maturity of

present biomass energy technologies are major barriers

for utilizing the available bioresources more efficiently

and on a sustainable basis. A review of the present

status of biomass conversion and utilization

technologies reveals that there is a large scope forlaunching major R&D and product development

initiatives for promotion of efficient use of biomass.

Utilization of a basket of energy technologies, rather

than a single technology to deliver energy and

economic services in rural areas seems to hold the key

for successful commercialization and mainstreaming of

biomass energy technologies. The R&D strategy and

funding pattern for development of

products/processes/technologies based on biomass for

the benefit of small and rural enterprises will

necessarily have to follow an unconventional approach.

Bibliography:

Alexandrov G A, Oikawa T & Esser G, Estimating terrestrial

NPP: what the data say and how they may be interpreted? Ecolo

Model, 117 (1999) 2-3,361-369.

Bungay H R. 1981Energy, the Biomass Option. (John Wiley and

SonsNew York) 1981, 347.

Chakravarthy P, Raman P & Kishore V V N, Evaluation study of

biomass gasifier system at Haryana, Report submitted to Haryana

State Energy Development Agency, February 1999.

Department of Energy, 1990.Biofuels program Summary,Vol 1

Overview, 1990. Fiscal Year 1989, 11-20. Washington, DC, U S

Department of Energy.

Dhingra Sunil & Kishore V V N, SDC-TERI experience on product

Development Case 1: design, development, and field testing of

gasifier-based silk reeling ovens, In Renewables products and

market, edited by Mahesh Vipradas, 2001.

Hall D O, Barnard G W & Moss P A, 1982.Biomass for Energy in

the Developing Countries. (Pergamon Press, Oxford) 1982.

I T Power, Tata Energy Research Institute, Industrial Development

Society, 1988. Promotion of large scale manufacturer of

decentralized energy technologies in India: preparatory phase (in 3

volumes) 1988.

Joshi V, Kishore V V N & Mande S, Indian Wood and Biomass

Energy Development Project, Report submitted to FAO. March

1994.

Kishore V.V.N, Issues and concerns related to product development

in renewable energy, in Renewables- products and markets, edited

by Mahesh Vipradas (Tata Energy Research Institute, New Delhi)

2001.

Kishore V V N, Dhingra Sunil, Mande Sanjay, Raman P & Srinivas

S N, January 2001. Potential and Status of Thermal Gasifier

Systems for Industrial Applications, Paper presented at Annamalai

University, Chennai, India, January 2001.

Kishore V V N & Ramana P V, Improved cookstoves in rural

India: how imported are they? A critique of the perceived benefits

from the National Programme on Improved Chulhas (NPIC), Ener

Int J, (2001) (accepted).

Kishore V V & Sinha C S, Biogas technology: status and prospects

paper, in PACER Conf Role Innovat Technol Indias Power Sector.

New Delhi, Tata Energy Research Institute, 1990.

Kishore V V N,1989.A heat transfer analysis of fixed dome biogas

plants. biological wastes, Vol. 30, 1989, 199-215.

Kishore V V N & Thukral K, Techno-economics of electric power

generation through renewable sources of energy: a comparative

study, Techno-economics of Renewable Energy Power Generating

Systems. New Delhi, Sarita Prakashan, 1989.

Kishore V V N & Murthy V L N, Review of design procedures for

downdraft Gasifier, Renewable Energy for rural development,

edited by K S Rao, V V N Kishore and N K Bansal (Tata Mc Graw-

Hill, New Delhi) 1989, 563-567.

Kishore V V N, & Rastogi S K, Thermal Analysis of Cardamom

Curing Chambers.Ener Agric, 6, (1989) 245-253.

Kishore V V N, Ranga Rao V. V & Raman P. 1986. Some problems

of implementation of biogas technology in rural areas, Tata Energy

Research Institute, New Delhi [TERI/DP/01/86] 1986.

Mande Sanjay, Pai B R, & Kishore V V N, Study of stoves used in

silk reeling industry.Biomass and Bioener An Inl J,(2000).

Mande Sanjay, Kumar A, & Kishore V V N, A study of large-

cardamom curing chambers in Sikkim, Biomass and Bioener, 16

(1999) 463-473.

Mande Sanjay, Kishore V V N, Kai Oertel & Uwe Sprengel,

Advanced Solar-hybrid adsorption cooling system for decentralized

storage of agricultural products in India, Pro. CLIMA-2000 97,

Brussels (August-September 1997).

Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy Sources, Government of

India, Annual Report 1999-2000. Mukunda H S,Shrinivasa U &

Dasappa S, Portable single-pan wood stoves of high efficiency for

domestic use, Sadhana,13 (part 4) (December 1988) 237-270.

Pachauri R K, Dwivedi B N, Joshi V, Kishore V V N, & Kanetkar

Rajshree S, Indian Wood and Biomass Energy Development

Project, Project Document (1994-1999), submitted to Food and

Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, September, 1994.

Pal R C & Joshi V, Field evaluation of improved cookstoves,

Renewable Energy rural development. edited by V V N Kishore and

N K Bansal (Tata Mc Graw-Hill, New Delhi), 1989, 318-323.


17/18


Rajvanshi A K, Distillation of ethyl alcohol from fermented sweet

sorghum using solar energy. Report submitted to the Department of

Non-conventional Energy Sources (by Nimbkar Agricultural

Research Institute, Phaltan, India, 1984.

Rajeshwari KV, Pant DC, Lata K & Kishore V V N, A novel

process of using enhanced acidification and a UASB reactor for

biomethanation of vegetable market waste, Waste Manage Res

(2002) (accepted).

Raman P, Sujata K, Dasgupta S, & Kishore V V N, Residence Time

distribution studies of biogas digester models. Paper presented at the

National Solar Energy Convention 88. Hyderabad, December.

1988.

Ravindranath N H & Hall D O,Biomass, energy, and environement

A developing country perspective from India (Oxford University

Press, UK) 1995.

Sinha Chandra Shekhar & Kishore V V N, Bio-fuel conversion

processes and technologies. TERI Inform Dig on Ener. (Jan. to Mar.

1991).

Smith K R, Dialectics of improved stoves, Econo and Pol Week,

24(10) (1989) 517-522.

Srinivas S N. July 2000. Biomass consumption in unorganised

enterprises in India.Biomass Users Network. 3.3 (July 2000) (2000)

2-4.

Survey of unorganized manufacturing secdtor, NSS 45 th Round.

National Sample Survey Organization. Department of Statistics,

Government of India, Sarvekshana, 19 (No. 1) (July-September

1995) 64th issue.

Tata Energy Research Institute. Potential for Utilisation of Biomass

Gasifier Systems in Plantation and Related Industries. Report

submitted to the Department of Non-Conventional Energy Sources.

1992.

United State Agency for International Development (USAID),

Lowering expousure of children to indoor Air pollution to prevent

ARI: The need for information and action. Environmental health

project Capsule Report. Number 3, January 1999.

Verhaart P, On designing woodstoves. Proc Indian Acad of Scie

(Eng Sci). 5 (1982) 287-326.

Vimal O P & Tyagi P D, 1988 Bioenergy spectrum, New Delhi:Bio

Energy and Wasteland Development Organisation, Chemistry

Department and Indian Institute of technology, 1988.

Vimal O P & Tyagi P D,Energy from Biomass (Agricol publishers,

New Delhi) 1985.

Dr. Kishore has 22 years of expertise in the areas of biomass utilization, waste-to-energy systems and

solar energy applications. His main work experience consisted of development of products, processes, and

end-use packages starting from conceptualization and prototype development to field-testing, transfer of

technology and identification of market linkages. He led a group of professionals at TERI who successfully

developed and commercialized biomass gasifier for a variety of applications such as sericulture, textile dyeing,

institutional cooking, cardamom curing, rubber drying etc. and for decentralized power generation for remote

areas. Nearly 250 TERI gasifier systems for a variety of end-uses have been installed throughout the country

both under demonstration-cum action research projects supported by Government departments and bilateral

agencies and commercially through manufacturers to whom the technology is transferred. Dr. Kishore has developed a process

of generating energy and manure from wastes such as vegetable market wastes, food processing wastes and other organic wastes

by means of a biphasic process termed TERIs Enhanced Acidification and Methanation (TEAM) process. He has led a team,

which designed, constructed and operated Asias largest solar pond (6000 m2) for supply of process heat to a dairy in Kutch in

north-west India. Earlier, he was instrumental in developing the TERI model of rural biogas plant, a mobile briquetting-

gasification system for rural areas, passive solar systems for comfort conditioning in composite climates, shallow solar pond

system for domestic hot water and solar (thermal) water pump. He also led a group for studying greenhouse gas emissions from

small biomass combustion devices in India under a collaborative project with East West Centre, Hawaii. He has executed several

other projects, which involved policy analysis, laboratory work and extensive field work. He has published over 150 papers in

scientific and technical journals, edited 5 books and holds six patents. Dr. Kishore is a Chemical Engineer with a doctoral degree

from the Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur. He is currently a Senior Fellow and Resource Advisor at TERI and is involved in

several ongoing projects in biomass and waste utilization, and in projects dealing with climate change issues, renewable energy

policy and energy efficiency improvement in rural and small enterprises. He also holds the additional charge of Head, Centre of

Energy and Environment in the Faculty of Applied Sciences, TERI School of Advanced Studies, which has a deemed university

status. He acted as the Dean of Energy Engineering Division of TERI during 1990-1992. Before joining TERI in 1984, he was

working as Scientist C in the Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute of CSIR. He has acted as a chairperson and

member of several committees of the Ministry of Non-conventional Energy Sources (MNES), Department of Science and

Technology, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research etc. Currently, he is a member of the Standing Monitoring and Review

Committee of Gasifier Action Research Project (GARP) of MNES and Monitoring Committee for the project on 5 & 25 kW

decentralized power packs under New Millenium India Technology Leadership Initiative (NMITLI), launched by CSIR. He is the

recipient of Dr. K.S. Rao Memorial award given by the Solar Energy Society of India, for the year 2001.


18/18


Mr. Srinivas has 12 years of experience in the demonstration and dissemination of energy eifficient

and renewable energy technologies specifically biomass energy systems, evaluation of renewable energy

devices in various parts of the country, and energy planning. He has experience in the design of sub-systems

of gasifier based technology for decentralized power generation and thermal applications. He was involved

in the installation of various Renewable energy systems in various parts of the country (India); gasifier based

power generating systems for village electrification in Karnataka; thermal systems in the industries in silk

reeling and dyeing in the state of Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu; Solar home systems, Solarstreet lights, Solar pumping systems and small sized biogas plants in Haryana. He has a record of

supervising the operation of the gasifier based power generation unit (low capacity) for over 5,000 hours in the field and over

30,000 hours for gasifier based thermal applications in silk industry. His conceptualizing of establishing a supply mechanism has

ensured the marketing of gasifier systems in silk dyeing sector and their sustained operation. He has published about 24 papers

in national & international journals, workshops and conferences and edited a book titled Biomass energy systems. Mr.

Srinivas is a Mechanical Engineer with Bachelors degree from the Karnataka Regional Engineering College, Surathkal. He is

currently a Research Associate at TERI and is involved in several ongoing projects in biomass assessment, monitoring of

implementation of biomass devices (Biogas plants and Improved Cookstoves) in Southern India, policy research on promotion

and adoption of cleaner technologies and fuels by low-capacity end-users: Biomass based small and rural industries (Karnataka

state), designing and coordinating entrepreneurship development programmes in the area of renewable energy as project leader

leading a group of about eight interdisciplinary professionals. Before joining TERI, he worked as Project Engineer atCombustion, Gasification and Propulsion Laboratory, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore on a project demonstrating the

decentralized power generation through gasification technology and also worked as a lecturer for a very brief period at BapujiInstitute of Engnineering & Technology, Karnataka. He is the recipient of first prize for presenting a paper given by Ministry of

Non-conventional Energy Sources during the year 1993. He is also one of the team member involved in the development of

gasifier based cocoon cooking system that was awarded Energy Globe 2001- The world Award for Sustainable Energy, Best 50

instituted by Government of Austria.

biofuels of india

Documents