SHOWCASING%20STATE-OF-ART%20GASIFICATION%20SYSTEMS%20FOR%20RURAL%20ELECTRIFICATION

1
SHOWCASING STATE-OF-ART GASIFICATION SYSTEMS FOR
RURAL ELECTRIFICATION

• A Reliable, Efficient
• Affordable Solution

By Dr. B. C. Jain Managing Director
Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt.
Ltd., Ankur, Near Old Sama Jakat Naka, Baroda
390 008, India (0265 2793098/2794021 v Fax
2794042 August 27, 2003
2
ROLE OF RENEWABLE

• Specifically being considered for most difficult
  locations (forest villages, hilly terrains, very
  remote locations, islands, scattered households
  etc.)
• Loads and PLFs are likely to be very low
• Renewables will generally require lower
  investments for such sites
• Reliance will be on local resources. Also the
  entire strategy will be environment friendly
• If properly planned and implemented, it could
  lead to empowerment of local population and
  possible economic development

3
SPECIFIC RENEWABLES

• Major reliance is being placed on three options
• Micro hydel
• Solar PV
• Biomass Gasification
• Wherever water resource is available, micro hydel
  is idea choice
• Wherever the village consists of a small number
  of scattered households, solar home lighting
  system are the natural choice
• Wherever no biomass is available (desert areas
  etc) once again, solar PV system are the only
  choice
• However, a vast majority of location will have
  both biomass and solar radiation and hence
  require intelligent selection

4
RURAL ELECTRIFICATION THROUGH RENEWABLES The
Current Scenario

• Non-Conventional Wisdom assumes that
  photovoltaic home lighting systems and PV power
  packs (510 kWe) are the only viable solutions
  for electrification of small villages/communities
• While home lighting systems are a logical choice
  for scattered households or for households on
  difficult terrains (i.e. scattered individual
  homes on hills or in forests), PV power packs
  still require distribution lines
• Investments are very large and yet, the power
  delivery is not of grid quality or on demand
• Storage batteries are a necessary evil (requiring
  replacement after a few years)

5
THE CHALLENGE
So the challenge was to come up with an
alternative solution that would,

• Provide Grid Quality power even at a few kW level
• Provide power on-demand
• Require No Storage
• Be Efficient Reliable
• Be Affordable
• Depend totally on local resources
• Could be operated and managed by local people

6
THE OPTION OF BIOMASS GASIFICATION
While biomass gasification based power generation
always had the promise, it suffered from the
following drawbacks

• Systems were in dual-fuel mode, requiring some
  amount of diesel
• Small rating systems were not very user-friendly
• Biomass preparation (sizing) was seen to be
  hasslesome for small power needs
• Systems were not packaged well
• Operation Maintenance by local people was not
  assured/built into the system

All of this has indeed changed in the recent past!
7
ANKUR BIOMASS BASED POWER PLANT FOR ISLAND
ELECTRIFICATION
Case Study- I Dual Fuel, Large Systems
BASED ON THE UNQUALIFIED SUCCESS OF THE FIRST, A
SECOND PROJECT INSTALLED IN NEARBY ISLAND
8
ANKUR BIOMASS BASED POWER PLANT FOR ISLAND
ELECTRIFICATION
Case Study- II Dual Fuel, Large Systems
BASED ON THE UNQUALIFIED SUCCESS OF THE FIRST TWO
PROJECTS, NOT ONLY ADDITIONAL PROJECTS ARE
PLANNED BUT THERE IS ALSO A POLICY DECISION TO
ELECTRIFY THE ENTIRE SUNDARBANS AREA USING SOLAR
PHOTO VOLTAICS AND BIOMASS GASIFIERS. OBVIOUSLY,
INSTALLELD CAPACITY IS ALREADY MUCH HIGHER
THROUGH GASIFIERS AND A MUCH LARGER NUMBER OF
CUSTOMERS ARE BEING SERVED AT A MUCH LOWER COST.
9
100 PRODUCER GAS SYSTEMSHIGHER RATINGS(30 kWe
and more)
Developed through a collaborative RD project
jointly funded by MNES (Govt. of India) and Ankur
Scientific, the systems have a number of
outstanding features

• Excellent variable load capability (with 31
  turndown)
• Ideally suited power range for rural
  electrification as well as captive power for
  small industries
• Specific wood/biomass consumption of only 1.2 to
  1.6 kg/kWhr

HENCE, COST OF GENERATION OF Rs. 1 to 2 ONLY
10
ANKUR BIOMASS BASED POWER PLANT FOR ISLAND
ELECTRIFICATION
Case Study - 100 Producer Gas Systems
This is a pilot installation and is likely to
lead to a large number of similar Biomass based
Power Plants throughout Sri Lanka
11
100 PRODUCER GAS SYSTEMS SMALL RATINGS (4 kWe
to 10 kWe)
Totally funded internally out of strong
conviction, the system have following additional
features

• Built-in start-up (No external power source/fuel
  needed)
• Specially designed motorised cutter
• Reasonable variable load capability.
• Optional battery start (in place of manual
  cranking of engine)

We strongly believe remote/rural areas, island
communities etc. deserve the best of technology
without compromises!!!
12
A New Vision with total Conviction Commitment

• Demonstration
• Initiating the un-initiated

• Hands-On Training
• Convincing the skeptic

13
An Overview of the Small Rating Demo Area

• A total of seven system covering thermal
  application, irrigation pumping power
  generation in both Dual Fuel !00 Producer Gas
  Modes

14
A Close-up of Irrigation Pumping System
Aesthetic Ergonomically Designed Package
15
Thermal Applications An Industrial burner two
domestic burners being operated on the gasifier
system
16
Generating Power at Village Level Dual Fuel Mode

• (Output Rating 5 kW)

17
Generating Power at village Level Dual Fuel Mode

• (Output Rating 15 kW)

18
100 Producer Gas Systems Ultimate Solution for
Self -Reliance based on Local Resources

• Output ? 4 kW

(Next Rating 8 to 10 kW)
19
Rural Electrification for Larger Villages, Island
Communities the 100 Producer Gas Way GAS
Power Pack - 40

• (Output Rating 40 kWe)

20
PV POWER PACKS PRODUCER GAS POWER PACKSA
COMPARISON
Take a 8 - 10 kW Power pack
PV Pack Gas Pack
Initial Investment More than Rs. 30 lacs An order of magnitude lower - _at_ Rs 3 lacs
Availability of power 4 6 hours daily 24 hours on demand
Maximum number of units that can be generated daily 50 60 kWhrs 200 240 kWhrs

• In effect, for each kWhr generated, the initial
  investment could be FORTY times lower!
• In addition, the total mismatch between the
  demand and the source requires expensive, battery
  storage while Producer Gas Power Plant can be run
  on demand and needs no storage!!

Is There a Comparison?
21
FREE PV POWERVS. COST OF BIOMASS A FALLACY

• For a 10 kW power pack with equivalent energy
  delivery, daily biomass requirement may not
  exceed 80 kg!
• Whatever price is paid for such biomass really
  remains within the community as the resource is
  local! There is therefore no cost to the
  community for the resource. As a matter of fact,
  there is a high probability that this money
  really goes to the have-nots who could gather
  twigs/branches/firewood for the plant!!
• Analysis suggests that the cost of battery
  replacement is generally higher than the cost of
  biomass used over battery life for equivalent
  energy output. And this money flows out of the
  community!!!

22
MOVING AHEAD

• Categorizing and prioritizing target groups
• Formulating a pilot project covering at least
  five villages in a cluster
• State nodal agency keen on such biomass based
  pilot project, with ability to facilitate matters
• Preparation of a complete project document in a
  month, identifying alternative operational
  strategies, likely constraints, viability issues
• Funding for such quick pilot project documents
• Subsequent decision making SNAs? REST?
  Ministry of Power?

23
RURAL ENERGY SERVICE PROVIDERS (RESPs?)
PERSPECTIVE

• Businessmen / Entrepreneurs and not
  philanthropists
• Limited resources, limited risk-taking ability
• Limited ability to flight red tape would rather
  focus on business basics
• Ability to repay loans and make reasonable
  profits (No NPA approach!)
• Sunk investments (like distribution, civil works)
  might be seen as liabilities with almost no
  resale value

• IN A NUTSHELL,
• Can work hard
• Can manage, operate and maintain power/energy
  supply
• Need a viable, profit-making, easy to implement
  project

24
INDICATIVE PROJECT PROFILES VIABILITY ISSUES
Policy Implications
Village size 30-40 households 30-40 households 30-40 households 30-40 households 30-40 households
Load Profile Mainly lighting fans and a few streetlights Mainly lighting fans and a few streetlights Mainly lighting fans and a few streetlights Mainly lighting fans and a few streetlights Mainly lighting fans and a few streetlights
System Proposed GAS-4 net power of 3.5 kW in 100 gas mode (Rs. In Lakhs) GAS-4 net power of 3.5 kW in 100 gas mode (Rs. In Lakhs) GAS-4 net power of 3.5 kW in 100 gas mode (Rs. In Lakhs) GAS-4 net power of 3.5 kW in 100 gas mode (Rs. In Lakhs) GAS-4 net power of 3.5 kW in 100 gas mode (Rs. In Lakhs)
Financials Basic 1.70 1.70 1.70
Add transport, taxes, duties 0.30 0.30 0.30
Site specific civil works 0.40 0.40 0.40
Misc. Contingencies 0.30 0.30 0.30
Sub Total 2.70 2.70 2.70
(DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED)
Loan Installment (15 years no interest) Rs.1500/month (15 years no interest) Rs.1500/month (15 years no interest) Rs.1500/month (15 years no interest) Rs.1500/month (15 years no interest) Rs.1500/month
OM Expenses Rs.1200/month Rs.1200/month Rs.1200/month
Miscellaneous Rs. 300/month Rs. 300/month Rs. 300/month
So, monthly cash outflow Rs.3000 Rs.3000 Rs.3000
Hence, even if the charges are of the order of
Rs.100/HH/month, there is hardly any income for
RESP!
What is the way out? Capital Subsidy???
25
INDICATIVE PROJECT PROFILES VIABILITY ISSUES
Policy Implications
Village size Upto 200 households Upto 200 households Upto 200 households Upto 200 households Upto 200 households
Load Profile Mainly lighting fans, a few streetlights and provisions for commercial loads Mainly lighting fans, a few streetlights and provisions for commercial loads Mainly lighting fans, a few streetlights and provisions for commercial loads Mainly lighting fans, a few streetlights and provisions for commercial loads Mainly lighting fans, a few streetlights and provisions for commercial loads
System Proposed GAS-40 net power of 30-35 kW in 100 gas mode (Rs. In Lakhs) GAS-40 net power of 30-35 kW in 100 gas mode (Rs. In Lakhs) GAS-40 net power of 30-35 kW in 100 gas mode (Rs. In Lakhs) GAS-40 net power of 30-35 kW in 100 gas mode (Rs. In Lakhs) GAS-40 net power of 30-35 kW in 100 gas mode (Rs. In Lakhs)
Financials Basic 15.32 15.32 15.32
Add transport, taxes, duties 0.50 0.50 0.50
Site specific civil works 1.50 1.50 1.50
Misc. Contingencies 2.00 2.00 2.00
Sub Total 19.32 19.32 19.32
(DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED) (DISTRIBUTION COSTS NOT CONSIDERED)
Loan Installment (15 years no interest) Rs.10,750/month (15 years no interest) Rs.10,750/month (15 years no interest) Rs.10,750/month (15 years no interest) Rs.10,750/month (15 years no interest) Rs.10,750/month
OM Expenses Rs.9,650/month Rs.9,650/month Rs.9,650/month
Miscellaneous Rs. 2,000/month Rs. 2,000/month Rs. 2,000/month
So, monthly cash flow Rs. 25,000 Rs. 25,000 Rs. 25,000
Hence, if the domestic charges are of the order
of Rs.100/HH/month and income through commercial
sales is atleast Rs. 10,00, RESP can have an
income of Rs 5,000/month
May be, a small Capital Subsidy???
26
ISSUES FOR REST MISSION

• To underwrite marketing and entrepreneur
  identification and development (training) costs
• To set up a system for approving RESPs involving
  local banks and technology/solution providers to
  recognise them as such (i.e. Approved RESPs)
• To arrange long-term, interest free loans to
  identified/approved/qualified RESPs.
• To transfer existing distribution infrastructure
  to RESPs at no cost
• Issues of land allotment (where needed),
  right-of-way for distribution and freedom in
  fixation of tariffs/charges.
• Underwriting (additional) costs of distribution
  and civil works (sunk costs)
• To provide outright grant to bridge the gap in
  terms of viability.