A review on organic waste to energy systems in India

A review on organic waste to energy systems in India

Accepted Manuscript Review A Review on Organic Waste to Energy Systems in India Hiya Dhar, Sunil Kumar, Rakesh Kumar PII: DOI: Reference: S0960-8524(...

1MB Sizes 1 Downloads 12 Views

Accepted Manuscript Review A Review on Organic Waste to Energy Systems in India Hiya Dhar, Sunil Kumar, Rakesh Kumar PII: DOI: Reference:

S0960-8524(17)31473-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.08.159 BITE 18768

To appear in:

Bioresource Technology

Received Date: Revised Date: Accepted Date:

26 June 2017 22 August 2017 27 August 2017

Please cite this article as: Dhar, H., Kumar, S., Kumar, R., A Review on Organic Waste to Energy Systems in India, Bioresource Technology (2017), doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.08.159

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

1

A Review on Organic Waste to Energy Systems in India

2

Hiya Dhar1, Sunil Kumar1*, Rakesh Kumar1

3

1

CSIR-National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (CSIR-NEERI), Nehru Marg,

4

Nagpur 440020, Maharashtra India

5

*Corresponding author (Email: [email protected])

6

Abstract

7

Waste generation is increasing day-by-day with the growth of population which directly

8

affects the environment and economy.Organic municipal solid waste (MSW) and

9

agriculturesectors contribute towards maximum waste generation in India. Thus, management

10

of organic waste is very much essential with the increasing demand for energy. The present

11

paper mainly focusses onreviewingwaste to energy (WtE) potentials, its technologies, andthe

12

associated challenges. Different substrates are utilized through various technological

13

optionsin India. Organic waste has good potential to attain sustainable energy yields with and

14

withoutaffecting the environment.A realistic scenario of WtE technologies and their

15

challengesin line with the existing Indian condition is presented in this paper.

16

Keywords:Organic waste, biogas technology, waste to energy, success, challenges

17 18 19 20 21

1

22

1. Introduction

23

Developing countries are facing soaring challenges of managing solid waste and its improper

24

management causes hazards to society and the environment. The high organic waste fractions

25

in the solid waste can lead to the recovery of energy by applying appropriate processing

26

options but on the other side, it can create pollution problem if it is disposed off without

27

adopting any control measures. The most common treatment and disposal options for

28

municipal solid waste (MSW) are composting, mechanical & biological treatment, recycling,

29

waste to energy (WtE) and landfilling (Psomopoulos et al., 2009).

30

According to the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Govt. of India (MNRE 2013),

31

1700 MW of energy will be generated from urban organic solid waste (1500 from MSW and

32

225 MW from sewage) along with 1300 MW of energy from industrial waste

33

(http://www.eai.in/ref/ae/wte/wte.html).

34

There are various WtE systems, such as anaerobic digestion (AD) of organic waste,

35

combustion, pyrolysis, gasification and incineration. In India, the organic waste fraction

36

varies between 40 and 60% of the total solid waste streams. These waste fractions can be

37

utilized through various treatment options, such as composting as organic fertilizer and soil

38

enhancement as well as AD for biogas production. The calorific value of urban solid waste is

39

7.3 MJ/kg, and the moisture content is around 47% (Annepu 2012). “To encourage the AD

40

technology from organic waste, the Government of India has set-up 1 million family-sized

41

plants and hundreds of community plants during the 6th five-year plan period” (Abbasi 2012).

42

The thrust was continued up to the 11thfive-year plan, and till date, close to four million

43

biogas plants have been installed in India (Abbasi 2012). The scale for the growth of Indian

44

economy during 1947 to 2017 was measured through Five-Year Plan by the Planning

45

Commission (1951 - 2014) (http://planningcommission.gov.in/index_oldpc.php) and then the

46

NITI Aayog (2014 - 2017) (http://niti.gov.in/). MNRE implemented the “National Biogas and 2

47

Manure Management Programme (NBMMP) and National Biomass Cook-stoves Programme

48

(NBCP)” in all the States and Union Territories (UTs) of India for setting up of family type

49

biogas plants mainly for rural and semi-urban/households (Abbasi 2012). There are

50

challenges to maintain and operate biogas plants due to lack of skilled manpower. On the

51

basis of a detailed review of literature and experiences of the authors, biogas technologies in

52

India clustered by size, end-users, such as restaurants, communities and substrate inputs, like

53

food, household and agricultural organic waste, and other factors contributing to its success

54

and failure were reviewed and presented in this paper.The objective of the review is to

55

identify the potential from the organic waste to energy conversion in India and its associated

56

challanges.

57

2. Present Energy Demand in India and its Future Requirement

58

Energy requirement is the need of the hours and it is one of the most significant indicators for

59

socio-economic development. The biomass energy from firewood, crop residues, animal

60

dung etc. are still used in rural parts of developing countries like India to meet the energy

61

requirement.

62

India had 17% of the world’s population with highest population density i.e., 382 persons per

63

km2 on an average (Census of India 2011). Since, India is in the transition phase and likely to

64

be categorized under developed country status and hence the energy enhancement is required

65

both from non-renewable and renewable sources. The energy balance of India is presented in

66

Table 1which interprets the total primary energy supply by different energy sources and final

67

energy consumption (Minde et al., 2014).

68

< Table 1 is here>

69

According to US Energy Information Administration (2012), 288 million Indian population

70

are still without electricity (International Energy Statistics 2012). On an average, 75% are

3

71

under electrification rate with urban and rural electrification rates as 94% and 67%,

72

respectively in India (Minde et al., 2014 and World Energy Outlook 2011). In India, 27%

73

people rely on solid fuels for cooking, and 28 % people have access to the electricity (UNDP

74

2009). The traditional cookstoves with efficiency range 10-14 % is still used which leads to

75

insufficient cooking (Ravindranath 1995). Biomass combustion with traditional cookstoves is

76

the major cause of indoor air pollution in India. The incomplete combustion releases

77

temperature entrap pollutants, such as methane (CH4) and black carbon, which have higher

78

global warming impact than carbon dioxide (CO2) per unit of carbon emitted (Bond et al.,

79

2004; Ramanathan and Carmichael 2008).

80

To meet the energy requirement, India needs 3-4 times more energy than the total energy

81

consumed today. The most economical benefits are to minimize environmental pollution and

82

meeting the energy demand for various purposes. In India, the MNRE, Govt. of India

83

initiated a National Master Plan in 1994, which incorporates biogas technology as one of the

84

major WtE options to be developed and adopted in the country (http://www.mnre.gov.in/).

85

The aim of the National Policy on Biofuels is mainstreaming of the biofuels and therefore

86

envisages a major role for it in the energy and transportation sectors of the country in future.

87

It will also bring the rapid development and will promote the cultivation, production and use

88

of biofuels to substitute the fossil fuels for transport to be used in stationary and other

89

applications, which will contribute towards the energy security and climate change

90

mitigations. The goal of the policy is to ensure that a minimum level of biofuels can be used

91

for the market to meet the demand (National Policy on Biofuels, MNRE 2011). Now-a-days,

92

renewable source accounts for 33% of India's primary energy consumptions. India is adopting

93

renewable energy technologies and also taking initiatives towards reducing air pollution and

94

ensuring a more sustainable development (Kumar et al., 2010).

95 4

96 97

3. Organic Waste and its Energy Potential 3.1 Organic Waste Sources and its Management in India

98

Different types of organic waste are available in India. In this paper, an organic waste stream

99

is comprised of organic fraction of MSW (OFMSW), agriculture waste (AW), waste water,

100

and animal dung.

101

Urbanization contributes enhanced MSW generation and its unscientific handling damages

102

the environment causing health hazards. With the introduction of Solid Waste Rule, 2016 of

103

the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF& CC), the Ministry of

104

Urban Development (MUD) aimed to guide all urban areas in the country towards achieving

105

sustainable municipal solid waste management (MSWM) system adopting the principle of

106

waste minimization at source based on 3R principles, such as reduce, reuse and recycle with

107

proper systems of collection, segregation, processing, transportation, and disposal. MSWM

108

system in India is still not following its entire chain with full strength. According to the

109

database of Swachh Bharath Mission (SBM) and State-wise status of implementation of

110

various components under SBM (up to September 2016) of the MUD, only 21.45 % of the

111

MSW is treated, and the remaining is still going to the landfill (SBM 2016).The existing

112

status of MSWM in India is depicted in Figure 1. According to Solid Waste Rule 2016,

113

waste should be segregated by the generator and stored them in three separate streams namely

114

domestic hazardous, bio-degradable, and non-biodegradable wastes in suitable bins. The

115

segregated wastes should be handed over to the authoried waste pickers or waste collectors as

116

per the direction or notification issued by the local authorities from time to time (Solid Waste

117

Rule 2016). Mainly municipalities are responsible for the collection of waste from door-to-

118

door. But, segregation component is one of the biggest challenges for Indian Municipal

119

corporations. However, the majority of the urban local bodies (ULBs) do not have the

5

120

capacity and appropriate action plan along with funds for execution and enactment of the

121

Solid Waste Rule (CPCB, 2013).

122



123

India is the world 2nd largest producer of paddy after Chian. Presently, India is producing 98

124

million metric ton (MT) of paddy and around 130 million MT of rice straw. Now on an

125

average 50% rice straw is used as fodder and the remaining part is just thrown away along

126

with other solid waste. India also produces about 350,000 MT of cane generating

127

approximately 50 million MT of cane trash which can be good potential to produce fuel with

128

appropiate treatment (http://abccarbon.com/biomass-turning-agricultural-waste-to-green-

129

power-in-india/).Silica content is very high in cane trash, which has no commercial use and to

130

reduce the volume, it is entirely burned. Other agricultural wastes,such as aize, cotton,

131

millets, pulse, sunflower & other stalks, groundnut shells and coconut trash are available in

132

India. Farmers have time constraints due to crop cycle and hence huge quantities of biomass

133

are mostly destroyed by fire contributing to great haze and global warming with overall

134

environmental and health impacts.

135

The main physical components of MSW in India are compostable, recyclable and inert.

136

Indian MSW comprised of 40-60% biodegradable, 30-50% inert waste and 10-30%

137

recyclable materials (Kumar et al., 2009). Kumar et al., 2009 also revealed that MSW

138

contains nitrogen content as 0.64 ± 0.8 %, phosphorus as 0.67 ± 0.15 %, potassium as

139

0.68 ± 0.15 %, and C/N ratio as 26 ± 5 (Kumar et al., 2009).

140 141

3.2 Potential of Energy Recovery from Organic Waste in India

142

There are several other WtE technologies available in India, but most of them are not

143

successfully running now-a-days. The most common WtE is AD, refuse derived fuel,

144

combustion.The only dissimilarity between RDF generation and combustion is that the 6

145

volume reduction of waste rather than the production of energy. Most of the waste belongs to

146

organic component (about 52%) and also the paper component is about 10%. Hence, WtE has

147

been recognized as a renewable source of energy by the Govt. of India (Singh et al., 2014).

148

MSW can be converted into the useful form of energy using a number of different

149

processes which are available in India. There are 45 Class-I Metro Cities (>1, 000,000)

150

having population 114,029,267, 440 Class-I Cities (100,000-1,000,000) having population

151

106,943,560 and 410 Class-II Towns having population 156,133,298 in India. The population

152

of small town (10,000-50,000) is 72,375,147 and village (<10,000) (population) is

153

761,373,705 (Census of India, 2011).Several studies were carried out on organic waste

154

generation in India, which is presented in Tables 2 (a) through (d).

155

From Table 2 (a), it is observed that waste generations in various categories of the city

156

are in the range 0.27 to 0.57 kg/cap/day (NEERI 2005, Kumar et al., 2009), 0.16 to 0.48

157

kg/cap/day (CPCB 2000), 0.2 to 0.6 kg/cap/day (NEERI 2005, Kumar et al., 2009),

158

respectively. Volatile solids (VS) of MSW in India are 84.6 ± 5.8 % on the dry and wet basis

159

in all types of cities, towns, and villages (Wakadikaret al., 2012). The organic fractions of

160

MSW is also in the range 19539-26669 t/day (NEERI Report 2005) for metro cities and

161

15186-16904 MT/day (NEERI 1996) for class I cities, 26,230 t/day (CPCB 2000) for class II

162

town, 6,080 MT/day (CPCB 2000) for small towns and 63,955 MT/day (CPCB 2000) for

163

villages. Thus, a different class of cities, town, and villages have different energy potentials

164

from organic fractions. Total energy contents of organic waste in MSW are 2282 MW-h for

165

metro cities, 676 MW-h for class I cities, 624 MW-h for class II towns, 289 MW-h for a

166

small town and 3041 MW-h for villages.

167

India is an agricultural based country, and different types of crops are available.

168

However, Department of Agriculture, Government of India mainly included cereals, oilseeds,

169

pulses, sugarcane, horticulture and others as major crops of India. Hence, in this study, 7

170

mainly these crops are included, and energy potentials are calculated from their residues and

171

presented in Table 2 (b). Cereals are again considered mainly as rice, maize, bajra, jowar and

172

wheat. Oilseeds mainly consider as mustard and rapeseeds, soybean, groundnut and

173

sunflower. Pulses are considered as tur, lentils, gram; Horticulture as a coconut and others are

174

considered as jute, cotton and etc. in this study. Production of cereals, oilseeds, pulses,

175

sugarcanes, horticulture, and other crops are 232, 24, 11, 359, 14, 38 MT/year (Agricultural

176

statistics at a glance 2015), respectively. Hiloidhari et al., 2014 listed different residue

177

production ratios and surplus production of different crops. Based on calculations, residue

178

production of cereals, oilseeds, pulses, sugarcanes, horticulture, and other crops are 429, 46,

179

17, 137, 64, 217 MT/year (Hiloidhari et al., 2014), respectively. The surplus residues are 132,

180

11, 6, 51, 26, 95 MT/year (Hiloidhari et al., 2014). Many studies reported different heating

181

values for different crops which are in the range 10-20 MJ/kg (Wellinger et al., 2013;

182

Hiloidhari et al., 2014; Lethomaki 2006; Nzial et al., 2015) and based on heating value,

183

energy potential (Basic Statistics on Indian Petroleum & Natural Gas, 2009–10) is calculated.

184

Energy potentials of cereals, oilseeds, pulses, sugarcanes, horticulture, and other crops are

185

50.5, 5, 2.7, 28.1, 81, 46.3 (x107) MW-h, respectively.

186

The generations of wastewater in major cities and towns are 15456.08, 20210.04, and

187

2696.70 MLD, respectively (CPCB 2005-06, 2009). Presently, total treatment capacity of the

188

sewage is 30 % of total generation (CPCB 2009) and hence rest of 70 % can be utilized as co-

189

substrate for biogas production. VS for wastewater is 3.75 % (w/w) and so total energy

190

content available for various categories of the cities and town are 68, 88, 12 MW-h,

191

respectively. Energy potentials from wastewater are presented in Table 2 (c).

192

As per 19th livestock census 2012, India has total 300,827 (in thousands) large animals, such

193

as, cattle, buffalo, horse & ponies, camels and mules available. Large animals dung based

194

biomass has immense energy potential. Cattle and Horse & ponies daily produce 11.6 kg 8

195

(Kaur et al, 2014), Buffalo produce 12.2 kg (Kaur et al., 2014), and Mules produce 12 kg

196

excreta per animal wet weight. Total animal manure is estimated in India is 568040 MT/day

197

and out of this, 15 % of the total manure is utilizied by the local people for daily purposes.

198

Remaining 85 % can be utilized for the production of biogas in rural and urban areas. Energy

199

efficiency always lies between 35-40 %. Energy production potential of cattle, buffalo, horse

200

& ponies, and mules are 419108, 288635, 1251, 610, 409 MW-h (/day), respectively. Energy

201

potential from large animal excreta is presented individually in Table 2 (d).

202



203

The conversion of WtE takes place mainly through two processes i.e., thermo-chemical and

204

bio-chemical/biological technologies. Again thermo-chemical conversion has four processes

205

i.e., gasification, liquefaction, incineration, combustion and pyrolysis. Bio-chemical

206

conversion includes digestion and fermentation. Digestion can produce biogas which is

207

majorly mixture of CH4 and CO2 and fermentation can produce ethanol (McKendry

208

2002).The basic principle and important parameters affecting are presented in Table 3.

209

Thermo-chemical conversion is an appliance of heat/temperature and chemical processes

210

produce the energy from any type of biomass or organic waste. This process is best suited

211

for organic wastes containing high calorific value and low moisture content and

212

characterized by higher temperature and conversion rates. Thermo-chemical conversion

213

processes mainly include three subcategories, such as pyrolysis, gasification, and liquefaction

214

(Sirvio and Rintala 2002; Demirbas 2009).

215

Biochemical conversion involves bacteria or other microorganisms and use of enzymes to

216

break down biomass into liquid fuels, such as biogas or fuels. Major biochemical conversion

217

technologies are AD (or biomethanation) and fermentation (Fehrenbacher 2009).

218



9

219

Two main bio-chemical/biological technologies processes are named as fermentation

220

and AD to derive energy from organic waste. Fermentation is used commercially to produce

221

ethanol from sugar and starch crops on a large-scale in different countries (McKendry 2002).

222

However, India is generating mostly cellulosic and lignocellulosic organic solid waste. The

223

conversion of lignocellulosic biomass is more compound due to the existence of longer-chain

224

polysaccharide molecules in the fermentation process.

225

3.3. AD of Organic Waste Fractions for Energy Production

226

The major contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is combustion of fossil fuels

227

which can be reduced though organic waste conversions applying different technologies. This

228

section mainly presents the theoretical CH4 yield estimation from individual solid waste

229

substrates.

230

AD is the conversion of organic waste into biogas which is a mixture of CH4 and CO2 with

231

small quantities of other gasses (Kumar et al., 2013). AD occurs in an enclosed space under

232

controlled conditions of temperature, moisture, pH, etc. It is an engineered anerobic

233

decomposing system depand on the waste characteristics (Ambulkar and Shekdar 2004). If all

234

these materials are processed through AD, then it will generate significant quantity of biogas

235

(250–350 m3/MT of waste) (NEERI 1996), and manure, it could also reduce the burden on

236

landfill and prevent the dilapidation of environmental quality due to uncontrolled breakdown

237

of organic matter in landfills (Ambulkar and Shekdar 2004). The major environmental

238

problems, such as desertification, land errosion, deforestation, CO2 emission, indoor air

239

pollution, organic pollution can be prevented with the generation of biogas. This will also

240

bring employment opportunities (Anjum2012).

241

AD is a commercially proven technology and widely used for the treatment of high moisture

242

content organic wastes i.e., 80–90% moisture (McKendry 2002). In India, MSW,sewage,

10

243

manure, agricultural residue, biomass are available as 135.5 , 44.9, 653, 200, 140 Million

244

MT/year, respectively (Nand 1999). The biomass availability in India is estimated as about

245

500 million MT per year. The surplus biomass availability is about 120 – 150 million MT

246

per year covering agricultural and forestry residues in India (MNRE 2015, Biomass power

247

and cogeneration program 2016). AD of energy crops, residues, and wastes are of increasing

248

interest to reduce climate change and to supply energy in a sustainable way.

249



250

Biogas production provides a versatile transporter of renewable energy as CH4 can be a

251

substitute for fossil fuel. Both heat and power can be generated along with fuel to the vehicle.

252

However, biomass with high moisture content is appropriate for biological conversion

253

process with lesser cost and significantly less environmental impact.

254

The first-ever anaerobic digester was constructed in 1897 at Matunga Leper Asylum,

255

Bombay (Mumbai) to utilize human waste to gas generation to meet the requirement for

256

lighting (Khanal 2008). Then, 1st successful biogas production from manure was attempted in

257

1939 by Dr. S.V. Deshai at Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi (KVIC

258

1993). The Government of India had envisaged setting up of 1 million family-sized plants

259

and hundreds of community plants during the sixthfive-year plan. The thrust was continued

260

through to the 11thfive-year plan and up-to 11th plan, close to 4 million biogas plants were

261

installed in India (MNRE 2011). NBMMP had planned to set-up 150,000 “family-type”

262

biogas plants during 2009–2010. Several grass-root level voluntary agencies and self-

263

employed trained workers are involved in promoting and constructing these biogas plants as

264

well as providing maintenance services (Abbasi et al., 2012).

265

The organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW) is a heterogeneous material in

266

which the composition varies in different states of India . The heterogeneous nature of

11

267

OFMSW is affected by various factors, including regional differences, climate, the extent of

268

recycling, frequency of collection, seasonal, cultural practices, as well as changes in

269

technology (Tchobanoglouset al., 1977, Gunaseelan 1997). Organic matter can be broken into

270

simple form within few weeks or months by different micro-organisms which produce

271

different gases, such as CH4, hydrogen (H2). These gases can be a useful resource for energy.

272

In contrast, CH4 (in biogas) burns with a clean blue flame which is much hotter than fire gas

273

by traditional resources (Singh and Sooch 2004). The efficiency of biogas cook-stoves in

274

developing countries might range from 20–56% which is depending on the design and

275

operational conditions (Singh and Sooch2004, Itodo 2007).

276

< Figure 2 is here>

277

Few researcher concluded that experimental biogas yields are 288 m3/TVS and 300-400

278

m3/TVS for food waste and OFMSW, respectively (Owen and Chynoweth 1993; Mohan and

279

Bindu 2008, Davidson et al., 2007). CH4 yields of food waste and two mixtures of

280

unscreened manure and food waste in the ratio of 68-32 and 52-48 produced 0.353, 0.282 and

281

0.311 m3/kgVS, respectively (El-Mashadand Zhang 2010). El-Mashad and Zhang 2010 also

282

developed first order kinetic model to predict CH4 yields from co-digestion of food waste &

283

manure. A mixture of 60% food waste & 40% manure was recommended in digestion time of

284

20 days (Cho 1995 and Forster-Carneiro 2007).

285

Biogas production can be enhanced in the range 10-80 % through AD of organic waste, such

286

as water hyacinth with partially digested cattle dung, cotton stalks, wheat straw, maize stalks,

287

and rice straw (El Shinnawiet al., 1989; Somayaji and Khanna 1994; Gunaseelan 2004).

288

Digestion can be increased enormously due to the introduction of source separation at the

289

time of collection of waste. Food waste has the potential to generate 367 m3 of biogas from 1

290

MT dry waste with 65% CH4 in it (Kondusamy and Kalamdhad 2014).

12

291

The calorific values of diesel and biogas are 44.8 MJ/m3 and 21.6 MJ/m3, respectively and

292

hence it can be used for transportation purpose (Uusitalo et al., 2013).

293

According to the MNRE Biomass, India/ Energy statistics 2012, biomass power potential is

294

17, 538 MW in India as on 31st March 2011 (Energy Statistics 2012). Indian biomass and has

295

a potential of 16,881 MW from agro-residues and plantations, 5000 MW from bagasse

296

cogeneration and 2700 MW of energy from waste (Subramanian 2007). Biomass power

297

generation industry has funds flow of more than Rs. 6000 million every year which generates

298

more than 5000 million units of electricity with employment of more than 10 million man-

299

days in the rural areas (Kumar et al., 2010).

300

4. Realistic Applications of Waste to Energy and its Challenges

301

4.1 Realistic Energy Potential of Biogas from Organic Waste in India

302

The mostly used biogas plant technologies available are KVIC Floating Drum type,

303

Janata Fixed Dome type, Deenbandhu fixed dome type, Shramik Bandhu biogas plant. Singh

304

and Sooch (2004) made a comparative study of different models of biogas plants and

305

observed that for 1 to 6 m3 capacity biogas plant installation, annual operational costs are

306

highest for KVIC model followed by Janata fixed dome than Deenbandhu fixed dome (Singh

307

and Sooch 2004). 279 conventional compost plants, 138 vermicomposting plants, 172

308

biomethnation facilities, 29 RDF facilities and 8 WtE facilities are available in India

309

(Mahpatra 2015; http://planningcommission.nic.in/reports/genrep/rep_wte1205.pdf; 2014).

310

The success and failure stories of WtE technologies are presented in Table 4. The first

311

MSW power plant was installed at Timarpur, Delhi with incineration technology. The

312

capacity was 300 TPD to produce 3.5 MW power which was financed by the Denmark

313

government and the formerly MNES (Ministry of Non-conventional Energy Sources), now

314

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), Govt. of India in 1989. The plant was

315

closed down within 2 years after an unsuccessful run. The next full-size WtE was started in 13

316

1999 with 600 TPD capacity at Hyderabad with the help of Hyderabad Municipal

317

Corporation (HMC) by M/s SELCO International Ltd in which the waste was converted into

318

energy-rich fuel pellets (Kumar 2000), which was also closed in 2009.

319

The WtE plant was established at Vijayawada by Shriram Energy Systems, Ltd.,

320

Hyderabad with a capacity of 500 TPD of MSW and its power generation capacity was 6

321

MW with operation from December 2003. Another plant with a capacity of about 700 TPD of

322

MSW was established by M/s SELCO International Ltd., at Gandhamguda near Hyderabad

323

with power generating capacity of6.6 MW which is in operation since November 2003. M/s

324

Shriram Energy Systems Ltd., Hyderabad, will also commission a third WtE plant at

325

Vishakhapattanam. A WtE plant (600 TPD capacity) is also underway at Chennai (Kumar et

326

al., 2009).

327



328

In India, the estimation of biogas production was about 2,075.7 million m3 in 2014-15. This

329

is equivalent to 66 million domestic LPG cylinders weighed to 14.2 L and it is equivalent to

330

5% of the total LPG utilization of India. Maharashtra produces the highest amount of biogas

331

which is 357.8 million m3 while Andhra Pradesh produces 216.5 million m3. This is also

332

stated that 0.25 million families were benefited from biogas plants (https://factly.in/biogas-

333

production-in-india-is-about-5-percent-of-the-total-lpg-consumption/).

334

A commercial biogas plant was installed in Satara (Maharashtra) under Indo-German

335

Development Partnership for generating 25,000 m3 of biogas/day from 600 m3 of sugar

336

waste. Another biogas bottling project was commissioned at Village Talwade, District Nashik

337

in Maharashtra with 500 m3/day capacity in 2011. The NISARGRUNA Technology

338

developed by Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) (2004) plant was supported by

339

MNRE. The purity of the biogas is around 98% in this plant. The biogas is compressed to

14

340

150-bar pressure for filling in cylinders (https://factly.in/biogas-production-in-india-is-about-

341

5-percent-of-the-total-lpg-consumption/).

342

A developed biogas plant with a capacity of 5,000 m3/day was commissioned in 2015 at

343

Sundarpur village of Umreth Taluka in Anand district of Gujarat. This can convert agriculture

344

wastes, such as banana stems, potato peels, animal dung, sugarcane waste and waste. The

345

biogas is being supplied to nearby industries (https://factly.in/biogas-production-in-india-is-

346

about-5-percent-of-the-total-lpg-consumption/).

347

In Panjab, a biogas bottling project was commissioned with a capacity of 600 m3/day in 2011.

348

Kitchen waste, cattle dung and poultry waste are used as raw materials. The plant is based on

349

Multistage Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor Technology which produces 98%

350

CH4. The upgraded biogas is compressed to 150-bar pressure for filling in cylinders

351

(https://factly.in/biogas-production-in-india-is-about-5-percent-of-the-total-lpg-

352

consumption/).

353

One more NIGARGRUNA plant was installed by Mangalore City Corporation, where up to 2

354

MT of biowaste is processed per day to produce 100-160 m3 of CH4. Raw materials used in

355

this plant are kitchen waste from hotels, vegetables and other green wastes.

356

A biogas plant with a capacity of 2MT/daty is in operation at Palayam, Thiruvananthapuram

357

which produces 30 KW of electricity/day. Leftovers from the fish and vegetable market along

358

with approximately1,500 household wastes are used as raw materials in this plant.

359

(https://factly.in/biogas-production-in-india-is-about-5-percent-of-the-total-lpg-

360

consumption/).

361

As on 31.03.2011, out of total biogas plants installed (4.198 million), a maximum number of

362

such plants installed is in Maharashtra (0.8 million) followed by Andhra Pradesh, Uttar

15

363

Pradesh, Karnataka and Gujarat each with about 0.4 million biogas plants (Energy Statistics

364

2012).

365

4.2 Success and Challenges of Realistic WtE Applications in India

366

The present review describes energy demand and potentials of MSW & other organic wastes

367

available in India. Different success and failure story of AD are also presented in this paper.

368

The technical feasibility of organic WtE facility is proven and established at few places in

369

India. However, there are some issues, such as high capital, maintenance and operating cost,

370

skilled manpower, source segregation, changes in climatic conditions throughout the year,

371

which need to be looked into. Biogas plants were set-up but later on cost-benefit analysis

372

proved that it is not worthy. Always shut down of the plants was not due to failure of

373

technology but due to non-customosation of technology addressing local situations.

374

Biogas plants of organic waste contribute a healthier figure for the farming community due to

375

the reduction of odor, pathogens and weeds from the manure along with generation of

376

improved fertilizer easily absorbed by the plant. Biogas not only produces energy but it also

377

played a vital role in waste management, environment cleaning and providing a continuous

378

fuel supply in the future. Conventional biogas is consumed for cooking purposes but with

379

increasing demand for renewable energy, its application has widened (Vijay 1996, Katuwal

380

2009, Weiland 2010,Gosens 2012). By keeping various parameters within the desired range,

381

gas production can be improved but at the same time, maintenance and regular monitoring

382

have been identified as one of the major hurdles (Yadvika et al.,2004).

383

Another constraint is the requirement of adequate expertise for construction and maintenance

384

of biogas plants which hinder the adoption of biogas technology in developing countries

385

(Surendra et al., 2010).

386

16

387

5. Conclusion and Recommendations

388

Many challenges are associated with WtE projects which can be overcome through proper

389

segregation and adoption of appropriate treatment technologies.Organic WtE can be the

390

sustainanble approach towards this which can substantially reduce the quantity of wastes,

391

generate substantial quantities of energy and reduces environmental pollution along with a

392

number of social and economic benefits. Field trial of WtE technology should be focused in

393

the near future.The synchronization of all the stakeholdersis important for any successful

394

waste management project. Involvement of citizens' participation is still lacking and hence

395

publicawareness in any waste management project is warranted.

396 397

Acknowledgements

398

The authors are thankful to the Department of Science and Technology (DST), Govt. of India, New

399

Delhi for funding the study (Project No GAP-1-2102). The authors are also grateful to Council of

400

Scientific and Industrial Research-National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (CSIR-

401

NEERI), Nagpur for giving permission to publish this work. Further, the authors declare that there

402

are no conflicts of interest.

403 404 405 406

References 1. 19th Livestock Census 2012 All India Report , Ministry of Agriculture Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi

407

2. Abbasi, T., 2012, Chapter 2, A Brief History of Anaerobic Digestion and “Biogas”

408

Biogas Energy, SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science 2, 11(doi 10.1007/978-1-

409

4614-1040-9_2)

17

410

3. Ambulkar, A.R., Shekdar, A.V., 2004. Prospects of biomethanation technology in the

411

Indian context: a pragmatic approach. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 40,

412

111–128

413 414 415 416 417 418 419

4. Anaerobic digestion of food waste. East Bay Municipal Utility District; March 2008. Final Report 5. Anjum, A, 2012. Biomass: energy and environmental concerns in developing country. Res. J. of Environ. Sci. 1/1, 54-57. 6. Annepu, R., 2012. Sustainable Solid Waste Management in India. M. Tech Thesis at Columbia University. 7. Basic Statistics on Indian Petroleum & Natural Gas, 2009–10. Ministry of Petroleum

420

& Natural Gas, Government of India; http://petroleum.nic.in/petstat.pdf

421

8. Biomass power and cogeneration programme, 2016, MNRE, Govt. of India

422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429

http://mnre.gov.in/related-links/grid-connected/biomass-powercogen/ 9. Bond, T., Venkataraman, C., Masera, O., 2004. Global atmospheric impacts of residential fuels. Energy Sustain. Dev. 8(3), 20–32. 10. Census of India, 2011 (accessed on November 2016) http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/hh-series/hh01.html 11. Central Pollution Control Board 2013. Annual review report on Implementation of municipal solid waste (Management and Handling) Rule 2000 12. Central Statistics Office, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation,

430

Government of India, Available online:

431

http://mospi.nic.in/mospi_new/upload/Energy_Statistics_2012_28mar.pdf (Accessed

432

on 18th April 2016)

433 434

13. Cho, J.K., Park, S.C., Chang, H.N., 1995. Biochemical methane potential and solidstate anaerobic-digestion of Korean food wastes. Biores. Technol. 52, 245–253.

18

435

14. Davidson, A., Gruvberger, C., Christensen, T.H., 2007. Methane yield in source-

436

sorted organic fraction of municipal solid waste. Waste Manag. 27(3), 406-414.

437

15. Demirbas, A., Thermochemical conversion processes. 2009. Green Energy and

438

Technology, Biofuels, 261-304. ISBN: 978-1-84882-010-4 (Print) 978-1-84882-011-1

439

(Online).

440

16. Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture

441

& Farmers Welfare, Government of India, "Agricultural statistics at a glance 2015",

442

http://eands.dacnet.nic.in/PDF/Agricultural_Statistics_At_Glance-2015.pdf

443

17. El Shinnawi, M.M., El Tahawi, B.S., El Houssieni, M., Fahmy, S.S., 1989.Changes of

444

organic constituents of crop residues and poultry wastes during fermentation for

445

biogas production. J.Appl.Microbiol.Biotechnol. 5 (4), 475–486.

446 447 448

18. El-Mashad HM, Zhang R, 2010. Biogas production from co-digestion of dairy manure and food waste. Biores.Technol. 101/11, 4021-4028. 19. Fehrenbacher, K., 2009. Iogen suspends U.S. cellulosic ethanol plant plans.

449

http://earth2tech.com/2008/06/04/iogen-suspends-us-cellulosic-ethanol-plant-plans/.

450

(Accessed August 2017).

451

20. Forster-Carneiro, T., Perez, M., Romero, L.I., Sales, D., 2007. Dry-thermophilic

452

anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of the municipal solid waste: focusing on the

453

inoculum sources. Biores. Technol. 98, 3195–3203.

454

21. Gauri P. Minde, Sandip S. Magdum and V. Kalyanraman, 2014. Biogas as a

455

Sustainable Alternative for Current Energy Need of India, Journal of Sustainable

456

Energy & Environment 4, 121-132

457 458

22. Gosens J, Lu Y, He G, Bluemling B, Beckers TA, Sustainability effects of householdscale biogas in rural China, Energy Policy (2012).

19

459 460 461 462 463 464

23. Gunaseelan, N.V., 1997. Anaerobic digestion of biomass for methane production: A review. Biomass and Bioenergy. 13(1–2), 83–114. 24. Gunaseelan, V.N., 2004. Biochemical methane potential of fruits and vegetable solid waste feedstocks. Biomass & Bioenergy. 26, 389–399. 25. Hiloidhari, M., Das, D., Baruah, D.C., 2014. Bioenergy potential from crop residue biomass in India. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 32, 504–512.

465

26. http://abccarbon.com/biomass-turning-agricultural-waste-to-green-power-in-india/.

466

27. http://niti.gov.in/

467

28. http://planningcommission.gov.in/index_oldpc.php

468

29. http://www.eai.in/ref/ae/wte/wte.html (accessed on January 2017)

469

30. http://www.mnre.gov.in/

470

31. https://factly.in/biogas-production-in-india-is-about-5-percent-of-the-total-lpg-

471 472 473 474

consumption/ (accessed on January 2017) 32. Itodo, I.N., Agyo, G.E., Yusuf, P., 2007. Performance evaluation of a biogas stove for cooking in Nigeria. J. Energy South Africa 2007; 18:14–8. 33. Kaur, G., Singh-Brar, Y., Kothari, D.P., 2014. Estimation of large animals dung for

475

power generation – a case study of District Bathinda, Punjab. IOSR Journal of

476

Electrical and Electronics Engineering. 9(5). 50-55.

477 478 479

34. Khanal, S.K., 2008. Anaerobic biotechnology for bioenergy production: principles and applications. Ames, Iowa, United States: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 35. Kondusamy, D., Kalamdhad, A.S., 2014. Pre-treatment and anaerobic digestion of

480

food waste for high rate methane production–a review. J. of Environ. Chemical Engg.

481

1, 1821-1830.

20

482

36. Kumar, A., Kumar, K., Kaushik, N., Sharma, S., Mishra, S., 2010. Renewable energy

483

in India: current status and future potentials Renewable and Sustainable Energy

484

Reviews. 14, 2434–2442

485

37. Kumar, K.V., Sridevi, V., Rani, R., Sakunthala, M.,Kumar, C.S., 2013. A review

486

onproduction of biogas, fundamentals, applications & its recent enhancing techniques.

487

Elixir Chem. Engg. 57, 14073-14079

488 489

38. Kumar, S., 2000. Technology options for municipal solid waste-to-energy project. TERI Information Monitor on Environmental Sciences. 5(1), 1–11

490

39. Kumar, S., Bhattacharyya, J.K., Vaidya, A.N., Chakrabarti, T., Devotta, S., Akolkar,

491

A.B., 2009. Assessment of the status of municipal solid waste management in metro

492

cities, state capitals, class I cities, and class II towns in India: an insight. Waste Mang.

493

29(2), 883-895.

494 495 496 497 498 499

40. Lethomaki, A., 2006. “Biogas Production from Energy Crops and Crops Residues", Finland: Jyvaskyla University, 91. 41. Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, 2011, Booklets on renewable energy. MNRE. http://mnre.gov.in/re-booklets.htm (Accessed April 2016) 42. Mohan, S., Bindu, B.K., 2008. Effect of phase separation on anaerobic digestion of kitchen waste. NRC Research Press, 19.

500

43. Mohapatra, P., 2015. History of waste to energy in India, 2015. Paper presentation at

501

National conference of waste to energy. Casuarina, India Habitat Centre, New Delhi,

502

organised by Toxic Link

503 504 505 506

44. Murphy, J., Braun, R., Weiland, P., Wellinger, A., 2011. Biogas from crop digestion. IEA Bioenergy, Task 37 45. Nand, K., 1999. Biomethanation from agro-industrial and food processing wastes. In: Joshi, V.K., Pandey, A. (Eds.), Biotechnolgy: Food Fermentation Microbiology, 21

507

Biochemistry and Technology, vol. II. Educational publishers and distributers, Kerala,

508

India, 1349–1372.

509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516

46. National Policy on Biofuels, 1994 Ministry of New & Renewable Energy, Government of India 47. NEERI Report, 1996. Solid waste management in Municipal Corporation of Delhi area. National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, India. 48. NEERI Report, 2005, Assessment of status of Municipal Solid Waste Management in Metro Cities, State Capitals, Class I cities and Class II towns 49. New bulletin: Biofuel up to date - http://biofueluptodate.com/biogas-plants-in-indiagobar-gas-commercial-production-capacity/ (Accessed on January 2017)

517

50. Nixon, J.D., Dey, P.K., Ghosh. S.K., 2017. Energy recovery from waste in India: An

518

evidence-based analysis. Sustainable Energ. Technologies and Assess. 21, 23-32

519

51. Nzila, C., Njuguna, D., Madara, D.,et al., 2015. Characterization of agro-residues for

520 521 522 523 524 525

biogas production and nutrient recovery in Kenya. JETEAS. 6(5), 327- 334. 52. Owens, J.M., Chynoweth, D.P., 1993. Biochemical methane potential of municipal solid-waste (MSW) components. Water Sci. and Technol. 27, 1–14. 53. Peter McKendry, 2002.Energy production from biomass (part 2): conversion technologies. Bioresource Technology 83: 47–54 54. Planning Commission. Report of the Task Force on Waste to Energy (Volume I),

526

Potential of Waste Biomass, J BioremedBiodeg, S8.Government of India Available

527

at: http://planningcommission.nic.in/

528 529 530 531

55. Psomopoulos, C.S., Bourka, A., Themelis, N.J., 2009. Waste-to-energy: A review of the status and benefits in USA. Waste Manag. 29, 1718-1724. 56. Ramanathan, V., Carmichael, G., 2008. Global and regional climate changes due to black carbon. Nat Geosci. 1(4), 221–227.

22

532

57. Ravindranath, N.H., Hall, D.O., 1995. Biomass, Energy and Environment: a

533

developing country perspective from India, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

534

58. SBM 2016, http://swachhbharaturban.gov.in/ (Accessed on November 2016)

535

59. Singh, K.J., Sooch, S.S., 2004. Comparative study of economics of different models

536

of family size biogas plants for state of Punjab, India. Energy Convers. Manag. 45,

537

1329–41.

538 539 540 541 542

60. Singh, R., Roy, S., Singh, S., 2014. Energy recovery from waste – a review, Impending Power Demand and Innovative Energy Paths. 1, 298-303. 61. Sirvio, A., and Rintala, J.A., 2002. Renewable energy production in farm scale: biogas from energy crops. Bio Energy News. 6, 16. 62. Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016.

543

http://www.moef.nic.in/sites/default/files/SWM%202016_0.pdf

544

63. Somayaji, D., Khanna, S., 1994. Biomethanation of rice and wheat

545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554

straw.WorldJ.Microbiol. Biotechnol.10 (5), 521–523. 64. Status of MSW generation, collection, treatment and disposal in Class I cities CPCB 2000 65. Status of sewage treatment in India (CUPS/61/2005-06)- Central Pollution Control Board 66. Status of water supply, wastewater generation and treatment in class-I cities & class-II towns of India (CUPS/ 70 / 2009 - 10) CPCB 2009 67. Subramanian, V., Renewable energy in India: status and future prospects. Ministry of New and Renewable Energy; November 2007. 68. Surendra, K.C., Khanal, S.K., Shrestha, P, Lamsal, B., 2010. Current status of

555

renewable energy in Nepal: opportunities and challenges. Renew Sustain Energy Rev.

556

15, 4107–17

23

557 558 559

69. Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H. and Eliassen, R., 1977. Solid wastes: engineering principles and management issues, McGraw Hill, New York. 70. United Nation Development Programme (UNDP)/World Health Organization

560

(WHO). The energy access situation in developing countries: a review focusing on the

561

least developed countries and Sub-Saharan Africa UNDP, New York, United States;

562

2009.

563

71. US Energy Information Administration, International Energy Statistic 2012: Total

564

Energy: Total Primary Energy Production, Available online:

565

http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=44&pid=44&aid=1&cid=I

566

N,&syid=2008&eyid=2012&unit=QBTU [accessed 13 April, 2016].

567

72. US Energy Information Administration, World Energy Outlook 2011: Access to

568

Electricity (2012) Available online:

569

http://www.iea.org/publications/worldenergyoutlook/resources/energydevelopment/ac

570

cesstoelectricity/ [accessed 13 April, 2016].

571

73. Uusitalo, V., Soukka, R., Horttanainen, M., Niskanen, A., Havukainen, J., 2012.

572

Economics and greenhouse gas balance of biogas use systems in the Finnish

573

transportation sector. Renewable Energy. 51, 132-140.

574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581

74. Vijay, V.K., Prasad, R., Singh, J.P., Sorayan, V.P.S., 1996. A case for biogas energy application for rural industries in India. Renewable Energy. 9/1, 993-996 75. Wakadikar, K.,Sil, A., Kumar, S.,Kumar, R., Mudhoo, A., 2012. Influence of sewage sludge and leachate on biochemical methane. S8-200. 76. Weiland, P., 2010. Biogas production: current state and perspectives, Applied Microbiol. andBiotechnol. 85(4), 849-860. 77. Wellinger, A., Murphy, J., Baxter, D., 2013. "The biogas handbook. Science, production and applications". 24

582

78. Yadvika, S., Sreekrishnan, T.R., Kohli, S., Rana V., 2004. Enhancement of biogas

583

production from solid substrates using different techniques-a review. Biores. Technol.

584

95, 1–10.

585

25

586 587

588 589

Figure 1: Existing MSWM System in India

26

0.600 0.482

0.500

0.400 0.300

0.189

0.210

0.400

0.373

0.368

0.356 0.300

0.200

0.473

0.472

0.331 0.294 0.277

0.290 0.277

0.278 0.209

0.298

0.267 0.190

0.123

0.134 0.143 0.100

0.100 0.030 0.000

Methane yield m3 per kg volatile solids

Figure 2: CH4 Yield of Different Organic Waste/Feedstock

27

0.241

Table 1: Energy Balance of India for 2010-11 (x106MW-hr)

Sectors

Total primary energy

Coal

Crude

Oil

Natural

Oil

Products

Gas

Nuclear

Hydro

Solar-

Bio-

Wind

fuels

and

and

Others

Waste

Electricity Total

3400

2400

640

630

57

110

22

190

5.6

7454.6

Final consumption

980

-

1800

250

-

-

3.5

1910

730

5673.5

Industry Sector

890

-

3.6

760

-

-

-

331

240

2224.6

Transport

-

-

590

24

-

-

-

1.9

61

676.9

Residential

190

-

270

0.3

-

-

-

1510

156

2126.3

-

-

240

150

-

-

-

-

-

390

supply

Non-energy use industry/ transformation Source: Minde et al, 2014 & International Energy Statistic: Total Energy: Total Primary Energy Production 28

Table 2: Organic Waste to Energy Potentialsfrom Various Waste Stream in India Table 2 (a): Waste Stream: Organic fraction of MSW Generation and Biogas/Energy its Potential in India Waste Stream Number of Waste Organic Total TS (%ww) VS m3 Total Inhabitants Generation Fraction Organic (NEERI (% ww) CH4/kg CH4 in 2005,Kumar (Wakadikar VS(Rao m3/day or Animals (kgww/unit/day) (%)(CP Waste (CPCB 2000, CB et al., 2012 et al., (Census Generati 2009, NEERI 2000, Wakadikar 2000) 2011) on 2005,Kumar NEERI 2012) (t/day) 2009) 2005,Ku mar 2009) Class I Metro Cities >1'000'000 Class I Cities 100’0001'000'000 Class II Towns (50'000 to 100'000) Small Town (10'000 to 50'000) Villages (<10'000)

Total energy content in MW-h

114'029'267

0.42

±

0.09

50

±

4

23'727

54.57

±

12.43

46.16

0.50

5'476'266

2'282

106'943'560

0.33

±

0.08

42

±

3

14'932

25.47

±

3.40

21.74

0.50

1'623'085

676

156'133'298

0.40

±

42

±

26'230

25.47

±

3.40

21.74

0.50

2'851'244

624

72'375'147

0.20

±

42

±

6'080

25.47

±

3.40

21.74

0.50

660'843

289

761'373'705

0.20

±

42

±

63'955

25.47

±

3.40

21.74

0.50

6'951'951

3'041

29

Waste Stream Cereals Oilseeds Pulses Sugarcane Horticulture Others

Table 2 (b) Waste Stream: Agricultural Residue Generation and its Biogas/Energy Potential in India Production (Mt/year) Surplus Residue Residue (Mt/year) (Agricultural statistics at a (Mt/year) Energy Potentials (x107MW-hr) (Nzilal et al. 2015) glance 2015) (Nzilal et al. 2015) 50.5 (Hiloidharietl. al., 2014, Wellinger 2232 429 132 13,Murphy 2011) 24 46 11 5.0 (Murphy 2011 Lethomaki 2006 ) 11 17 6 2.7 (Hiloidharietl. al., 2014) 359 137 51 28.1 (Nzilaetl al. 2015) 14 64 26 81.0 (Nzilaetl al. 2015) 38 217 95 46.3 (Nzilaetl al. 2015) Table 2 (c) Waste Stream: Waste Water Generation and its Biogas/Energy Potential in India

Waste Generation points

Class I Metrocities>1' 000'000 Class I Cities 100,0001'000'000 Class II Cities (50'000 to 100'000)

Number of Inhabitants or Animals (Census 2011)

Waste Generation in MLD (CPCB 2009)

Organic Fraction (%) (CPCB 2009)

Total Organic Waste Generation (t/day) (CPCB 2009)

TS (%ww) (Wellin ger 2013)

VS (%ww) (Wellin ger 2013)

m3 CH4/kg VS(Welli nger 2013)

Total CH4 in m3/day

Total Energy Content in MW-h

114'029'267

15'456

70

10819

5.00

3.75

0.40

162'289

67.62

106'943'560

20'210

70

14147

5.00

3.75

0.40

212'205

88.42

156'133'298

2'697

70

1888

5.00

3.75

0.40

28'315

11.80

30

Table 2 (d) Waste Stream: Animal Dung/Manure Generation and its Biogas/Energy Potential in India Number of Daily Average RPR Total Surplus Inhabitants or Waste Excreta or Animal Value Availability of Data Heating Animals (2012) Energy Generation Dung per Animal (Kaur Excreta from (%) Value (In Thousands) Efficiency et al, (Kaur et Points Wet Weight ( kg) Animal Dung (GJ/t) th (19 Livestock (Kaur et al, 2014) 2014) al, 2014) (t/day) 2012) Cattle 190'904 11.60 0.16 354318 0.85 14.20 0.35 (Kaur et al, 2014) Buffalo 108'702 12.20 0.16 212186 0.85 16.33 0.35 (Sahu et al, 2014) Horses & Ponies 624 11.60 0.16 1158 0.85 12.97(Sahu 0.35 et al, 2014) Mules 197 12.00 0.16 378 0.85 12.97(Sahu 0.35 et al, 2014)

31

Energy Potential in MWhr/day 419108

288635

1251 409

Table 3: Methods of Waste Treatment, its Basic Principle, Waste Parameters and their Ranges Waste Treatment Methods

Basic Principle

Desirable

Parameters

Range



Moisture content



Organic/Volatile matter

Decomposition of



Fixed Carbon

Thermo-chemical Conversion

Important Waste

<45% >40%

<15%



Incineration

organic matter by



Total Inerts



Pyrolysis

heat



Calorific Value



Gasification 

Temperature

>800 0C



Moisture content

>50%



Organic/Volatile

>40%

Bio-chemical conversion

Decomposition of

Anaerobic

organic matter by

digestion/

microbial action

<35% >1200 kcal/kg

matter

Bio-methanation Source: Modified from Singh et al. 2014

32



C/N ratio

25-30



Temperature

<70 0C

Table 4: State-Wise/Year-Wise List of Commissined Biomass Power/Cogeneration Projects (As on 01.04.2016) Sl. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

State

Upto 31.03.2012

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

2015-16

Total (in MW)

Andhra Pradesh

363.25

17.5

-

-

-

380.75

Bihar

15.5

27.92

-

-

-

43.42

Chattisgarh

249.9

-

15

15

-

279.9

Gujarat

20.5

10

13.4

12.4

-

56.3

Haryana

35.8

9.5

-

-

-

45.3

Karnataka

441.18

50

112

111

158

872.18

Madhya Pradesh

8.5

7.5

10

9

-

35

Maharashtra

603.7

151.2

185.5

184

96.38

1220.78

Odisha

20

-

-

-

-

20

Punjab

90.5

34

16

15

-

155.5

Rajasthan

83.3

10

8

7

-

108.3

Tamil Nadu

532.7

6

32.6

31.6

39

626.9

Uttarakhand

10

-

20

20

13

50

Uttar Pradesh

644.5

132

-

-

93.5

842

West Bengal

16

10

-

-

-

26

Total

3135.33

465.6

412.5

405

400

4831.33

Source: http://mnre.gov.in/related-links/grid-connected/biomass-powercogen/ 33

Table 5: Waste to Energy Facilities in India

Sl. No.

Project

Waste Processing Capacity (TPD)

Power Plant Capacity (MW)

Capital Cost of the Project (Million US$)

Year of Start

Year of Closure

Technology

References

1.

Timarpur, Delhi

350

3.75

3.76

1986

1991

Incineration based (Denmark)

MNRE 2012

2.

Selco, Gandamguda, Hyderabad

600

6.6

-

1999

2009

RDF based Incineration plant

Kumar 2000

3.

Shriram Energy, Vijaywada

225

6

-

2003

2008

RDF based Incineration plant

Kumar 2009

600

5

11.42

2003

Biogas Induced mixed arrangement (Australia)

Kumar 2009

4.

Asia Bio-energy India Ltd., &EnkemEngrs. Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow

5.

RDF Power, Hyderabad

800

11

-

RDF based Incineration plant

Kumar 2009

6.

Jindal EcopolisWaste Management Company PVT.Ltd., Okhla, Timarpur, Delhi

1300

16

30.06

-

Nixon 2017

34

2003

Yet to be commissioned

2012

Inoperation

7.

Organic Waste Recycling Systems Pvt. ltd, Sholapur, Maharastra

400

4

9.02

2012

In-operation

8.

Rochem, Pune

300

10

37.58

2012

In-operation

9.

A2Z, Kanpur

700

15

-

10.

Ramky, Narela, Delhi

1400

24

12.

Bangalore, Karnataka

1000

13.

Shalivahana (MSW) Green Energy Ltd, Karimnagar

330

14.

MSW of Vadodara City, Gujrat

300

15.

Integrated municipal waste-processing complex at Ghazipur, Delhi

1300

DRYAD Technology

Mohapatra 2015

-

Nixon 2017

Yet to be commissioned

-

Mohapatra 2015

-

Yet to be commissioned

-

Mohapatra 2015

150

-

Yet to be commissioned

12

15.38

10

84375675.5

35

DRYAD Technology

2010

Inoperation

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Mohapatra 2015

Nixon 2017 Mohapatra 2015 http://biofuelupto date.com/biogasplants-in-indiagobar-gascommercialproductioncapacity

Highlights: 

Review of organic waste to energy potentials in India



Citizen’s participation and synchronisation of stakeholders



A realistic scenario of WtE technologies and their challenges in Indian condition

36