Study of Biogas Plant - Survey

7/31/2019 Study of Biogas Plant - Survey

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/study-of-biogas-plant-survey 1/28

TD390: Supervised Learning: Study Report

Current Status of Household Biogas Plants in Thane District: A

Study

Submitted By

Nidhi Gupta (08d10033) Ajinkya Latkar (08d10037)

Under the guidance of

Prof. A. B. Rao

During

May-June 2012

Center for Technological Alternatives for Rural Areas (CTARA)

Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay



P a g e | 1

Contents

Sr. No. Topic Page No.1 Introduction 2

2 Technical Details 3

3 Details about the survey

carried out

5

4 Characteristics of the villages

surveyed

7

5 General characteristics of thebiogas plants surveyed

8

6 Recommendations 11

7 Survey Data 12

8 Photo Gallery 23

9 Visit to Dahanu district: A

comparison between Wada

and Dahanu

25

10 Acknowledgements 27





P a g e | 3

Technical Details

Biogas typically refers to a gas produced by the biological breakdown of organic matter in the absence

of oxygen. Organic waste such as dead plant and animal material, animal faeces, and kitchen waste canbe converted into a gaseous fuel called biogas. Biogas originates from biogenic material and is a type

of bio fuel.

For household cooking purposes, in rural areas, biogas is produced in small plants which typically come

in two types, fixed dome plants and floating dome plants. Both of these types work on animal excreta

as feed, and may or may not incorporate human wastes into it.

Typically a biogas plant consists of the following parts:

1. Feed inlet, for cowdung and household organic wastes

2. Digester

3. Gas holder (defines fixed dome or floating dome)

4. Outlet for bio slurry

5. Attached toilet for incorporation of human wastes (optional)

Fixed dome type biogas plants:

In this type of biogas plants, the gas holder is a fixed hemispherical slab, attached to the digester and

constructed a few feet into the ground depending on the size of the biogas plant.

The slab/dome is non removable, since it is completely under the ground and hence it extremely difficult

to repair if it gets cracked or damaged.

Fig. 1: Schematic of a fixed dome biogas plant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_matter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaseous

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bio_fuel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bio_fuel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaseous

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_matter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas



P a g e | 4

Floating dome type biogas plants:

In this type of biogas plants, the gas holder is a removable iron or fiber tank, which is fitted above the

digester, and where gas collects.

The tank being removable and replaceable, it is relatively easier to repair any damages in this type of

plants, since the tank can be simply removed and replaced. The tank lies partially above the ground in

these plants, and can be easily removed.

Fig. 2: Schematic of a floating dome biogas plant



P a g e | 5

Details about the survey carried out

The initial motivation behind the survey that was carried out was to understand the behaviour of rural

household biogas plants, and evaluate the government/panchayat schemes that subsidized theconstruction of these plants. It was also to understand the current status of the biogas plants for

estimating an average behaviour, and explore the possibility of community biogas plants in the villages

of Thane district.

For this survey, first some villages of Wada taluka were surveyed. Following are the villages which we

visited for the same:

1. Gandhre

2. Khanivali

3. Dakivali

4. Ambiste-Khurd

5. Ambiste-Budruk6. Kharivali

7. Bilavali

8. Vavegarh

Figures 3 and 4 show a map of the area, locating the taluka and marking the villages in it.

Fig. 3: Location of Wada taluka in Thane District



P a g e | 6

Fig. 4: Location of the villages visited in Wada taluka

A questionnaire was initially prepared and presented to the subject families, which had biogas plants at

their homes. In the survey, a variety of plants were discovered, of both types, fixed dome and floating

dome, some even converted from fixed dome to floating dome. Also, it was found that many schemes of

loan and subsidy for the construction of these plants existed at various points of time.

The survey data, however, is not 100% reliable, since no person is expected to remember the exact costs

and details of a biogas plant constructed as early as 1985. For the people who do not remember the

exact details of their plants, an estimate has been made about the plant's logistics by extrapolating data

patterns of plants constructed at around the same time period in the same village.

In the following sections, a brief description and analysis of the general trends observed in the

responses of the people to the important questions of the survey are presented.



P a g e | 7

Characteristics of the villages surveyed

1. GandhreThis is a village located very close to the main township of Wada. The population density here is very

low, and the houses are located far apart from each other. All the existing biogas plants here are of fixed

dome type, and a majority of them are dysfunctional.

2. Khanivali

This village is located in a plainer terrain than most of the other villages. There have been schemes for

biogas plants since around 1990, and people have made the most of them and got constructed biogas

plants for themselves, most of which are not dysfunctional. The village is also moderately large, and is a

travel transit point of Wada, i.e. there is a tempo stand here.

3. Dakivali

This is a moderately large village, population around 250 people, 75 families, located on the lower

border of Wada taluka. Many schemes for biogas were and are still in play here, but many plants are

dysfunctional. A biogas plant under construction was surveyed in this village, wherein details of material

and financial management were procured.

4. Ambiste-Budruk and Ambiste-Khurd

These are two very densely populated villages located close together in the interior of Wada taluka. The

total population is around 500. These villages had very active schemes towards biogas plant

construction till 2000. Inspite of that fact, most plants are dysfunctional.

5. Kharivali

This is a small village located near Kudus in the southern part of Wada taluka. A majority of the plantshere are dysfunctional. Unlike other villages where the dysfunctional plants were just kept covered, here

the tank was properly removed and cemented to provide extra space in house. Many of the households

sold off their cattle. In general it was observed that the villagers very careless about maintaining their

plants. Efforts like simple pipe replacements and cleaning of tank to circumvent problems were ignored

and not undertaken.

6. Bilavali

This is another small village, located close to Kharivali. This is the only village in this survey that had a

problem of water scarcity. Water scarcity is a major reason for many plants going dysfunctional in this

village. Most of the plants here (functional/dysfunctional) are fixed dome type, with only one r two

being of the floating dome type.

7. Vavegarh

This is a widely spread out village located in the northwestern part of Wada taluka. It has got 6

subvillages or “padas”, each of which has atleast 5-6 household biogas plants. Many biogas plants were

found here, but a majority of them are defunct. Interestingly, the people here are trying to develop

alternative technologies for sustainable energy, like solar energy.



P a g e | 8

General Characteristics of the Biogas Plants

surveyed

The questionnaire prepared for the survey had the following questions. We shall in discuss in brief the

general characteristics of each

1. Functionality of the plant:

Most of the biogas plants surveyed were found to be dysfunctional. In spite of a lot of efforts put in the

construction of the same, over the years families tend to take less care about its maintenance. Almost

negligible efforts were taken to restart the plant. The major constraint for not re-starting the plant was

the reliability of the successful functioning of the plant after putting in huge amount of money.

2. Village settlement Characteristics:

Each village has its own characteristic thinking and way of living. People from same community live

together. Each and every family was involved in farming. In few cases it was found that few members

from family also own poultry farm, work in nearby companies for example; Coca-Cola, teach in schools,

drive auto-rickshaw or own small shops. People generally lived in nuclear families. However, siblings

stay in adjacent houses. In few cases it was found that these siblings often share their cattle in order to

run their biogas plant.

Families were all APL. They owned Pink Ration Card. Almost all the families were hesitant to reveal their

family income. Those who revealed were the ones who were employees at some companies. According

to them, they don’t keep a tab on the income they earn yearly, it’s just sufficient for their daily needs.

Many families did own items luxury like Television, Washing Machine and Refrigerators.

3. Installation Details of the Plant:

Very old plants were generally built during the 1985 period. Other than this there is no obvious surge in

the construction of biogas plants. 1980’s marked the period when the schemes generally became

available to popular the use this clean source of energy - Biogas. A number of plants changed their type

from Floating Dome type to Fixed Dome Type. This was done because the success rate of Fixed dome

was more than that of the Floating Dome type.

4. Reasons for Dysfunctionality:

A variety of reasons cropped up during the survey. A major reason in many cases was poor design and

poor construction.

Given below are other common reasons for dysfunctionality of the plant.

i) Cracking in the Dome due to poor construction of poor material choice.



P a g e | 9

ii) Frequent leakages in the connecting pipes. Repeated replacements made the use of biogas expensive

and hence families discontinued its use.

iii) Water is required in large amount. Shortage of Water lead to dysfunctionality of many biogas plants

in Bilavali which doesn’t has a lake or common well for the villagers.

iv)Few families who were rich and could afford expensive LPG cylinders preferred to shut down their

biogas plant as they didn’t wish to put in long hours of labour daily for the continuous running of the

biogas plant

v) Quite a many families had to sell off their cattle for economic reasons

5. Size and Capacity of Plant:

The common size of the plants are mentioned as follows

i) Fixed Dome: Generally 8-10 feet deep and 3 feet in radius

ii) Floating Dome: The pit is about 10 feet deep and tank is about 3 feet above the ground and about 3

feet in radius.

The input to the plant is according to the feed that the family can collect from its cattle and toilets. The

output is left open and the slurry produced is used by the families as fertilizers for their farms.

6. Cost of building the Plant:

Most of the families built the plant with the Schemes and subsidies available at the Government

(Panchayat) level. Among them, a few families loaned money in order to use the scheme. The rest built

the plants on their own. There is quite a disparity in the opinion of subsidy provided to these families.Some families claim that the entire amount was reimbursed while others claim that only half the

amount was reimbursed. Few families self constructed the biogas plants using the materials provided by

the scheme while others took the help of Mason.

7. Effort spent working on the Plant

On an average, a family needs to spend 1-2 hours daily on the working of the plant. This involves

collecting cow-dung, removing it of non-biodegradable substances and converting the feed into thin

slurry by mixing water. Human excreta directly feed into the tank through the pipes. Output slurry needs

to be collected and then used as a fertilizer. All the families, except a couple of them, don’t use external

labour to carry out these daily activities.

8. Performance Analysis:

In general the efficiency of the biogas plant was almost constant, except for the few maintenance issues.

Mostly the plant produced sufficient gas for cooking or heating purposes. In the worst cases, where

families had few cattle or those who couldn’t maintain the plants well used biogas for just heating or

cooking beverages. It’s observed that the efficiency of the biogas plant is most during the summers. High



P a g e | 10

temperature facilitates production of biogas plant. Hence during rainy season or winters the usage of

substitute fuel increases.

9. Operation & Maintenance problems and their Solutions

The general operation and maintenance problems faced by the families using biogas plant are as

follows:

i) Cracking of floating type tank replaced with concrete slab fixed dome type plant

ii) Leakages were handled by regular replacement of pipes.

iii) Painting or using fibre-based tank helped in solving rusting problems.

iv) Regular cleaning of the dome/tank to avoid choking of inlet or outlet

10. Cost Comparison between biogas and other fuels:

Prior to installation of biogas, families used fuelwood for cooking and heating purposes. Fuelwood is

always used as substitute for biogas plants. In the last 20 years, the use of LPG cylinders has become

common. In case the biogas plant has gone dysfunctional, families tend to generally use fuelwood and

LPG cylinders both. Few families also use kerosene for cooking purposes.

The cost per cylinder is around 450. Fuelwood is either bought or procured randomly from their farms.

Kerosene is bought from ration and it costs around Rs. 16 per L. The families can avail around 3-5 L of

kerosene. Fuelwood if bought varies from 500-700 per cart. This depends on the quantity and quality of

the fuelwood.

11. Payback Period

It is calculated in the following way:

(Cash down cost of biogas plant) - (Reimbursement from scheme) + (Cost of supplementary fuel per

month)*x = (Cost of fuels independently without biogas plant)*x

Where x is in months.

Payback period, with error bounds = x ± 2 months.

All the plants in the village are more or less of the same size, and in some cases, the plants are so old

that the families do not remember the costs of installation. In such cases, the costs and payback periods

are guessed based on other similar plants built at that time whose information is available.

12. Effect of Biogas Plant on the lives of people

Apart from those who have shut down their plants as they don’t want to put in extra efforts, people are

open to the use of biogas plant for cooking and heating purposes. The use of biogas has eased the

cooking process, it’s cleaner and cheaper. Utensils are not spoilt as they used to be spoilt by “chullas”.

Majority of the people are open to the idea of community biogas plant. However there are a few things

that they are concerned about like availability of land, fair distribution, labour involvement, efficiency

and feasibility of the functioning of such a huge biogas plant.



P a g e | 11

Recommendations

Material Quality

The major reason for biogas plant failure was cracking. This issue can be addressed by proper

selection of materials. Material should be able to bear high pressure. Cracking may also take place

due to unwanted expansion of the tank or the dome.

Failure of floating type of tank was observed on a large scale. The tank is exposed to atmosphere

and hence can withstand less pressure in comparison to the fixed dome type which is buried

underground. However in case of floating tank, it is easier to replace the tank in case of some repair;

which in case of fixed dome will result in total dis-assembly of the plant.

Schemes for constructing biogas plant

During few interactions with the villagers, it was observed that many families are willing to have a

biogas plant of a scheme suiting his economic situation. A broad classification of the villagers on the

basis of their annual income should be done. Each type of family can avail the schemes according to

their needs. Banks should lend loans at cheaper rates. This in turn would encourage quick

repayment.

Maintenance of biogas plant

One should prefer fibre based tank rather than iron tanks to avoid rusting. Painting should be done

regularly if iron tanks are used. Feed fed to the plant should be free of non-biodegradablesubstances The feed should be made of very low density by mixing with water. Kitchen wastes can

also be used as a feed.



P a g e | 12

Survey Data

The following table presents some data collected from the field visits to the 8 villages in Wada Taluka. Many more

details were included in the actual questionnaire that was administered to the owners of the plants, the important

characterizing points of the plants, and their financial details are summarized here:

Sr.

No.Village Name Type of plant Status

Year of

Installation

Year of going

Dysfunctional

Construction

cost in Rupees

Subsidy (if

any), in RupeesPayback Period

1 Gandhre Fixed Dome Functional 2011 NA 13000-18000 7,500 ~ 1 year 2 months

2 Gandhre Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1997 2002 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1.5 years



5 Gandhre Fixed Dome

Working but

under

renovation

1992 NA 8000 7500 ~ 5 months

6 Gandhre Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1990 2000 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~2 years

7 Gandhre Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1990 2002 33000-38000 8000 2 years 1 month

8 Gandhre Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 2011 2012 Couldn't Recall Fully Reimbursed 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

9 Gandhre Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 2005 2006 7000 5000 ~5 months

10 Gandhre Fixed Dome Functional 2011 (Dec) NA 18000 7000 ~1 year 2 months

11 Gandhre Fixed Dome Functional 2010 (Dec) NA 18000 7000 ~1 year 2 months

12 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1992 2011 Couldn't Recall Fully Reimbursed 0 (Fully subsidized plant)

13 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1997 2010 3500 2000 6 months

14 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 2002 2003 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1 year



P a g e | 13

15 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1992 2006 4500 0 1.5 year

16 Dakivali Floating Dome Functional 1992 NA Couldn't Recall Fully Reimbursed 0 (Fully subsidized plant)

17 Dakivali Fixed Dome Functional 1987 NA 4500 2500 8 months - 1 year


19 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1992 2012 10000 0 2.5 years

20 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1992 2011 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1 year

21 Dakivali Fixed Dome Functional 1992 NA Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1 year

22 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1997 2009 13000 0 3 years

23 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1992 1997 3500 Couldn't Recall ~1 year

24 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1987 2008 7000 7000 0 (Fully subsidized plant)

25 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1982 2006 15000 15000 0 (Fully subsidized plant)

26 Dakivali Floating DomeUnder

Construction

2012 -

Under

Construction

NA>10000

expected0 Expected 2.5 years


28 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1992 2010 6000 2500 1 year

29 Dakivali Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1982 2008 7500 0 2 years

30 Dakivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1992 2007 3500 1400 6-7 months

31 Khanivali Fixed Dome Functional 2011 NA 20000 0 5.5 years

32 Khanivali Fixed Dome Functional 2009 NA 7000 2000 1.5 years

33 Khanivali Fixed Dome Functional 2002 NA 3500 3500 0 (Fully subsidized plant)



P a g e | 14

34 Khanivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1977 2005 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1 year

35 Khanivali Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1988 2002 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1 year

36 Khanivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1980 2004 7000 3500 1 year

37 Khanivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1980 2007 7000 3500 1 year

38 Khanivali Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1987 1992 4500 0 1 year 3 months

39 Khanivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1982 2002 7500 3000 1.5 years

40 Khanivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1982 2004 7500 3000 1.5 years

41 Khanivali Floating Dome Functional 2011 NA 14500 7500

2 years + another

approximately 1.5 years if

the construction of new

toilet is taken into account.

42 Khanivali Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1997

1997 (Plant

didn't work at

all)

Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1 year

43 Khanivali Floating Dome Dysfunctional 20092009 (Ran for

one month)Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1 year

44 Khanivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1982 2005 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1 year

45 Khanivali Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1992 1998 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1 year

46 Ambiste-Budruk Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1997 2010 15500 0 ~3 years 6 months

47 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1980 1998 8000 0 2.5 years

48 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1980 1990 4500 0 1 year 3 months

49 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1980 2006 4500 0 1 year

50 Ambiste-Budruk Fixed Dome Functional 1980 NA 13500 0 ~3 years



P a g e | 15

51 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome

Dysfunctional

(But attempting

to restart it)

1980 2009 18000 0 4 years

52 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Functional 1987 NA 7500 Couldn't Recall 2 years

53 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1997 2009 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1.5 year

54 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1992 200525000. Very

unsure0 5 years

55 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 2000 2006 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1.5 years



58 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1992 2007 8500 0 2 years 3 months


60 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1992 2002 15000 8000 2 years



63 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Functional 1985 NA 7500 0 2 years

64 Ambiste-Budruk Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 20082008 (Plant

Never Worked)Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1.5 years

65 Ambiste-Budruk Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1988 2000 8000 0 2 years 3 months

66 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 2000 2010 8000 8000 0 (Fully Reimbursed plant)

67 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Functional 1997 NA 7500 2500 1.5 years



P a g e | 16

68 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Functional 1997 NA 7500 2500 1.5 years


70 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1980 2004 10000 0 2 years 6 months

71 Ambiste-Budruk Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1997 2007 7000 Couldn't Recall 2 years




75 Ambiste-Budruk Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1995 2000 8500 0 2.5 years

76 Ambiste-Budruk Fixed Dome Functional 2002 NA 10000 0 2.5 years

77 Ambiste-Budruk Fixed Dome Functional 1980 NA Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1.5 years

78 Ambiste-Budruk Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 19901990 (Plant

Never Worked)8500 2000 1 year 9 months

79 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1985 2010 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years

80 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 1990 NA Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~2 years

81 Ambiste-KhurdFloating Dome

typeDysfunctional 1985 2012 7000 0 2.5 years

82 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed dome Functional 2000 NA 11000 0 3 years

83 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 2000 2005 10000 5000 1.5 years

84 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 1995 NA 10000 5000 1.5 years



P a g e | 17

85 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1980 2008 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 1.5 year

86 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 2012 (Jan) NA 20000 7000 3.5 years

87 Ambiste-Khurd Floating dome Dysfunctional 1981 2006 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 1.5 years

88 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 2011 (Dec) NA 25000 7000 5 years

89 Ambiste-Khurd Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1997 2002 10000 5000 1.5 years

90 Ambiste-Khurd Floating dome Dysfunctional 1983 2002 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years

91 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 2006 NA 20000 Couldn't Recall ~3.5 years

92 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 1985 NA 10000 Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years

93 Ambiste-Khurd Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1985 2006 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years

94 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 2007 NA 15000 0 4 years

95 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 2000 2007 15000 7500 2 years

96 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 1997 NA Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 1.5 years

97 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 1985 NA 8000 Couldn't Recall 2 years

98 Ambiste-Khurd Floating Dome. Functional 1985 NA 8000 Couldn't Recall 2 years

99 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 2010 NA 10000 Fully reimbursed 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

100 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 2012 NA 30000 7000 6 years

101 Ambiste-Khurd Floating Dome Functional 1995 NA 15000 5000 2.5 years



P a g e | 18

102 Ambiste-Khurd Floating Dome Functional 1985 NA Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 1.5 years

103 Ambiste-Khurd Fixed Dome Functional 2004 NA 12000 0 3.5 years

104 Kharivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1995 1998 Couldn't Recall Fully reimbursed 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)


106 Kharivali Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1992 2007 15000 7000 2.5 years


108 Kharivali Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1992 2006 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 1.5 years

109 Kharivali Floating dome Dysfunctional 1985 (Guess) 1995 (Guess) Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 1.5 years

110 Kharivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1997 2000 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years

111 Kharivali Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1987 1995 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years

112 Kharivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 2000 2003 12000 6000 1.5 years

113 Kharivali Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1985 (Guess) 1995(Guess) Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 1.5 years

114 Kharivali Fixed Dome Functional 1982 NA Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years

115 Kharivali Fixed Dome Functional 2004 NA Couldn't Recall Fully reimbursed 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

116 Kharivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1995 2007 8000 4000 1 year

117 Kharivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 2000 2007 Don’t Know Couldn't Recall ~1.5 years



120 Kharivali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1990 2004 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1.5 years



P a g e | 19


122 Bilavali Fixed Dome Functional 1998 NA Couldn't Recall Fully reimbursed 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

123 Bilavali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1985 2002 9500 0 2.5 years

124 Bilavali Fixed Dome

Functional.

(Temporarily

dysfunctional)

1997 NA 5000 5000 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

125 Bilavali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1997 2012 4000 4000 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

126 Bilavali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1992 1997 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years





131 Bilavali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1985 2010 7000 3500 1 year



134 BilavaliFloating type

domeDysfunctional 1980 1995

Couldn't recall

exactly. They say

that they spent

around 1500

Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years

135 Bilavali Fixed Dome Functional 1985 NA 12000 Couldn't Recall 2.5 years

136 Bilavali Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1985 2007 Couldn't Recall Fully Reimbursed 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)



P a g e | 20



139 Bilavali Fixed Dome Functional

It was

already

there when

the family

bought the

house. They

justrestarted it

NA NA NA NA

140 Bilavali Fixed Dome Functional 1992 NA Couldn't Recall

Couldn't Recall

exactly, but say

that it was 50%

reimbursed.

~ 1.5 years

141 Bilavali Fixed Dome Functional 1985 NA 7000 3500 1 year





146 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Functional 1992 NA 6500 0 2 years147 Vavegarh Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1979 1983 Couldn't Recall 0 ~ 2 years

148 Vavegarh Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1987 2002 5000 5000 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

149 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Functional 1988 NA 10000 0 2.5 years




P a g e | 21

151 Vavegarh Floating dome Functional 1987 NA 2500 2500 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

152 Vavegarh Floating dome Dysfunctional 1992 2005 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~1.5 years

153 Vavegarh Floating dome Dysfunctional 1980 1997 15000 15000 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

154 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Functional 2010 NA 3500 3500 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

155 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 2002 2008 5000 5000 0 (Fully Reimbursed Plant)

156 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 2010 2011 10000 0 2.5 years



159 Vavegarh Floating dome Dysfunctional 1990 1995 9000 0 2.5 years




163 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1987 2008 15000 0 4 years

164 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Functional 2007 NA 7000 0 2 years

165 Vavegarh Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1985 2002 6000 2500 1 year




P a g e | 22

167 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Functional 2005 NA Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years

168 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Functional 2007 NA 8000 Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years




172 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Functional 1985 NA Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 2 years


174 Vavegarh Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1985 1990 7000 Couldn't Recall 2 years

175 Vavegarh Floating Dome Dysfunctional 1988 1995 7000 Couldn't Recall 2 years

176 Vavegarh Fixed Dome Dysfunctional 1995 2005 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall ~ 1.5 years



Summary of the above data:

No. of plants surveyed in Wada Taluka = 178

Out of which,

No. of functional plants = 57 (32%)

No. of dysfunctional plants = 121 (68%)

No. of fixed dome plants = 116 (65.1%)

No. of floating dome plants = 62 (34.9%)



P a g e | 23

Photo Gallery

1. Example of a functional fixed dome plant

2. Example of a functional floating dome plant



P a g e | 24

3. Example of a dysfunctional fixed dome plant

4. Example of a dysfunctional floating dome plant, with the tank

removed from its holder



P a g e | 25

Visit to Dahanu: A comparison between Wada

and Dahanu

As a last phase of this project, a visit was made to Dahanu taluka in Thane district, to survey some plants

there and bring forward the differences (if any) between the characteristics of the biogas plants of

Dahanu and Wada.

Dahanu is located 65 km north of Virar on the Western Railway line of Mumbai Suburban Railway. It can

be reached from National Highway NH-8, 20 km off from Charoti Naka. It is 22 km North of Boisar on

the Western Railway line.

Fig. 5: Location of Dahanu taluka in Thane district

The major difference in the lifestyle of the people here from that in Wada taluka, is that many people

here belong to the fisherman community. Additionally, this is a more hilly area than Wada, where the

terrain is much plainer. The villages here are bigger, more densely populated, and more developed

technologically, than Wada taluka.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Railway_Zone_(India)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumbai_Suburban_Railway

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boisar



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boisar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumbai_Suburban_Railway




P a g e | 26

In Dahanu taluka, a village called "Ganjaad" was visited to survey any biogas plants and explore the

possibility of community biogas plants therein. Only two biogas plants were found, both of them

dysfunctional. The following table summarizes the details of these dysfunctional plants:

Sr.

No.

Type of

plant

Year of

Installation

Year of going

Dysfunctional

Construction

cost in Rupees

Subsidy (if

any), in RupeesPayback Period

1Floating

Dome1987 2006 Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall NA

2 Fixed Dome 20112011 (Plant

Never Worked)Couldn't Recall Couldn't Recall NA

Both the owners couldn't recall any details of the construction of their plants, so the payback period is

indeterminate, since there were no other plants whose details could be extrapolated and the paybacks

for these two plants could be estimated.

In Dahanu, there were and are many schemes in many villages for the construction of biogas plants, but

the people feel that this technology is outdated, and do not avail these schemes. Hence there are very

few biogas plants in the villages of Dahanu, in Ganjaad, only two were found.

However, there were many public toilets with huge septic tanks behind them at many places in the

villages. The villagers were very interested in getting community biogas plants constructed on these

tanks, if they got some schemes from the Government. On inquiry, it was found that such in the case in

many more villages in Dahanu taluka. Hence, there is a huge possibility of community biogas plants in

Dahanu, which is not the case in Wada.

Going by the surveys in Wada and Dahanu, which are two talukas in Thane districe, a conclusion can be

made that the data collected in these talukas can be extrapolated, and the behavior of biogas plants in

other talukas in Thane can be estimated with error tolerances.



Acknowledgements

Firstly, we thank our guide, Prof. A. B. Rao for his valuable guidance throughout this study. We

also thank Mr. Katole and Mr. Patil, from the Wada taluka main panchayat office, for pointing usin the right directions and hence helping us kick start our surveys. A sincere thanks to Mr.

Kaluram, contractor for biogas plants, who accompanied us in some of our visits and gave us

first hand information.

We would like to thank our batch-mate Vaibhav Nasery, a collaborator in this project, for

providing us with all the logistical details we needed for the surveys. We would also like to thank

our colleagues Prashant Jain, Raj Patel and Nikhil Jain (all students of IIT Bombay) for their

constant encouragement and companionship throughout this project.

A special word of thanks to all the villagers who cooperated and helped us around during thesurveys.

Lastly, we thank Prof. Sohoni and the entire CTARA team for providing this great opportunity to

study and interact with various stakeholders involved in the project.

Documents

Study of Biogas Plant - Survey