Changes in energy sources and forest utilization in Nepal
- 1. Changes in Energy Sources and Forest Resources Utilization in Nepal: after the devastating earthquake in 2015 *Kasumi ITO1 Narayan P. Geywali2 Gore K. Sangat2 1. Nagoya University, 2. Love Green Nepal
- 2. Forest resources in Nepal - Rural population is highly depending on forest resources for livelihood such as fuelwood, fodder, construction materials, medicinal plants etc. - Then experienced rapid deforestation since late 1950’s. - Fuelwood consumption used to be one of the main causes of deforestation in the country Introduction: Forest resources in Nepal (1) Land area : 147,516 km2 Geography : Land locked country located between India & China Capital city ： Kathmandu Population ： 28.3 million （80.26% in rural area） GDP ：USD 1,034 per capita Main industry: Tourism, agriculture and textiles Export : Garment, carpet, spices Trade : Highly depending on India Country of Nepal India China Nepal
- 3. Introduction II: Forest resources in Nepal (2) India China Eastern Central Western Far-western Mid-western ←Terai ←Siwalic ← Middle Mountain ← High Mountain ← High Himal Regions (Elevation) Forest Loss Forest Gain High Himal (4,000-8,848m) 1.4 2.6 High Mountain (2,000-4,000m) 12.5 21.0 Middle Mountain (1,000-2,000m) 6.4 40.9 Siwalik (300-1,000m) 28.2 14.1 Terai (60-300m) 51.5 21.5 45.5 38.2 37.4 29.0 40.36 40.4 40.3 4.7 4.8 10.0 4.38 2.4 2.3 45.5 42.9 42.2 39.0 44.7 42.8 42.6 0 10 20 30 40 50 1953-58 1978-79 1985-86 1994 2010 2000 2010 (DFRS) (LRMP) (MPFS) (NFI) (FRA) (LC 2000)(LC 2010) Forest Shrub Total （MFSC 2017) - Recent forest management seems effective to keep the balance b/w using and saving. - Community forestry system and biogas plant has been linked to reduced pressure on forest. Change in forest & shrub （MFSC 2017)
- 4. Forests area in Nepal Degraded forest Severe soil erosion Fuelwoods collection by cutting Carry fuelwoods 2-5 hours/day （Photo by Ito 2004)
- 5. Average time for firewood collection 2-6 hrs/day/person Average walking distance 5-20 km/day/person Average amount of firewood collection 25-50 kg/basket Kids sometimes can not go to school Carrying fuelwood: hard work （Ito et al. 2004)
- 6. A participatory forest management system in Nepal that was started in the late 1970s to control, protect and management of forest resources by rural people Defined as “Forested or degraded forestland owned by the government but formally handed over to a Forest Users Group (FUG) for protection, management, and Utilization” Community Forestry System*1 1978：Panchayat Forest Rule →Participatory forestry was introduced →Manager was local government officers 1988： Master Plan for Forestry Sector →Local people obtain the right to manage 1993： Forest Act →The number of CF increased rapidly （Master Plan for Forestry Sector in 1988) Introduction III: forest management Brief History of CF in Nepal People obtained the right to manage their forests
- 7. Provide Information on CF Constitution of FUG Preparation of Operational Plan (OP) Establishment of CF Forest Management Activities based on OP Sustainable Forest Management Provide info on CF to local people Assist forest users to form a group Assist to register their group as FUG Implement forest inventory for OP boundaries, area, forest condition, main species, objectives of forest management Set an internal rules to use forest resources Manage CF by members according OP Community Forestry formation procedure Submit OP to Department of Forestry Review OP and approved after investigation Issues a certificate and registers as CF Periodical check on forest condition *1 Note
- 8. Facts about biogas plant *2 - Connect to gas stove for easy and quick cooking - Obtain gas for 2-3 times of cooking per day - Residual can be used as organic manure - Nearly half of the cost will be covered by subsidy of government - Needs manure from 2 cows and 30L of water - No more fuelwoods and no more smoke inside of house Introduction IV: an alternative energy resource Impacts of biogas for livelihoods - fuelwood consumption was reduced by more than half - time for agricultural work and it’s income was increased - time for house work was 2.5 hours/ day reduced - more kids go to school without helping fuelwood collection - amount of chemical fertilizer was reduced Biogas was contributing to reduce pressure on forests （Ito et al. 2013, )
- 9. Outlet Methane fermentation Gas outlet Inlet & toilet Biogas System in Nepal Cow dung + water (30L) human toilet Gas stove Methane gas Inlet Residuals Organic manure Gas outlet Under ground NGOs are assisting installation with conditions such as - to be a member of “Forest Users Group” for forest protection - to plant Forest, Fruits and Fodder trees near their houses Total cost: 600-700 US$
- 10. History of biogas plant 1974：Agri. program introduced 199 plants ADB introduced 400 plants 1977：Gobargas and Agriculture Equipment Development Company Ltd. (GGC) opened 1980：Start revising Chinese model 1990：Developed GGC2047（Nepal model) 1992：Biogas Support Program started 1994：3 yrs. guarantee was introduced 1997：Subsidy system started （USD180 out of total USD600） 2010：More than 200,000 plants were installed 2020：More than 300,000 plants were installed Biogas plants were extended with government’s supports Kitchen with gas stove *2 Note Kitchen without gas stove
- 11. Research purposes Damages by earthquake in 2015 Objectives of this study This study aimed to find out indirect impacts of the quake to forest resources by clarifying; 1) change in energy source e.g. Fuelwoods? Cow dang? Biogas again? LP gas? Others? 2) change in forest resources usage e.g. increased or decreased usage? participating in CF activities or not? - nearly 9,000 people lost their lives, more than 22,000 were injured - about 800,000 houses were damaged or destroyed - 16,721 biogas plants were destroyed in the affected districts - 2.2% of forests in the affected 6 districts were destroyed by landslide - indirect loss caused by increasing fuelwood usage are concerned ★The indirect impacts to forest resources is not yet evaluated (World Bank 2015)
- 12. Semi-structured interview Key informant interview Survey methods 2 villages Research method Target of survey 2 villages in Kabrepalanchok - biogas were disseminated since 1990s 8 household heads - biogas plants were with destroyed Village chiefs ◎ Kathmandu ■ Energy sources Forest resources usage e.g. participation in CF activities etc. Main Contents Kabrepalanchok Kabrepalanchok
- 13. Study area Damages by the earthquake 80% of houses were destroyed - most of them were not recovered 90% of biogas plant were destroyed - few houses could reconstruct - construction companies are busy - no sufficient fund to reconstruct - need to reconstruct house Many people moved to other area - mostly moved to Kathmandu - some family moved to foreign countries Destroyed houses in the area Biogas as part of rural development I/NGOs have been assisting people to install biogas plant since 1990s Assisting to improving forest management, income from agriculture, health, education by using biogas Source: Interview to village chiefs
- 14. Result 1: Changes in energy source (1) Table 1. Current energy source of respondents Energy source Firewood Agri-residuals LP gas Biogas Others Cooking (human) 0 0 8 0 0 Cooking (livestock*) 2 6 0 0 0 * To boil plants for better digestion (Respondents: 8 HHHs with single answer) Kitchen with LP gas Using agri-residuals for livestock
- 15. Result 1: Changes in energy source (2) Table 2. Energy source before the quake * To boil plants for better digestion Energy source Firewood Agri-residuals LP gas Biogas Others Cooking (human) 0 0 0 8 0 Cooking (livestock*) 2 6 0 0 0 Table 3. Energy source before biogas plant installation Energy source Firewood Agri-residuals LP gas ICS** Others Cooking (human) 8 0 0 0 0 Cooking (livestock*) 2 6 0 0 0 ** Improved cooking stove Table 4. What energy source will you choose after house reconstruction? (Respondents: 8 HHHs with single answer) Energy source Firewood Agri-residuals LP gas Biogas Others Cooking (human) 0 0 0 8 0 Cooking (livestock*) 2 6 0 0 0 *To boil plants for better digestion
- 16. Table 5. What are the benefits of biogas? Benefits of using biogas plant HHHs No need to spend extra money for energy 3 No smoke, clean and healthy 7 No need to spend time for fuelwood collection 6 Reduce time for cooking and house works 7 Multi purposes (both gas, manure and toilet) 3 Result 1: Changes in energy source (3) Cooking with biogas Residuals: organic manure Apply residuals for veg. Multiple answers allowed (Respondents: 8 HHHs)
- 17. Result 1: Changes in energy source (4) Table 6. Reasons of using LP gas Reasons of using LP gas HHHs It was provided after the earthquake 8 Temporal use until reconstruction of biogas 2 Planning to reconstruct house /w biogas 2 No other choice after the earthquake 4 Multiple answers allowed (Respondents: 8 HHHs) Table 7. What are the difficulties of using LP gas? Difficulties about LP gas HHHs Need to spend money to buy 8 Price is expensive* 6 Dangerous (many explosion)** 6 It become empty quickly 3 *Price of LP gas 1,500Rs (12-13 US$) per one cylinder **LPG incidents LPG cylinder explosion due to poor quality of cylinder Multiple answers allowed
- 18. Result 2: Changes in forest usage (1) Results of interview to 8 house hold heads (HHHs) Q. Is there any changes in frequency of visiting forest after the quake? Yes. 0 HHHs No. 8 HHHs Q. How often do you generally visit forest for collecting resources? Never. 8 HHHs Q. Why you do not visit forest? - Using forest resources is bad for forest management: 8 HHHs - The best way to protect forest is to avoid using it: 6 HHHs All of them seemed to have confidence in forest protection
- 19. Result 2: Changes in forest usage (2) Results of interview to village two chiefs Q. Do you feel any changes in forest usage by people after the quake? - particular behavioral changes after the quake have not observed - behavioral change have occurred after they install biogas Q. Can you observe any activities of CF to manage the forest? - No. Activity is not needed because no one is using - forests are well protected as long as on one is entering Q. What are the changes after they installed biogas plant? - almost no people are visiting forest constantly including CF - instead, many animals such as monkey are coming to village - cases of crop damage from wild animals are increasing Q. Have your CF ever revised CF operational plan ? - No. - Not sure
- 20. It seems to be changed by biogas, not by the quake Findings People who lost biogas shifted to LPG because it was provided as emergency assistance The LPG usage will be temporal until reconstruction of their houses and biogas plants People were feeling biogas as the most suitable energy source to their rural livelihood with livestock and farms Change in energy sources after the quake Change in forest usage after the quake No one was visiting forest area The change was not occurred by the earthquake but by biogas People believe that unused forest must be well protected It was temporally changed by the quake - the result implied a new concern, “status of forests”
- 21. This case study is too small to generalize the results as conclusion, however, the results implied a possibility of inappropriate forest management without visiting or using forest resources at all. Community forestry system started more than decades ago. Protection by preventing people from using resources is sometimes necessary according to the status of forests. However, forest area may need people’s activities such as cleaning or weeding to keep it healthy. If people are not depending on forest resources anymore, new relationship with forest (new way of using forest) may be necessary to keep the forest healthy. It seemed that review of the system and operational plan of CF is desirable. Additional detailed survey on current status of CF management is urgently necessary. Challenges for the future
- 22. Thank you for visiting my presentation