Social Intervention Term paper

Application of Science and Technology to Rural Areas

(ASTRA)

Avinash Shankar, Girish Ravuri, Ghanshyam Kumar, Pradeep Agarhari, Shahzeb Yamin

(MAD12015) (MAD12026) (MAD12025) (MAD12053) (MAD12076)

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the support of The Center for Sustainable Technology (CST)

members and Indian Institute of Science (IISc) professors particularly Hoysala Chanakya and

T. Somasekhar, who allowed us to interview them at length. We are also grateful to our

professors Chandan Gowda, Sujit Sinha who encouraged us to pursue this topic and spent time

helping us to achieve a refined structure. We also place on record, our sense of gratitude to one

and all who, directly and indirectly, have lent their helping hand in this study.

Abstract

In 1962, when the first biogas plant based on the KVIC Floating Dome Model was

commissioned in India, it gave everyone hope that Mahatma Gandhi’s mission of self-

sustainable and self-reliant villages could be realized. Biogas technology was perceived as

the tool to address the energy needs of rural India. The advocacy for biogas plants became

more pronounced in the aftermath of oil crisis of 1973 that led to huge rise in petroleum

prices. Biogas technology was looked upon as the weapon to fight energy crisis in rural

India. The biogas program in India gained momentum in 1970s and attracted huge

attention of the world community. Afterwards, huge efforts were made to bring

technological innovations in the biogas system in order to achieve greater efficiency. One

such effort was made by the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) with its programme for the

application of science and technology to rural areas, also known as ASTRA. The program

was started under the guidance of the program convener Amulya Kumar N. Reddy. The

present study is an effort to understand the complexities of the community biogas

initiatives in India through the lens of community biogas plant implemented by ASTRA in

the Pura Village of Tumkur district in Karnataka. We will try to under how/whether such

community biogas initiatives could be relevant in the contemporary context.

Amulya Reddy’s Perception on the Role of Science & Technology in Rural India

After almost two decades in the field of electrochemistry, I felt that, like most of the work in

advanced institutions of education, science and technology, my own work was largely irrelevant

to India's poor, the majority of whom live in villages. I also felt that I should reorient my efforts

towards technologies for rural development. Such as viewpoint found sympathy from many other

colleagues at the Indian Institute of Science. This shared vision led in 1974 to the formulating

and implementation of the ASTRA programme through which it was hoped that the application

of science and technology would be a weapon (or asthra in Sanskrit) in the interests of the poor1.

Pura Biogas Project: Was it a social intervention

We understand that any intervention that enters into social space of people and bring changes in

their lives qualifies as social intervention. Any individual or the group effort can qualify as social

intervention if that helps in bridging the social gap that emanates from disparity in terms of the

availability of resources necessary for improving the quality of life. The Pura biogas initiative

was based on community participation which itself is the reflection of capacity building of

society, thus a mechanism of social intervention for the betterment of society. We consider it as

an ideal example of social intervention because it attempted to bring positive changes in the

society through innovative technology.

In the wake of globalization, the gap between rich and poor has increased. It has also led to rural-

urban divide. Rural India, even after sixty year of independence has been subjected to apathy of

Indian state. This intervention of PURA model was based on tapping rural resources available

locally. We decided to study this intervention because it was based on the utilization of locally

available resources and community participation. We thought that the study could help us in

analyzing whether such interventions are sustainable in contemporary context. More importantly,

we approached this case study with the intention to understand the applicability and replicability

of the Pura project in larger rural setting.

1 Amulya Kumar N. Reddy, “Lessons from ASTRA’s Experience of Technologies for Rural Development”.

Methodology

This study is based on literature review of books and articles related to biogas initiatives in

general and the Pura biogas initiative in particular. For this study, we also relied on interviews

with IISc professors Hoysala Chanakya and T. Somasekhar. Both Chanakya and Somasekhar had

been actively involved with the Pura biogas project.

Introduction:

Energy is an essential requirement for life existence. In nature, there are many sources of energy,

namely coal, water, fossil fuels, solar energy, biomass etc. Among them a few are commercially

used. Industrial revolution in 18th

century was the period in which fundamental changes occurred

in all the sectors like agriculture, manufacture, transportation etc. that created a huge demand for

the energy. Fossil fuel, in particular has played an important role in the progress of human race

and increase the standard of living. It has penetrated deep into the mechanism of human living

and has become the driving force without which the human race can’t sustain. The fact is, some

of these energy sources are not renewable and will exhaust very soon by causing huge effect on

environment. Energy crisis in 1970s made the world to look for alternative source of energy. So

many experiments and research studies started after that to find the alternative sources of

energies. As the consequence of these research studies, biogas was found to be one of the

alternative renewable sources of energy that could meet some needs of household and farms.

Like other fossil fuels, biogas can be used for purposes such as domestic cooking, lighting,

pumping water etc. with better efficiency depending upon the methane content in it, for which

many research studies and developmental works are in progress.

Biogas is also known as bio methane or digester gas with the composition of 50% to 80%

methane (CH4) and 20% to 50% carbon dioxide (CO2) with traces of other gases such as

hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, carbon-monoxide and hydrogen sulphide (H2S)2. Biogas can be

produced by decomposing organic matter such as sewage, animal byproducts, industrial,

agricultural residues and municipal solid waste. Biogas is produced through a biochemical

process in which some bacteria convert the biological wastes into useful biogas comprising

methane through chemical interaction. The process takes place in two stages namely acid

2 http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/emerging_biogas.html

formation stage and methane formation stage. Thus, the biogas is produced by the above two

stages in the biogas plant. The basic feedstock for biogas plants in India is cattle dung which is

available in plenty. According to 2007, Livestock population, all India Census, there is bout

304.42 million cattle are present in India3.

The sludge from the biogas plant is rich in nitrogen which is used as an organic fertilizer that

increases the soil porosity and texture. There is an enormous scope for biogas plants in India

with its large number of cattle population and the huge availability of dung that helps in

producing biogas to meet the energy needs in rural India. The biogas may reduce the dependence

of conventional sources of energy, if promotional efforts are continued by the government,

organizations and NGOs. Biogas replaces the use of firewood, kerosene and Liquefied petroleum

gas and save them for future needs.

The biogas technology is not new in India. Its experimentation started in 1940 by Dr. S.V.Desai

at Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI). In 1951, the cattle dung fermentation was

patented by Shri Jasbhai J Patel. However, after several modifications the plant was named as

Gramlaxmi III in 1954. The same model has been disseminated by Khadi and Village Industries

Commission (KVIC) in a nationwide programme and the late seventies saw Janata model. Since

1962, KVIC was the only agency for promotion of biogas plants independent of government

programme. Arab-Israel war in 1973 led to oil crisis that made the Indian government to include

biogas plants as alternative energy source in the Fifth Five year plan4. In this period a number of

new attempts arose to reorient Indian Science and Technology towards the need of rural India.

Notable among these were, the experiments carried out by Dr. Amulya Kumar. N. Reddy and his

colleagues at the Cell for the Application of Science and Technology to Rural Areas (ASTRA),

and the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. They have modified the KVIC design in several

important ways and made the ASTRA model 40% cheaper and 14% increase in gas yield than

the KVIC model. In 1982, ASTRA group constructed community biogas plant in pura village,

Tumkur district near Bangalore.

3 http://dahd.nic.in/dahd/WriteReadData/7.%20Part%20IV%20Livestock%20Census%20BAHS%202012.pdf

4 http://www.nabard.org/modelbankprojects/biogas.asp

Pura village case study:

ASTRAs’ first community biogas plant project was initiated in Pura village which is about 120

km far from Bangalore in Kunigal Taluk, Tumkur district of Karnataka, India. Table 1 below

gives a glimpse of energy sources and activities in pura village in 1977. The energy utilizing

activities in pura are Agriculture, domestic, lighting and Industry. Commercial energy i.e.,

kerosene and electricity accounts to 3% was utilized in the pura village and the remaining 97%

energy come from fuel wood. Large amount of human energy was spent on gathering fuel wood

by spending 3 hours on an average and travelling 4.8 km to collect 10 kg of fuel wood per day

per family. About 75% of the households don’t have electricity and depend on kerosene lamps

and the remaining 25% have access to electricity. In gathering the fuel wood women and

children work very hard and suffered burden and women contributed 53% of the total human

labor. Table 2 shows the end uses of human energy in pura village. Figure 1 below demonstrates

the traditional system of obtaining water, illumination and fertilizer.

The profound study on rural energy consumption patterns by Reddy and et al. in 1977 identified

that fuel wood is the main source for cooking and in gathering the fuel wood a lot of time was

spent by women and children. In this context an alternative to fuel wood was looked-for and

biogas (cattle dung) was highlighted. They started with community biogas plant because many of

the households don’t have cattle and can’t afford their own plant. When compared to the cost of

family size plant the community plant for 56 households costs 6 times more. In 1987, Amulya

Reddy formulated a detailed proposal for a community biogas plant and was accepted for

funding by the Karnataka State Council for Science and Technology (KSCST).

Table1. Energy sources and activities in pura (1977)5

Agriculture Domestic Lighting Industry Total

Human hours 34848 255506 - 20730 311084

Man hours 19914 82376 - 16485 118775

Woman hours 14934 113928 - 4245 133107

5 Srilatha Batliwala, Amulya Reddy, “Energy for women and women for energy (Engendering energy

and empowering women)”

Child hours - 59202 - - 59202

Bullock hours 5393 - - - 5392

Firewood

(Kg)

- 207807 - 8930 216737

Kerosene (l) - - 1938 156 2094

Electricity

(kwh)

7264 - 3078 820 11162

Table2. End-uses of human energy in pura6

Human Activity

Human energy expenditure

Hours/year Hours/day/household GJ/year

1.Domestic 255506 12.5 212.85

1.1.Grazing livestock 117534 5.7 98.05

1.2.Cooking 58766 2.9 49.02

1.3.Gathering

fuelwood

45991 2.3 38.13

1.4.Fetching water 33215 1.6 27.65

2. Agriculture 34848 1.7 33.52

3. Industry 20730 1.0 20.95

Total 311084 15.2 267.32

6 ibid

Figure1. The traditional system for obtaining water, light and fertilizers in Pura village7

Figure2. The rural energy and water supply utility based on community biogas plant in Pura8

7 ibid

8 ibid

The traditional system was replaced by the community biogas plant as shown in the above

figure2. This was an energy intervention that would play an important role in improving the

living conditions of the pura villagers in general and women in particular.

Operation of the Biogas plant:

Pura’s traditional system of obtaining water, illumination and fertilizer was replaced with the

community biogas plant. The operation of the system consists of following activities:

According to the season the delivery of cattle dung by households varies, in winter it was

from 6:45 to 8:00 A.M and in summer from 5:00 to 7:00 A.M

Weighing the delivered dung and recording the quantities in their pass books and in the

ledger books of the system.

Returning the processed precipitate produced by sewage treatment to those who want

Charging the biogas plant with the dung water mixture in a 1:1 ratio by volume.

Pouring the slurry (insoluble particles) displaced from the biogas plants by the charged

dung water mixture on to the sand bed filters for filtration and production of dewatered

sludge.

Releasing the biogas from the plant and piping it to the engine, adding required amount

of diesel and starting the dual fuel engine and electrical generator.

Supplying the electricity either for pumping the bore well water to the overhead tank or

for the electrical lighting of homes.

Visiting the households to receive payments for the power supply and to make payments

for the dung that was delivered to the plant, all these payments are recorded and

maintained in the books.

First and Second phase of the Biogas plant system:

The first phase of the project was started in 1982 with an aim to provide biogas for cooking for

all the households of the village. The sufficient supply of gas was depended on the size of the

family because smaller families with less than 5 members could finish their cooking task

compared to large families though they have larger cattle holdings and were largest dung

suppliers. Overall on an average, the total gas yield turned out to be sufficient only for cooking

one time meal. The inadequacy of gas was not because of poor collection of dung, but because of

overestimation of cow dung resources which varies from season to season and the incorrect

measurement of the efficiency of biogas stove against fuel wood that leads to underestimation of

biogas requirement. These halted the first phase of the project in 1984.

Fortunately after a few months the second phase of the project started on the request of villagers

with an emphasis on generating electricity from the biogas plant to pump drinking water and

light homes. These needs required only a fraction of the energy required for cooking. The water

supply system operation started in 1987 and the lighting system in 1988. This phase was

successfully operated for almost a decade and widely appreciated at the international level. The

operating and maintenance expenses of the plant were sustained through the payments by

villagers for lighting and water. The plant with all their assets were handed over to a new body

whose approach differed from the Pura approach of waste utilization, participatory management,

building of local institutions and strengthening of self-reliance.

Regardless of the success, operation of the plant was halted for non-technical reasons between

November 1997 and March 1998 and was closed down later. Some of the reasons for the failure

of the project are: 1) Inadequate funds to withstand major repairs and maintenance of the plant,

2) Radical change in the decision making process from community based participation at the

village level to top-down management by project administrators. An example was the imposition

of tariff increase without community participation and approval. 3) A change of feedstock from a

biogas source for the dual fuel diesel engine cum generator to vegetable oil from pongamia

pinnata seeds. This drastic change was implemented without creating widespread awareness

among the villagers and securing their confirmation and approval.

Apart from the above problems there are other three major obstacles that couldn’t replicate the

Pura type biogas based rural energy systems. They are 1) Relationship with government: The

technical team deliberately maintained a distance from the government to distinguish itself from

the conventional government run approach to rural projects and to earn credibility and the

respect of the villagers. This approach was successful but the situation changed drastically when

the government implemented World Bank funded free water supply schemes that undermine

sustainably priced biogas plant system water supply. 2) The investment on the distribution

systems for water and electricity requires concessional financing as this is a development

oriented infrastructure. 3) It is unfortunate that the Pura project didn’t incorporate a multipurpose

platform like battery charger, husker, carpentry machine etc. to increase the utilization of the

system and therefore improve its economics, because the villagers were apprehensive about the

underutilization of biogas that could have led to excessive biogas release into atmosphere

causing environmental problems.

In the case of pura, the villager’s non-cooperation with the community biogas plant resulted to

great personal loss particularly for the women of the household.

Positive outcomes during the heydays of the plant operation:

When compared to the traditional system of obtaining water and electricity, the community

biogas plant was found to be more beneficial to the household in the form of safe drinking water,

cheaper illumination for households, improved fertilizers which has greater nitrogen content,

gung delivery fee to those who deliver the dung and carry back the sludge. In addition, the

village through its Grama Vikas Sabha, called as village Development Committee has gained in

the following ways- Improvement in the quality of life with regard to safe water and

illumination, empowerment for two of its youth in the operation and maintenance of the plant by

training and skill upgradation, creating revenue for the village by decreasing the expenditures on

fertilizers and saving time for the women and children in collecting the firewood and by paying

for the delivery of dung etc. and by making them self-reliant.

The pura community biogas plant system elucidates a principle that shall be termed here the

“Blessing of the Commons” the opposite of the well-known “Tragedy of the Commons”

described by Hardin9. According to the “Blessing of the Commons” there is a convergence of

self-interest and collective interest so that the interest of the commons automatically makes

headway when individuals pursue their private interest. The pura biogas plant project has

ensured the careful conservation of resources and procured the cooperation of every villager.

9 Hardin, Garrett, “The Tragedy of the Commons”, Science, 162, December 1968, pp. 1243-1248.

Lessons from Astra’s experience in Pura village:

Many lessons have emerged from this experience. These lessons may be useful for those who

are wishing to make similar initiatives in the field of science and technology for rural

development.

Rural people may be poor and illiterate, but they are not irrational10

, they know exactly what they

need. In analyzing risk-reward ratio, they perpetually take the worst scenario more seriously than

the best scenario because the former can lead to total deterioration whereas the latter only means

minimal improvement. In choosing the technology rural people are rational, we must respect and

understand their rationality before introducing the technology to them and we should understand

their real needs instead of imposing perceived needs. Gender bias shouldn’t be there because

women are the best agents of wide spreading technologies than men. We must not ignore the

traditional technologies because they have evolved through a long process of the natural

selection of improvements that gives optimal solutions to the problems. Before introducing the

modern technology we have to see whether we can make compatible with traditional

technologies or not. Before introducing/implementing the technology we should involve

everyone viz. people, scientists, engineers, financial partners etc. in decision making. Once the

people are educated and aware of the benefits of the technology they will nurture it as their own

child.

The Community Biogas Plant, Fateh Singh Ka Purva, Itawa11

In 1978, two community biogas plants became operational at Fateh Singh ka Purva, a village

situated in the Itawa district of Uttar Pradesh. The two multifunctional plants served the lighting,

water and cooking needs of the villagers. The developers of the plants also used biogas for

running agricultural machines including a chaff cutter and power thresher. There were about 27

households in the Fateh Singh Ka Purva village. Almost every family owned some agricultural

lands. Most of the people in the village were illiterate. When it comes to the number of cattle per

household, the figure is higher the national average. The two plants in the village were set up by

the Planning, Research, and Action Division (PRAD) of the Uttar Pradesh government. The

10

Amulya Kumar N. Reddy, “Lessons from ASTRA’s Experience of Technologies for Rural Development”. 11

Rajiv Gupta. “Are Community Biogas Plants a Feasible Proposition,” World Health Forum (1983), 358-361

financial support was provided by UNICEF. Prior to the start of this project, villagers were

dependent on dung cakes, dried leaves, twigs, plant residues, firewood, and kerosene.

Fuel Sources Average Utilization

Dung Cakes 32 percent

Dried leaves, twigs, plant residues 56 percent

Firewood 9 percent

Kerosene Oil 3 percent

Firewood was generally used by the richest few in the village. The survey conducted by the

PRAD suggests that prior to the installation of the project families in the village used to spend

Rs200 to Rs1000 annually on fuel. The cost amounted to about 20 percent of the average income

of villagers. Before the project was initiated, plant developers and managers held meetings with

villagers. Villagers were convinced that the project will be helpful in achieving energy self-

sufficiency. The first of the two plants in the village was started in November 1978. The first

plant had the daily gas production capacity of 35 cubic meters and was primarily used for

generating gas for cooking needs. The second plant with 45 cubic meter capacity became

operational in January 1979 and was used for generating electricity. Though the two plants were

located at two opposite ends, both were linked together with one main pipeline. A 3.5 kw dual-

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Dung Cakes Dried Leaves,Twigs, Plant

Residues

Firewood Kerosene Oil

Average Utilization Of Available Fuel Sources

Average Utilization

Fateh Singh Ka Purva, Itawa, UP

fuel engine was installed that used biogas and diesel in the ratio of eighty percent and 20 percent

respectively. The electricity generated from this unit was used to power domestic and street

lights. This generator was also used to power a tube-well that irrigated about 17 acres of

cultivated land in the village. After few months, another 5.2 kw dual fuel engine was also started

with the objective of powering a thresher, a flour mill, and a chaff cutter.

In a short period of one year, the biogas plants in the village brought about a positive change in

the village. Despite having no access to any electricity grid, each household had access to two 40

watts bulbs and streets were fitted with 11 tube lights. Electricity supply was provided daily

between 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. The supply of cooking gas was provided for 6 hours daily in three

fixed slots, breakfast (7 a.m. to 9 a.m.), lunch (11 a.m. to 1 p.m.) and dinner (7 p.m. to 9 p.m.).

Even during winter season when gas pressure fell below normal, the availability of the gas was

enough to for cooking needs. There was also the provision for change in the timing of gas supply

provided the village committee decided in the favour of change. One member of the each family

was included in the committee to give it the democratic shape. The spirit of the community

biogas plant was preserved by providing gas equally to every household at a constant pressure.

Initially clay burners were provided to every household free of cost and when these broke

because of rough handling, the same was substituted with steel burners.

Villagers also benefited from the operations of agricultural machineries. The grinding cost at

flour mills went as low as 5 paise per kilogram, similarly the cost of chaff cutting went down

considerably. Villagers were required to pay Rs6 for using tube-well for irrigation. The slurry

released from the plant was utilized as fertilizer. Each household was eligible for slurry in

proportion to the dung contributed to the plant. Despite these successes, plant developers failed

to provide villagers the overhead drinking water tank due to shortage of funds. There was

immense enthusiasm among villagers about the plant during the first few months of plant

operations. Villagers used to collect all the cow-dung and bring it to the plant site where dung

was weighed. Plant supervisor used to register the dung brought my each individual. Villagers

soon realized that kerosene was a costly affair, villagers were happy to pay Rs5 per month for

electricity consumption. The plant developers were also thinking of collecting Rs5 from each

family for burner.

But there was another side of the story that started to unfold after few months. The supply was

dung was affected due to differences between plant authorities and villagers over the issue of

cost of burners and lighting. By early 1980, these differences became more pronounced. The

requirement for dung for the two biogas plants was 1500 kg but the maximum contribution by

the villagers dropped to the level of 800 kg. Soon villagers’ disinterest became more visible and

they refused to bring the dung to the two plants. Plant authorities had to deploy two labourers to

fetch dung from families. Resultantly the supply was dung came down to the level of 440 kg. It

severely impacted the production and plant authorities had to reduce the hours of supply of gas.

Gradually the supply of cow dung shrank even further and the authorities were compelled to

reduce the supply of gas. The plant authorities then decided to supply the gas on alternate days.

By March 1981, the dung supply came down to the level of 160 kg, and authorities reduced the

supply to the extent of only twice a week. The excitement started to fizzle out and the villagers

reverted to making their traditional dung cakes. Some villagers even started to use more

expensive kerosene for domestic lighting.

It will be interesting to know why the relationship between villagers and the plant authorities

reached such a low level. One reason for this strained relationship was the lack of

communication between villagers and the plant officials. The lack of communication became

more visible when B. P. Ghate, the director of the PRAD, had to move to some other place.

Ghate, the young IAS officer, was taking active participation in the project. He was instrumental

in building the relationship with villagers. Once he departed, villagers gradually lost trust in the

project and even a nominal hike in price of services resulted into conflicts. After his departure,

villagers complained that there is no one to listen to their difficulties. Another reason for

villagers’ dissent was that the changeover from traditional fuels to biogas resulted into alteration

of cooking habits of villagers. Since they were traditionally using dung cakes and fuel wood, it

was suitable for boiling milk and baking bajra chapatis on low heat. But biogas did not provide

them that comfort. that has required the people to alter their cooking habits. Villagers considered

slow-burning dung cakes better for these purposes.

Another important factor that led to the failure of the plant was that the biogas plant was

gradually intruding into villagers’ traditional social rhythm. They had to cook according to the

timing fixed by the plant managers and it used to become very difficult for them whenever any

guest used to come. In such circumstances they had to resort to fuel woods. They felt that the

introduction of biogas plant gave them the feeling that they were living in a regimented territory.

Another reason and perhaps the important one was that the villagers were not consulted about

their priorities at each stage of the project implementation. There were two conflicting groups in

the village. The first group consisted of affluent people and the other group consisted of poor and

low income people. The first group was cooperating with the plant and was in favor of its

continuation, while the low income group felt that the plant was only serving the interest of rich

and plant developers. People belonging to the second income group felt why they should pay for

cooking gas whereas dung cakes and other resources were freely available to them. These people

even refused to pay for burner. There were instances when these people hid their burners in

potato sacks to avoid monthly charges.

It is interesting to see the reasons for conflict between the two groups. Gas usage priorities were

different for the two groups. For the second group, cooking gas was not on the priority list

because that they could manage otherwise at no cost. Electricity was also not their main priority.

They would have preferred for other purposes such as running of flour mill, thresher, chaff

cutter, and tube-well. Since the village was not electrified, the first group gave main priority to

electricity and cooking. Due to these conflicting views among groups, relationship between plant

managers and villagers deteriorated and often led to a situation when the police had to be called

in to intervene. Villagers also resorted to disruptive ways like blocking the slurry pits with dung

cakes. To bring discipline among villagers, project managers also resorted to ways like severing

the gas supply. But things did not improve and the biogas plant ran into huge troubles.

Pura and the Fateh Singh ka Purva biogas projects: An interesting comparison

It will be interesting to make comparison between these two biogas projects implemented at

different villages. It makes a compelling comparison because the both projects were executed

within the gap of 4 years. Fateha Singh Ka Purva project was implemented in 1979 and it came

to halt in 1982. Pura biogas project was implemented the same year (1982) when Fateh project

became dysfunctional. Structure of the village was same in both cases. There was huge socio-

economical divide at both places. The gap between rich and poor were visible at both places. The

availability of cattle is the most important thing for running such biogas plants. Compared to

Pura village, Fateh village was better placed in terms of number of cattle per family. Average

number of cattle per family in Fateh was 4.3, which was better than the national average at that

time. Pura village however lacked in terms of cattle availability per household12

. Availability of

dungs never became an issue for Fateh biogas project, whereas Pura biogas project was halted

after first phase of its operations due to the lack of the availability of cattle and miscalculation

about dung requirements. Such problem never happened in Fateh. Another contrast between the

two projects is that Pura biogas was Astra initiative wherein funding was made available by

Karnataka State Council for Science & Technology. Fateh project was the government-led

project funded by UNICEF. It was implemented and monitored by government, whereas there

was no government monitoring in the case of Pura project. While two biogas plants were built in

Fateh, there was only one such plant in Pura.

Another interesting comparison could be monitoring of the project. In the case of Fateh, the

project was running very successfully till the time project was being under the guidance of B. P.

Ghate, the director of the PRAD. Real problems started to creep in when Ghate had to leave this

project in order to take some other administrative assignments. Villagers were quite happy with

the delivery of the project till the time Ghate was involved. Villagers felt that he used to include

villagers in all decision making processes. Once Ghate left the project, managers started to take

arbitrary decisions. People gradually lost trust in the project and they became very critical of the

intentions of project managers. Similarly in the case of Pura project, villagers were cooperating

in the functioning of the project till the time Amulya Reddy was directly involved with the

project. But the project ran into trouble once Amulya left ASTRA and joined International

Energy Initiative (IEI). It is apparent that the failures of both projects were preceded by change

at the upper management and administrative level. Both biogas projects suffered due to the

inability of the management to understand the social and economic dynamics of the village. It

shows that such projects will continue to suffer in the absence of proper coordination between

project developers and the community.

12

Rajiv Gupta. “Are Community Biogas Plants a Feasible Proposition,” World Health Forum (1983), 358-361

The fate of the two different biogas projects shows that no technological intervention can be

useful unless it is accepted by the target community. Each village in India has its own social,

economic, and cultural dynamics and no technology can succeed in its objectives without

understanding those dynamics. Projects developers need to adopt a sensitive approach to

working with community and only the real benefits can accrue to people at large. What surprises

me most is that ASTRA did not learn from the experiences of Fateh and met the same fate.

Comparative analysis between ASTRA’s Pura village biogas plant and IEI’s REWSU in

Mavinakere Village:

There are some differences in the biogas-diesel plant of ASTRAS in Pura village that began

generating electricity in 1987 for household lighting and water supply and IEI (International

Energy Initiative, Bangalore)’s biogas-diesel plant in Mavinakere village, Karnataka.

With the purpose of assessing if such village-based utilities could be built by independent

applying agencies and then successfully operated by the village people, IEI developed a nine-

village biogas-based REWSU (Rural Electricity and Water Supply Utility) project. It was

intended that, with the experiences from this sample, there would be replication on a much larger

scale. The REWSU project was started in the year 1995-96 with the selection of nine villages in

Karnataka. Each village was to have a (biogas-diesel) dual-fuel electricity generation plant and

village-wide electricity and supply systems for supply to each household. In order to assess the

total energy needs of Mavinakere village, the only village where a REWSU is still working.

In the following points we would like to compare the biogas-diesel plant of ASTRAS in Pura

village and IEI’s biogas-diesel plant in Mavinakere village:-

1. Management: There was a new body of the management of Pura village biogas plant in

1998. The new management had some lacking in the comparison with the management of

IEI’s biogas-diesel plant in Mavinakere village. The approach of the new management of

Pura biogas plant differed from the Pura approach of waste utilization, participatory

management, building of local institutions and strengthening of self-reliance. The

decision-making process was not based on participation. It was on top-down management

by project administrators located about 100 km away in the metropolis of Bangalore. The

villagers was feeling this abandonment of participatory management by with-drawing

their co-operation.

While the plant of Mavinakere was being managed effectively and the GVS (Gram Vikas

Sabha) members assemble every Friday to take stock about the project. All the

households of Mavinakere feel that the plant is a “blessing”.

2. Greater utilization of the system: It is important to note that at the Pura village biogas

plant the barrier was the greater utilization of the plant. There was not an inadequacy in

dung supply. The operation of the Pura system for about 4.15 hr/day parallels to a dung

supply of 291kg/day in comparison with the daily dung availability of about 1,250 kg/day

(from a cattle population of 250 each yielding 5 kg of dung/day) (Reddy A, 2004).

Hence, the dung resources were actually utilized was only about 23 %. Thus, the low

utilization of the plant was because of a (biogas) demand constraint rising from a

restriction of biogas utilization to lighting and water for domestic purposes. From this

point of view, attempts to increase dung supply (for instance, by linking the system to

dairy schemes) are misdirected.

On the other way, the Mavinakere biogas plant a dairy is also attached to the operations,

dung delivery from this source is assured. The people themselves have decided on a

penalty of Rs 25 per household if at least 30 kg of dung per week is not delivered to the

plant by those belonging to the dairy co-operative. In this way there is a greater

utilization of the system.

3. Satisfaction level: There is a difference in the term of satisfaction of the people with the

projects. The project at Mavinkere village is satisfied. The people are really satisfied with

the performance of the biogas plant and the benefit of the plant is proved by their

acceptance of the tariff increase of Rs 5 per month. In this way the major and minor

expenditure of the plant have been covered. Besides this because of the confident about

the plant they have rejected the government’s proposed mini water supply scheme. The

regional administration has forced the latter on them but they have provided place to

construct the same on the outskirts of the village and although that water supply unit has

been in existence for several months, the villagers continue to pay for the household

supply through the biogas-based system.

But at the Pura project, the story is quite opposite. The villagers of Pura village were not

satisfied with the plant management and the efficiency of the plant. They were

disappointed about of the new, increased tariff. It happened without their consultation.

They moved towards government’s scheme. The government begun implementing World

Bank funded ‘‘free’’ water-supply schemes that undermine sustainably price biogas-

plant-system water supply (Reddy A, 2004). Because of the dissatisfaction with the

project the long-term advantages of sustainability and self-reliance overcame the

immediate attractions of free supply of the same quality of water to villagers.

4. Collaboration with other organizations: Although both of the projects was non-

governmental, for the successful implementation of the project, IEI coordinated with

several types of implementing agencies – local non-governmental organizations (NGOs)

committed to social welfare, engineering colleges, one branch of the Rotary Club, and the

regional government-sponsored committee elected by the constituent villages. Therefore

there is a source of funding and some other technical support in Mavinkere village.

But in the second phase of ASTRA’s Pura project could not get the support from Indian

Institute of Science and other organizations after 1998 due to the new management.

5. Awareness: Besides these points the awareness among the people of Mavinkere village is

greater than the Pura village. Most of the villagers did not think this system would be of

real help, but now they are now fully convinced that it is really benefiting them. This also

caused a better understanding about the project and success in Mavinkere village. But in

the Pura village there was lacking of it. We can find out from the issue of using new

locally available feedstock’s was an attractive alternative to the diesel ‘‘imported’’ into

the village for dual-fuel operation. But due to improper awareness among the villages it

could not got success.

Thus waste utilization, participatory management, building of local institutions and

strengthening of self-reliance are the main need to make such kind of projects successful.

We have seen in the term of successful co-operatives in India, where the important

factors are self-reliance and participation among the people.

PURA model and community participation

Technological intervention by AMULYA Reddy in rural India established a good example of

community participation. The PURA model of bio-gas project ran successfully for a decade with

good cooperation and contribution from the community at large. To make people participate in a

project entails a great deal of challenge. To understand the science of community, choices of

people, ensuring participation are some of the key factors which determine success of a program.

Understanding science of community means to understand something from the perspective, of

cost- benefits analysis. Amulya Reddy discusses several ideas from his own experiences when he

made intervention in rural India. He argues that a project cannot be sustainable unless we

understand the rationality of rural lives he says rural people may be poor but not irrational, and

their rationality lies in a way they make proper evaluation of cost benefit analysis, and their

attitude to return and risk. Thus, given the alternative choices in their full awareness they make

rational choices.

“In the institution of community,” writes Rose, “a sector is brought into existence whose

vectors and forces can be mobilized, enrolled, deployed in novel programs and techniques which

encourage and harness active practices of self-management and identity construction, of personal

ethics and collective allegiances13

.” When an intervention from outsiders say, the state, or an

NGO is made, it needs to bring forces of community in line with the spirit of the program being

run. Issues are “problematized in terms of features of communities and their strength, cultures,

pathologies” solutions take the form of acting upon community dynamics.

In case of PURA village, in its initial phase the program faced some challenges which were

inherently concerned with the problem of community participation. At first place some People

were unwilling to share their cow dung apprehending that it will not be shared by the all. This

problem was solved by forming village development society involving the traditional community

leader. And now the project was managed by the involvement of all the villagers, it brought

sense of participation and their spirit in line with the objective of the program. How community

participation and leadership from within the community helped PURA model to succeed? There

13 Rose Nicolas, “Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought”, Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1999.

are some special attributes of decentralization. Here I am not using decentralization as a grand

project of good governance or neo-liberal agenda. To me it is very much concerned with the

process of decision making. Since village community is small, people know their strength, the

strength of the community. It helps in overcoming information constrains as how much dung is

to be used, what are their felt need, cost involved, their priorities and so on. This helps them to

make decision of their own rather than to face the consequences of vertically implanted decision

from the top. Vertically implanted decision often does not include the ground reality of

community and consequently fails to address the issues.

Communities have their own dynamic forces. These forces are democratic values, social capital.

As describing the features of social capital Robert Putnam writes- Features of social

organization, such as trust, norms, and networks that can improve the efficiency of society by

facilitating coordinated actions. (Trust and transparency ensures participation thereby increases

adding efficiency to program meant for them. This trust and transparency must not lie only

among villagers, but also with the outsiders (state agency, NGO). As Amulya Reddy writes to

win trust of the people our approach to rural work should be with empathy and affection for the

people. Otherwise they tend to be to be afraid of the people and hide behind the walls of their

rural centers. Then, the poor tend to conclude that their poverty is being used as a resource for

professional gain. This mistrust creates a distance between people and professionals working for

them.

Women and participation; PURA model

When energy interventions involve new ways of producing and using energy, the experience

from several projects around the developing world demonstrates that women are not only the

main beneficiaries, but play a key role in the operation of these utilities since their stake in the

success of the utilities tends to be greater. As it has been evident from around the fact that the

poor urban and rural women are excellent managers and entrepreneurs in a number of context,

for example milk cooperative, microfinance. Microenterprises in Bangladesh succeeded because

it got overwhelming entrepreneurial support from women. They have an outstanding record of

repayment of small credits on time; which simply indicates women are better investors and

planners than men. When she invests or borrows she knows that her family is also a stakeholder.

According to experiences it has been seen that the decisions of women take into account the long

term and the next generation, a natural consequences of their linkage with children. Hence,

women are naturally endowed to be the implementers of sustainable development.

Women in rural setting play greater role in different walk of life. They do household works and

participate in agriculture related activities with men.in rural area they face a very hard life. In

case of PURA village, they had to bring water from nearby open pond. For collecting fire wood

they would go far and wide places to search. This extensive gender division work has great

impact on women health and working capacity. In order to sustain their life willy-nilly they

become a good manager of energy resources, and accordingly they prioritize their need. In case

of PURA village they gave priority to drinking water rather than electric light, or bio-gas. As

they were better knew the cost and the time involved in fetching and drinking unhygienic water

from open pond. Amulya Reddy talks about three steps for women to have their stake in energy

service. First step involves in making them stake holder of energy services, then to have them

managerial skills , and at the end enable them to be an energy entrepreneurs.

Neo-liberal regime and community participation

Neo-liberalism has emerged as one of most dominant strand of economic development. The

main argument it makes is the withdrawal of state apparatus from economic activities and giving

autonomy to market instead. As put by Gray and Lawrence- Neoliberalism is based upon the

assumption that market individualism is the key to economic and social progress, and that the

best outcomes for society will be realized when governments remove constraints from business

activity and retreat from involvement in social and other Programs that are viewed as both

‘distorting’ market signals and breeding dependency through welfare-style payments14

.

On one hand where it talks the minimum role of government, it demands for enabling

people capacity to take part of market through decentralization and community participation on

the other. These two strands of neo-liberalism, shrinking of state role and community

participation, thereby enabling people capacity, has been the two major strand of neo-liberal

policy. Our effort here is to see energy security program at community level (taking PURA bio-

14

Lynda Cheshire & Geoffrey Lawrence, Neoliberalism, “Individualization and Community: Regional Restructuring in Australia”, Social Identities Vol. 11, No. 5, September 2005, pp. 436

gas project) through these lenses of neo-liberal arguments, and to enquire in to sustainability and

viability of such project in the light of neo-liberal policy.

In the wake of globalization the distance between rural and urban India widened. Further

minimal state intervention in rural India made the situation worst. Bureaucratic apathy towards

human sentiment is better known in India. Keeping such circumstances, a scientific intervention

such as PURA in rural India bridged the space of the state. The model of PURA village of

community participation has different attributes than that of neo-liberal agenda. Community

participation designed at high level does not include rural rationality in policy design and

transplanted through state or development project of a NGOs. But the community participation

model of PURA is based on rural rationality. It is very much fit into socio-economic profile of

rural setting hence, can claim to be more sustainable.

The importance of such intervention can be understood in two terms. Firstly where state does

not have its presence, may be its inefficiency, or its shrinking role in public lives. And secondly,

where transcendentally implanted policy of development agency has failed due to its

misconfiguration in rural setting, the community participation of PURA model can sustain it.

Apart from such context, in the wake of 73rd

amendments one could guess that women

participation in local governance and permanent leadership increases the viability of such

program.

Comparative study of India and China biogas projects:

A Comparative study of India and China carried out by ASTRA and IISc gives a salient exposure

of the achievement of China in the field of biogas. When compared to China, the biogas

experiments and programs in India have started much earlier; later China took this technology in

1970 and surprisingly over took India in this field. The below table 3 gives the biogas plants

information in India and China from 1973-199815

.

15 http://www.nabard.org/modelbankprojects/biogas.asp

Year India China

1973 8,000 5,000

1980 80,000 72,00,000

1998 27,50,000 69,00,000

The reasons for the slow growth of biogas plants in India are: lack of awareness about the

benefits of the biogas plants, costlier construction costs, uneven distribution of cattle, no proper

institutional structures to build biogas plants and to maintain them, social reasons like

unwillingness to accept gas from cow dung, poor designs and operating systems leading to poor

or no gas yields, no proper training facilities, no proper assistance from government etc. In order

to increase growth rate, action on many fronts technology, training, financial and institutional

assistance are being taken up and coordinated by a biogas directorate in the State Government.

Though china does not have much cattle dung resources but they managed to overtake India in

all the above fronts. They use human excreta, pig dung, poultry litters and agriculture residues

etc. but in India, mostly cow dung is used as input and is reluctant to use human excreta. Both

state and citizens have to work hard with seriousness in meeting the energy needs and should

strive hard for finding the alternative sources of energy which are sustainable.

Major Findings:

Our study suggests that Astra did not pay enough attention to mechanism for peer review and

quality control that is essential for the success of such projects. Moreover they could have done

better if they would have learnt lessons from the experiences of the Fateh village biogas project.

Since Fateh project was implemented just few years before the Pura village project, lessons

could have benefited the plant developers of Pura biogas project. It points towards the lack of

proper connectivity between different project developers. We have found that technology may be

a necessary condition for rural development, but it is also essential that the political structure and

socio-economic framework are both committed to the development mission. Such interventions

have the potential to address the energy crisis in rural India with minimum damage to

environment. We have also found that the family biogas units have been more successful than

the community biogas plant due to the complex social, cultural and economic dynamics of the

Indian villages. To foster community participation in villages, developers of the project need to

understand these subtle dynamics that vary from village to village. Another thing that surprises

me the most is that project developers did not make any attempt to utilize agricultural residues as

biogas. There is huge potential of utilizing such biogas resources that still remain untapped.

Despite having an immense potentiality in such intervention we find some other

aspects which is quite threatening in its sustenance. Changing livelihood pattern, mass migration

of rural people and new generation’s reluctance toward farming and cattle keeping are the factors

that are threatening the availability of resources that are needed for sustenance of biogas plants.

Apart from such problems there are some ecological concerns like deforestation, privatization of

common property land in rural areas, uneven monsoon that cause flood and drought conditions

which force the people to sell their cattle to slaughter houses etc.

Conclusion

If we place the Pura intervention in contemporary context, we will find that technology has

improved dramatically since the time Pura intervention was undertaken. With modern innovative

technologies that are available today, we can hope to replicate the intervention with significantly

higher success rate. If we look this intervention with the community participation perspective, it

becomes apparent that the decentralization that gives more constitutional strength to Panchayati

Raj institutions can help in effectively addressing the issue of community participation in such

interventions. If we place such biogas projects in the context of the present discourse

surrounding the organic farming, we will find that these biogas plants still have much relevance

because they could be the source of quality manures that organic farming need in abundance. As

the villages in India are gradually adopting modern toilets, there is enough scope for human

excreta-based biogas plant. There is a notion among the people that biogas produced by human

excreta will get bad odour when used for cooking. This notion is proven wrong; it burns with

blue flame and without soot and odour. Along with huge amount of cow dung, human excreta

and agricultural residues are also available through which biogas can be produced but, most of

the people are reluctant to use human excreta especially in producing the biogas. Biogas

generation from human excreta is an important way to get rid of health hazards. Biogas

technology from human wastes has multiple benefits such as- sanitation, bio energy and manure

and reduces greenhouse effect.

References:

1. Amulya Kumar N. Reddy, “Lessons from ASTRA’s Experience of Technologies for Rural

Development”.

2. Amulya K.N. Reddy, “Lessons from the pura community biogas project”

3. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/emerging_biogas.html

4. http://dahd.nic.in/dahd/WriteReadData/7.%20Part%20IV%20Livestock%20Census%20B

AHS%202012.pdf

5. http://www.nabard.org/modelbankprojects/biogas.asp

6. Hardin, Garrett, “The Tragedy of the Commons”, Science, 162, December 1968, pp.

1243-1248.

7. Rajiv Gupta. “Are Community Biogas Plants a Feasible Proposition,” World Health

Forum (1983), 358-361

8. Rose Nicolas, “Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought”, Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1999.

9. Waterberg Anna, “Group Therapy: How Social Ties Affect Household Welfare During

Crisis”, Jakarta: World Bank, 2004.

10. Lynda Cheshire & Geoffrey Lawrence, Neoliberalism, “Individualization and

Community: Regional Restructuring in Australia”, Social Identities Vol. 11, No. 5,

September 2005, pp. 436

11. Srilatha Batliwala, Amulya Reddy, “Energy for women and women for energy

(Engendering energy and empowering women)”

12. Amulya K.N Reddy, “The Blessing of Commons”, 1993

13. K.V.Narasimha Murthy, Chandru B.T. and Antonette D’Sa, Community biogas plants:

IEI’s Rural Electricity and Water Supply Utility (REWSU) project with special reference

to the utility at Mavinakere, September 2003