IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jchals/v6y2015i1p42-54d48028.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indian Farmers’ Perceptions and Willingness to Supply Surplus Biomass to an Envisioned Biomass-Based Power Plant

Author

Listed:
  • Anas Zyadin

    (School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, 80101 Joensuu, Finland)

  • Karthikeyan Natarajan

    (School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, 80101 Joensuu, Finland)

  • Suresh Chauhan

    (The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), Darbari Seth Block, IHC Complex, Lodhi Road, 110003 New Delhi, India)

  • Harminder Singh

    (The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), Darbari Seth Block, IHC Complex, Lodhi Road, 110003 New Delhi, India)

  • Md. Kamrul Hassan

    (School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, 80101 Joensuu, Finland)

  • Ari Pappinen

    (School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, 80101 Joensuu, Finland)

  • Paavo Pelkonen

    (School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, 80101 Joensuu, Finland)

Abstract

The main objectives of this socio-technical study are to investigate the Indian farmers’ biomass production capacities and their perceptions and willingness to supply their surplus biomass to fuel an envisioned biomass-based power plant in three selected Indian states: Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. For doing so, 471 farmers (about one-third from each state) have been interviewed in the field with info-sheet filled in by the field investigators. The farmers from all of the states appeared very much willing to sell their surplus biomass directly to a power plant. The farmers seem to depreciate the involvement of a middleman in the biomass procurement process. The farmers, however, appeared to highly appreciate a community-based association to regulate the biomass prices, with varying perceptions regarding government intervention. The majority of the farmers perceived the establishment of a biomass-based power plant in their region with positive economic outcomes. The farmers identified several barriers to supply biomass to a power plant where transportation logistics appeared to be the main barrier. The study recommends considering biomass collection, storage and transportation logistics as a fundamental segment of any envisioned investment in a biomass-based power plant. Biomass processing, such as pelletization or briquetting is recommended for efficient transportation of biomass at longer distances to reduce the transportation costs. The study further encourages the establishment of a farmers’ association aimed at collecting and selling biomass in agriculture areas predominant for small land holdings.

Suggested Citation

  • Anas Zyadin & Karthikeyan Natarajan & Suresh Chauhan & Harminder Singh & Md. Kamrul Hassan & Ari Pappinen & Paavo Pelkonen, 2015. "Indian Farmers’ Perceptions and Willingness to Supply Surplus Biomass to an Envisioned Biomass-Based Power Plant," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-13, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:6:y:2015:i:1:p:42-54:d:48028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/6/1/42/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/6/1/42/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Convery, I. & Robson, D. & Ottitsch, A. & Long, M., 2012. "The willingness of farmers to engage with bioenergy and woody biomass production: A regional case study from Cumbria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 293-300.
    2. Gulati, Ashok & Narayanan, Sudha, 2003. "The Subsidy Syndrome in Indian Agriculture," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195662061.
    3. Iglinski, Bartlomiej & Iglinska, Anna & Kujawski, Wojciech & Buczkowski, Roman & Cichosz, Marcin, 2011. "Bioenergy in Poland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 2999-3007, August.
    4. Hiloidhari, Moonmoon & Das, Dhiman & Baruah, D.C., 2014. "Bioenergy potential from crop residue biomass in India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 504-512.
    5. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    6. Cohen, Jed J. & Reichl, Johannes & Schmidthaler, Michael, 2014. "Re-focussing research efforts on the public acceptance of energy infrastructure: A critical review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 4-9.
    7. Rogers, Jennifer C. & Simmons, Eunice A. & Convery, Ian & Weatherall, Andrew, 2012. "Social impacts of community renewable energy projects: findings from a woodfuel case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 239-247.
    8. Altman, Ira & Bergtold, Jason & Sanders, Dwight & Johnson, Tom, 2015. "Willingness to supply biomass for bioenergy production: A random parameter truncated analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-10.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anna Härri & Jarkko Levänen & Katariina Koistinen, 2020. "Marginalized Small-Scale Farmers as Actors in Just Circular-Economy Transitions: Exploring Opportunities to Circulate Crop Residue as Raw Material in India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-18, December.
    2. Sansaniwal, S.K. & Rosen, M.A. & Tyagi, S.K., 2017. "Global challenges in the sustainable development of biomass gasification: An overview," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 23-43.
    3. Natarajan, Karthikeyan & Latva-Käyrä, Petri & Zyadin, Anas & Pelkonen, Paavo, 2016. "New methodological approach for biomass resource assessment in India using GIS application and land use/land cover (LULC) maps," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 256-268.
    4. Zyadin, Anas & Natarajan, Karthikeyan & Latva-Käyrä, Petri & Igliński, Bartłomiej & Iglińska, Anna & Trishkin, Maxim & Pelkonen, Paavo & Pappinen, Ari, 2018. "Estimation of surplus biomass potential in southern and central Poland using GIS applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 204-215.
    5. Karthikeyan Natarajan & Petri Latva-Käyrä & Anas Zyadin & Suresh Chauhan & Harminder Singh & Ari Pappinen & Paavo Pelkonen, 2015. "Biomass Resource Assessment and Existing Biomass Use in the Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu States of India," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-15, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Natarajan, Karthikeyan & Latva-Käyrä, Petri & Zyadin, Anas & Pelkonen, Paavo, 2016. "New methodological approach for biomass resource assessment in India using GIS application and land use/land cover (LULC) maps," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 256-268.
    2. Hogan, Jessica L. & Warren, Charles R. & Simpson, Michael & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "What makes local energy projects acceptable? Probing the connection between ownership structures and community acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    3. Ioannidis, Romanos & Koutsoyiannis, Demetris, 2020. "A review of land use, visibility and public perception of renewable energy in the context of landscape impact," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    4. Antoine Boche & Clément Foucher & Luiz Fernando Lavado Villa, 2022. "Understanding Microgrid Sustainability: A Systemic and Comprehensive Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-29, April.
    5. Zemo, Kahsay Haile & Termansen, Mette, 2018. "Farmers’ willingness to participate in collective biogas investment: A discrete choice experiment study," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 87-101.
    6. Schweizer, Pia-Johanna & Bovet, Jana, 2016. "The potential of public participation to facilitate infrastructure decision-making: Lessons from the German and European legal planning system for electricity grid expansion," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 64-73.
    7. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.
    8. Nadejda Komendantova & Marco Vocciante & Antonella Battaglini, 2015. "Can the BestGrid Process Improve Stakeholder Involvement in Electricity Transmission Projects?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-27, August.
    9. Jay Sterling Gregg & Sophie Nyborg & Meiken Hansen & Valeria Jana Schwanitz & August Wierling & Jan Pedro Zeiss & Sarah Delvaux & Victor Saenz & Lucia Polo-Alvarez & Chiara Candelise & Winston Gilcrea, 2020. "Collective Action and Social Innovation in the Energy Sector: A Mobilization Model Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-24, February.
    10. Galvin, Ray, 2018. "‘Them and us’: Regional-national power-plays in the German energy transformation: A case study in Lower Franconia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 269-277.
    11. Eduardo Martínez-Mendoza & Luis Arturo Rivas-Tovar & Luis Enrique García-Santamaría, 2021. "Wind energy in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec: conflicts and social implications," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 11706-11731, August.
    12. Woo, JongRoul & Chung, Sungsam & Lee, Chul-Yong & Huh, Sung-Yoon, 2019. "Willingness to participate in community-based renewable energy projects: A contingent valuation study in South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 643-652.
    13. Salak, B. & Lindberg, K. & Kienast, F. & Hunziker, M., 2021. "How landscape-technology fit affects public evaluations of renewable energy infrastructure scenarios. A hybrid choice model," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    14. Qingchang Li & Seungkook Roh & Jin Won Lee, 2020. "Segmenting the South Korean Public According to Their Preferred Direction for Electricity Mix Reform," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-17, October.
    15. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    16. Mehmet Efe Biresselioglu & Muhittin Hakan Demir & Sebnem Altinci, 2022. "Understanding the Citizen’s Role in the Transition to a Smart Energy System: Are We Ready?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-24, May.
    17. Avri Eitan & Gillad Rosen & Lior Herman & Itay Fishhendler, 2020. "Renewable Energy Entrepreneurs: A Conceptual Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, May.
    18. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    19. Thomas, Heiko & Marian, Adela & Chervyakov, Alexander & Stückrad, Stefan & Salmieri, Delia & Rubbia, Carlo, 2016. "Superconducting transmission lines – Sustainable electric energy transfer with higher public acceptance?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 59-72.
    20. John Colton & Kenneth Corscadden & Stewart Fast & Monica Gattinger & Joel Gehman & Martha Hall Findlay & Dylan Morgan & Judith Sayers & Jennifer Winter & Adonis Yatchew, 2016. "Energy Projects, Social Licence, Public Acceptance and Regulatory Systems in Canada: A White Paper," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 9(20), May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:6:y:2015:i:1:p:42-54:d:48028. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.