Title of paper

3.4 Using manure of cows to generate power

3.4.1 Project description

In 2010, the !Aimab Super Dairy Farm intended to receive CDM support for generating electricity by making use of cow dung. The Super Dairy Farm is owned by Ohlthaver and List (O&L) and widely known as a multi-million-dollar project, situated 10 km north of Mariental. The farm owns 2,800 cows, half of them giving milk. Every cow produces 30 l of milk per day. The other half of cows either rests or is pregnant.

Livestock farming, the production of dairy products and crop farming contribute significantly to global warming. “It generates 65% of human-related nitrous oxide, which is 296 times the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CO₂” the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization stated in 2006. According to the authors, it is responsible for 37% of the world’s CH4 emissions (FAO, 2006). In other countries, enteric methane emissions from dairy animals are also considered as projects with high CDM potential. Unfortunately, little information is available on the details of the Super Dairy Farm Mariental. However, various animal dung mitigation options are already in use in other countries. Often these projects use high-rate rethanization digesters or anaerobic digesters to extract biogas from animal waste and dung, thus generating biogas based energy and transform methane through flaring into CO₂ (The Villager, 25 Mar 2012).

Without knowing more about the project, it is assumed that it resembles both projects of the City of Windhoek to a certain extent. It can be assumed that it was classified as a small- scale activity. Using methane flaring and biogas based energy as ways to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases classifies as ‘methane avoidance project’ as well as a ‘renewable energy project’ since the production of energy with biogas was considered. Unfortunately, neither are data available on the output of this project, nor information on the reasons for failing.

4. Comparison and critique

4.1 Comparing Namibia’s CDM project activities

Comparing the four projects, several similarities appear. All projects are classified as small scale projects. Most projects (A; B; D) contain a switch of technology from a conventional power station using steam turbines towards electricity generation with gas engines. The same projects exercise the destruction of methane respectively landfill gas. According to Fenhann’s CDM pipeline, for the projects of the City of Windhoek the classification as a gas flaring project is more defining than the classification as a renewable energy project, though both projects are listed as gas destruction projects (Fenhann, 2013). All projects include the modification of an already operating facility. Foreign direct investments as well as the generation of CERs revenue represent the most prominent economic benefits. All projects contribute to a reduction of coal imports and thus to the emission of CO₂. Moreover, all projects more or less have a job creation potential.
Figure 2: Comparison for Namibian CDM project activities

	Project A	Project B	Project C	Project D
Title	Gammams Water Care Works	Kupferberg Landfill	Energy for Future	!Aimab Super Dairy Farm Mariental
Description	Power generation from biogas in Windhoek	Methane recovery and power generation at the Kupferberg Landfill in Windhoek	Power generation from encroacher bush	Using manure of cows to generate power
Successful	Yes	Yes	No	No
National Verification	Completed	Completed	Completed	Completed
Registration on the international level	Completed	Completed	Rejected	Rejected
Status Quo	Registered	Registered	Withdrawn	Withdrawn
Project-type	Small scale activity	Small scale activity	Small scale activity	Small scale activity
Measure	Switch of technology with a change of energy source	Switch of technology with a change of energy source	Change of energy source	Switch of technology with a change of energy source
Classification	Methane destruction	Landfill gas destruction	Renewable Energy	Methane destruction
Implementation	Modification of an operating facility	Modification of an operating facility	Modification of an operating facility	Modification of an operating facility
Contribution to sustainable development	Gain of foreign currency; CERs generate revenue; more independence from coal imports; reduction of coal used; job creation; support of local markets	Gain of foreign currency; CERs generate revenue; more independence from coal imports; reduction of coal used; job creation; improvement of working conditions	Gain of foreign currency; CERs generate revenue; more independence from coal imports; reduction of coal used; job creation; support of local markets	Gain of foreign currency; CERs generate revenue; more independence from coal imports; reduction of coal used; job creation; support of local markets
Savings	7,869 tonnes of CO² per year. 465 tonnes of CH4 per year and generates 4,646 MWh of electricity in the same time period	9,341 tonnes of CO² per year; transforms 1,568 tons CH4 into CO² and generates 5,256 MWh of electricity per year	55,300 tonnes of coal could be saved per year	No data