1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Kathmandu University (KU) - Nepal

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Sarada Batase Village Development Committee (Sarada Batase VDC) - Nepal

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

No

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Production of fuel and manure from animal waste

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

People here use animal as well as human waste for the production of biogas.Equal amount of dung and water is poured in the inlet and mixed by the help of mixture.Then the raw materials are passed to the digestor where gas (methane) is produced by an anerobic fermentation by methanogenic bacteria. The produced gas is collected in dome and slurry is drained out through an outlet.

Purpose of the Technology: The biogas produced from the plant is used as a fuel for cooking food. The bio gas produced can also be used to light bulbs.The slurry can be used as manure in agricultural fields.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: About 24% houses is using this technique by the funds from international , national (government) and few by self funding . The digester should be cleaned every five years of its use.

Natural / human environment: Temperature maintenance is basic requirement for biogas production. (36 degree celsius).
It is most favorable if the plant is near the water resources and near to the fuel source i.e. cattle house.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• during experiments/ research

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Comments:

Major cash crop: Potatoes and oranges

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Loss of fertile soil
Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• mixed rainfed-irrigated

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• energy efficiency technologies

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Type of agronomic measures: better crop cover, manure / compost / residues

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires), inputs and infrastructure: (roads, markets, distribution of water points, other, …)
Secondary causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub), over-exploitation of vegetation for domestic use, overgrazing, change in temperature, change of seasonal rainfall, Heavy / extreme rainfall (intensity/amounts), wind storms / dust storms, floods, droughts, population pressure, land tenure, poverty / wealth, labour availability, governance / institutional

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• reduce land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Labour	unit	1.0	4500.0	4500.0
Equipment	Animal traction	unit	1.0	5765.0	5765.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					10265.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					10265.0

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Digestor cleaning	5 years
2.	Refilling the digestor	Daily

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

1) Size of biogas plant
2) Materials required to build the plant
3) Labour Cost

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Landforms: Also valley floors

5.3 Soils

If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil fertility is high - medium
Soil water storage capacity is high

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 100-200 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 1% - 2%

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• communal/ village

Land use rights:

• individual

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	not well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	not well
local windstorm	well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	not well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	not well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Comments:

There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
used as a fertilizer
Efficient cooking method.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Decreases the dependency on wood.
Reduces health problems due to air pollution.
Improves the living standard of rural men and women.
Use of alternative energy resources.

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
Size of digestion is too big due to which its requirement cannot be fulfilled.	Size should be maintained according to the available resources.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
If methane produced is leaked in atmosphere can sustain global warming.	Should be well constructed.
leakage from the plant may be mixed in the water sources.	Prevent leakage with timely maintainance.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information