A Low Carbon Society Scenario Development for Ratchaburi, Thailand - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
a low carbon society scenario development for ratchaburi
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

A Low Carbon Society Scenario Development for Ratchaburi, Thailand - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jul 25, 2023 646 likes •888 views

A Low Carbon Society Scenario Development for Ratchaburi, Thailand Savitri Garivait, Sirintornthep Towprayoon, Penwadee Cheewaphongphan The 16 th AIM International Workshop 19-21 February 2011 Climate Change Research Hall, NIES Objective To

slide-1
SLIDE 1

A Low Carbon Society Scenario Development for Ratchaburi, Thailand

The 16th AIM International Workshop Climate Change Research Hall, NIES 19-21 February 2011

Savitri Garivait, Sirintornthep Towprayoon, Penwadee Cheewaphongphan

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Objective

To develop a low carbon society (LCS) scenario for Ratchaburi with an objective to support the provincial vision of self-sufficiency economy for sustainable development.

Scope & Methodology

To quantify the GHG emissions vs. associated drivers

  • Energy related activities  ExSS Tools
  • Agriculture  IPCC 2006 Guidelines

Methodology

  • Land Use, Land Use Change, and Forestry 

IPCC 2006 Guidelines Methodology Base Year: 2005 Target Year: 2030 Projection: BAU vs. CM

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Ratchaburi: Facts&Figures

Location latitudes 13º32’15” N longitudes 90º49’09” E Climate SW monsoon with very dry zones Mean Annual Temperature 21-38ºC Average Annual Precipitation 1,303 mm (131 days) Total Land 5,196.5 km2

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Tak Nan Loei Chiang Mai Surin Kanchanaburi Roi Et Lampang Burirum Sisaket Chiangrai Surat Thani Phrae Nakhon Ratchasima Yala Chaiyaphum Udon Thani Krabi Kalasin Lopburi Srakaeo Songkhla Phitsanu Lok Phayao Auttaradit Trang Trat Phichit Uthai Thani Phetchaburi Chonburi Rayong Ratchaburi Chainat Phetchabun Khon Kaen Ubon Ratchathani Mae Hong Son Nong Khai Sukhothai Sakon Nakhon Nakhon Sawan Chumphon Kampaeng Phet Chanthaburi Satun Phang Nga Lamphun Nakhon Si Thammarat Yasothon Prachinburi Suphan Buri Narathiwat Saraburi Ranong Mukdahan Mahasarakham Prachuap Khilikha Nakhon Phanom Chachoengsao Phatthalung Pattani Nong Bua Lamphu Amnaj Charoen Bangkok Nakhon Nayok Nakhon Prathom Pathum Thani Singburi Phuket Samut Prakarn Samut Sakhon Trat Satun Samut Songkham

Legend

REGION Northern Central Western Eastern North-eastern Southern

Location of Ratchaburi pro

Ratchaburi Facts & Figures

Population 795,255 pp (Yr 2005) Density 160 pp/km2 (Yr 2005) GPP 2,976 million US$ (17th rank) GPP/capita 3,634 US$ (13th rank)

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Industry GPP (million $US) Primary 450 Secondary 905 Tertiary 1,621 Tertiary industry Primary industry Secondary industry

Year 2005

Ratchaburi Facts & Figures

slide-6
SLIDE 6

3) Commercial 2) Transportation 4) Residential

Energy Related Activities

1) Industrial

Passenger Freight

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Agriculture Related Activities

Enteric Fermentation Manure Management Rice Cultivation Agricultural Residues Open Burning Agricultural soil

slide-8
SLIDE 8

LULUCF Related Activities

Source: Garivait and Boonman, 2010

Ratchaburi Land use 2000 Ratchaburi Land use 2007 Crop land Forest land Grass land Other land Settlement Wet land Ratchaburi boundary

  • 2. Forest land converts to other land

(Crop land/ Grass land/ Settlement/ Wetland)

  • 1. Other land (Crop land/Grassland/

Settlement/Wetland) converts to forest land

  • 3. Forest land remains forest land
slide-9
SLIDE 9

Ratchaburi Land use change from 2000 to 2007 (1000 Ha) % Crop land Grass land Forest land Other land Settlement Wet land Forest Plant Total area (2000) Crop land 214.17 16.75 9.34 4.10 37.35 16.12 0.96 298.79 57.7 Grass land 5.46 1.78 5.23 0.63 0.98 0.32 0.01 14.41 2.8 Forest land 17.55 6.60 134.85 2.92 6.04 3.33 1.11 172.40 33.3 Other land 0.62 0.16 1.71 0.41 0.14 0.06 0.00 3.10 0.6 Settlement 7.56 1.12 0.83 0.83 6.44 1.08 0.08 17.93 3.5 Wet land 2.43 0.18 0.21 0.07 1.36 3.31 0.00 7.56 1.5 Forest plantation 1.36 0.12 0.87 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.87 3.33 0.7 Total area (2007) 249.15 26.71 153.04 8.95 52.41 24.21 3.04 517.52 100.0 % 48.1 5.2 29.6 1.7 10.1 4.7 0.6 100.0

  • %Change
  • 9.6

+2.4

  • 3.7

+1.1 +6.7 +3.2

  • 0.1
  • Ratchaburi Land use change

2000 2007

(during 2000 to 2007)

Source: Garivait and Boonman, 2010

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Scenarios Formulation

BAU  Historical Trends Analysis

Indicator Annual Change Demographic Population +0.88% Demographic composition 0‐14: ‐1.49 %, 15‐64: +1.22 %, >65: +3.14 % Economic GPP +3.03% Transportation Trip generation +1.6% Modal share of passenger transportation Walk/bike: 9.30%, Motor cycle: 26.00%, Car: 17.00%, Pick up: 17.00%, Van: 17.00%, Small public vehicle: 3.00%, Large public vehicle: 10.70%

slide-11
SLIDE 11

National Renewable Energy Development Plan (2008-2022) Ratchaburi’s Development Plan 2010-2013 State Railway of Thailand’s Plan Western Region Plan Power Development Plan

Scenarios Formulation

CM  Adapted from the following Plans used/may be referred to Ratchaburi Administration

slide-12
SLIDE 12
  • Demography data: population/household
  • Economic data: Thailand IO table, Thailand GDP,

Ratchaburi’s GPP

  • Transportation data: trip generation/mode share

The National Statistics Office Office of the National Economics and Social Development Board Office of Transport and Traffic Policy and Planning

Source of Input Data

  • Building: commercial area (applied from land use data)

Land Development Department

  • Energy: Ratchaburi’s energy consumption-supply/Thailand

energy supply

Provincial Energy Agency/ Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency

slide-13
SLIDE 13
  • Agricultural livestock: No. of animal
  • Agricultural crop: Area/Production/Fertilization/

Residue/Residue utilization

  • Land use: Land use characteristic (GIS-based)

Office of Agricultural Economics Office of Agricultural Economic/Literature review/Field survey Land development department

Source of input data

2006 IPCC Guidelines

  • Emission factor
slide-14
SLIDE 14

762 1,112 2,080 59 142 269 466 351 29 439 1,138

  • 648
  • 1,000
  • 500

500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Residential Commercial Industrial Passenger transport Freight transport Fermentation Manure management Rice cultivation Open burning Agricultural soil land use change land use change Activities GHG Emission (kt CO2eq)

Ratchaburi Emission, 2005

Total GHG emission 6,848 ktCO2eq Total removal

  • 648 ktCO2eq

agricultural 33% land use 6% energy consumption 61%

Results

slide-15
SLIDE 15

1,435 2,363 4,106 75 292 789 1,768 511 48 1,941 (1,578) (2,000) (1,000) 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Residential Commercial Industrial Passenger transport Freight transport Fermentation Manure management Rice cultivation Open burning Agricultural soil land use change GHG Emission (kt CO2eq) Activities

Ratchaburi Emission, 2030 (BAU)

6,848 13,328

  • 648
  • 1,578
  • 4,000
  • 2,000

2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 Yr 2005 2030 BAU GHG emissions/removals (kt-CO2eq) Y ear

total removal total emission

+95%

  • 143%

Results

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Countermeasures (CM)  7 Actions for Ratchaburi LCS

Action 1 Modal Shifting in Transportation

 50% of passenger-small vehicle in inner area switches to walk/bike in 2030/2005  25% of freight-large vehicle that transport goods within Ratchaburi switches to freight-small vehicle in 2030/2005  25% of freight-large vehicle that transport goods outside Ratchaburi switches to train in 2030/2005

Action 2 Fuel Switching in Transportation

 50% of passenger-small vehicle switches to biofuel, 70% of bus switches to biofuel in 2030/2005  70% of large vehicle switches to biofuel

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Acttion 3 Fuel Switching in Industrial

 22.2 ktoe (max.) from Biomass

Action 4 Energy efficiency improvement

 30% of refrigerator, air-condition, fan, and lighting in residential and commercial uses high efficiency equipment (Label No. 5)

Action 5 Good agricultural practice (GAP)

 use of pre-fermented organic matter instead of green manure or readily decomposable organic matter

Countermeasures (CM)  7 Actions for Ratchaburi LCS

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Action 6 Change in Manure Management

swine manure used as an organic fertilizer.

Action 7 Land use change

Develop 1,291 ha of abandoned paddy land to forest plantation

Countermeasures (CM)  7 Actions for Ratchaburi LCS

slide-19
SLIDE 19

6,848 13,328 10,200

  • 648
  • 1,578
  • 1,599
  • 4,000
  • 2,000

2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000

Yr 2005 2030 BAU 2030 CM GHG emissions/removal (kt-CO2eq) Year

Land use change Change manure management Good agricultural practice Energy efficiency improvement Fuel shift (renewable energy) Fuel Switching in Transport Mode Shifting in Transport Removal Emission +95%

  • 23%
  • 1%
  • 143%

Results

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Mitigation option GHG reduction (kt-CO2eq) % reduction/ rem

  • val from

target year

  • 1. Modal shifting
  • 83.89
  • 0.63%
  • 2. Fuel switching in transportation
  • 239.90
  • 1.80%
  • 3. Fuel shift (renewable energy)
  • 1,805.73
  • 13.53%
  • 4. Energy efficiency improvement
  • 793.11
  • 5.94%
  • 5. Good agricultural practice (GAP)
  • 20.65
  • 1.55%
  • 6. Change manure management
  • 135.66
  • 1.02%
  • 7. Land use change

+ 21.30 + 1.35%

Total GHG mitigation in 2030

  • 3,078.94
  • 23.45%

Total GHG removal in 2030 + 21.30 + 1.35% Total GHG emission in 2030 (CM)

10,200

Total GHG removal in 2030 (CM)

  • 1,599

Net emission 8,601

Summary of GHG Emissions Reduction in 2030 based on CM compared to BAU

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Take consideration on the potential of province

23 355 770 602 37 9 203 75 849 21 136

  • 21
  • 200

200 400 600 800 1000 Efficiency improvement Fuel shift (renewable energy) Efficiency improvement Fuel shift (renewable energy) Fuel switching Modal shifting Fuel switching Modal shifting Fuel shift (renewable energy) GAP Manure management Land use change GHG emission reduction/removal (kt-CO2eq)

Land Use Agriculture Industrial Freight transport Passenger transport Commercial Residential

Total emissions reduction 3,079 kt-CO2eq

Max: Fuel Shift in Renewable energy

(- 26%) (- 58%) (- 62%)

(- 21%)

(- 95%) (- 4%) (+ 1%) Decrease from BAU of each sector

Summary of GHG Emissions Reduction in 2030 based on CM compared to BAU

slide-22
SLIDE 22