NEOBIOME

LIT_003: Kaur et al. (2024) — Techno-economic self-sustainable village energy

Properties4
typesource
source_typeLIT
year2024
topicsenergy_generation, energy_storage_grid, methodology_frameworks

4 min read

LIT_003: Kaur et al. (2024) — Techno-economic self-sustainable village energy

Source

doi:10.1093/ijlct/ctae072 — original publication (opens in a new tab; the file is not redistributed)

Feeds: d01_renewable_energy_storage · d08_biotechnology_nature_based · i01_financial_economic_sufficiency · i06_resistance_external_shocks · i07_fulfilment_basic_needs

Summary

Techno-economic optimisation study of a hybrid renewable energy system for a 336-household Indian village using the HOMER (Hybrid Optimization of Multiple Energy Resources) modelling tool. Evaluates two hybrid configurations combining PV, wind, battery storage, diesel generator, and biomass/biogas sources against the grid baseline. Introduces a bioengineering framing: agricultural waste streams (crop residue + cattle dung via anaerobic digestion) are treated as primary energy feedstock, not byproducts. Demonstrates that local renewable generation with agricultural waste feedstock is cheaper than grid electricity and achieves full energy self-sufficiency.

Key claims

Demand baseline

  • Village of 336 houses; total annual demand 1,267 MWh/year; average 10.3 kWh/household/day. LIT_003
  • HOMER simulates thousands of system configurations at hourly resolution across a full year — standard techno-economic optimisation tool for hybrid rural energy systems. LIT_003

Hybrid Model 1 — PV + wind + battery + diesel

  • Cost of Energy (COE): 0.053/kWh; Net Present Cost (NPC): 889,000; Capital cost: 150,200; O&M: 9,040/year. LIT_003
  • Annual savings vs grid: 41,618; Surplus generation revenue (sold at utility tariff): 5,155/year profit. LIT_003

Hybrid Model 2 — PV + wind + battery + biogas generator

  • COE: 0.0524/kWh; NPC: 857,000; Capital cost: 135,000; O&M: 9,023/year. LIT_003
  • Annual savings vs grid: 46,057; Surplus revenue: 4,614/year. LIT_003

Economic case

  • Grid electricity cost for the village: 116,934/year; hybrid generation cost: 70,877–75,316/year — saving 41,618–$46,057 annually. LIT_003
  • Utility tariff surplus revenue: 7,247–7,647/year from surplus generation sold back to grid. LIT_003

Biogas (PAU Janta Model biodigester)

  • 1 ton/day cattle dung → 300 m³/day biogas → 657,000 kWh/year electrical equivalent. LIT_003
  • Biogas generator output: 1,800 kWh/day; replaces diesel peaking generation entirely in Model 2. LIT_003

Biomass from crop residue

  • Village generates 2,400 tons/year crop residue (wheat straw, paddy husk, paddy straw, maize); 400 kW biomass generator converts this to approximately 1,342,353 kWh/year. LIT_003
  • Agricultural waste output exceeds village energy demand — full self-sufficiency from waste streams alone is feasible without any grid input. LIT_003

Bioengineering framing

  • Authors frame agricultural waste management as bioengineering: converting biological waste streams into structured energy feedstock is both an energy solution and a waste-treatment solution. LIT_003
  • Energy self-sufficiency via local agricultural waste provides resilience against natural catastrophes and external energy supply interruptions. LIT_003

Key thesis insights

  • HOMER-based techno-economic modelling is the established standard for evaluating hybrid rural energy systems; methodology is directly applicable to NZ community contexts with local parameter substitution.
  • Bioengineering framing (waste → feedstock) represents an integrated systems approach that bridges D01 and D08 domains.

Caveats

  • All cost figures in USD based on Indian grid tariffs and input costs. NZ equivalents will differ significantly — treat as methodology and structural benchmarks, not absolute targets.
  • Cattle dung volumes assume Indian agricultural density; NZ livestock waste streams would require separate assessment.

Research targets

Documents to retrieve

  • [RT_025] Sarkar (2015) — hybrid energy system with producer gas for southern Norway households (Renewable Energy 86:772-781); cold-climate parallel directly applicable to NZ highland/alpine sites. → D01
  • [RT_041] Kaur et al. (2020) — India livestock biogas potential methodology (Energies 10:847, doi:10.3390/en10070847); 1 ton cattle dung → 300 m³/day biogas conversion factor. → D02
  • [RT_042] Vaish et al. (2022) — agricultural biomass potential estimation methodology (Sustainability 14:5077). → D02
  • [RT_043] Kumar & Channi (2022) — PV-biomass off-grid HRES for rural electrification India; HOMER study with comparable cost data (J. Clean Prod. 349:131347). → D01, D02

Connections

Links to

SSI indicators (3): I01: Financial & Economic Self-Sufficiency · I06: Resistance to External Shocks · I07: Fulfilment of Basic Needs

EDT domains (2): D01: Renewable Energy & Storage Systems · D08: Biotechnology & Nature-Based Solutions

Referenced by

SSI indicators (3): I01: Financial & Economic Self-Sufficiency · I06: Resistance to External Shocks · I07: Fulfilment of Basic Needs

EDT domains (2): D01: Renewable Energy & Storage Systems · D08: Biotechnology & Nature-Based Solutions

Graph View

Backlinks