Sugar palm ethanol Analysis of economic feasibility and sustainability
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
ECOFYS NETHERLANDS BV, A PRIVATE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE NETHERLANDS HAVING ITS OFFICIAL SEAT AT UTRECHT AND REGISTERED WITH THE TRADE REGISTER OF THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN MIDDEN NEDERLAND UNDER FILE NUMBER 30161191
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Ecofys Netherlands BV
Kanaalweg 15-G
P.O. Box 8408
NL- 3503 RK Utrecht
The Netherlands
T: +31 (0) 30 66 23 300
F: +31 (0) 30 66 23 301
W: www.ecofys.com
-Confidential-
Ecofys:
Jasper van de Staaij
Arno van den Bos
Carlo Hamelinck
Winrock:
Endri Martini
James Roshetko
David Walden
Date: 29 August 2011
Project number: PEGENL085046
Sugar palm ethanol Analysis of economic feasibility and sustainability
GAVE090756
© Ecofys 2011
by order of:
NL Agency
29 August 2011 i
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Summary
Most of the current biofuels today come from crops such as oil palm, rapeseed and soy
(biodiesel) and sugar cane, corn and wheat (ethanol). There are also several “new”
promising crops for biofuels of which little is known about their technical and
sustainability performance.
One example is sugar palm; although little empirical data from a small number of
sources is yet available, it seems under the right conditions sugar palm can be very
productive with high ethanol yields. Sugar palm grows in mixed stands (providing
opportunities for additional sources of income for farmers), has certain environmental
benefits and requires little maintenance.
This study evaluates whether sugar palm is a suitable crop for biofuels and how
production of ethanol from sugar palm in a large-scale setting is sustainably and
economically feasible.
Field data was collected from two areas with existing sugar palm plantings in
Indonesia; from eight villages in Batang Toru in North Sumatra and from six locations
in Tomohon, North Sulawesi. The empirical data showed large variations in yields per
productive sugar palm and number of productive palms per hectare. These variations
are explained by heterogeneous smallholder management systems, tapping skills,
local conditions and climate, and the lack of improved quality seeds / seedlings that
have been selected for high and uniform juice production.
Using the empirical data, we performed an economic analysis on different models of
large-scale sugar palm cultivation and ethanol production and analysed the
sustainability. These analyses revealed that sugar palm has the opportunity to provide
a source of sustainable and profitable bio ethanol. Under conservative assumptions,
the economic analysis showed an interesting business case. An aspect to consider is
the relatively long payback period (after 13.7 years) as for new plantings it will take 5
to 10 years before any flowering occurs and juice can be tapped. The main uncertain
parameters with the greatest implications for the business case are the density of
productive sugar palms and their yields per year.
Sugar palm does not need to be large-scale to be embraced as a source of biofuel
because of its sustainability performance and its positive contribution to smallholders.
Tapping of sugar palm already occurs with wild sugar palms and domesticated sugar
palms. However, a certain scale will be needed in order for a conventional ethanol
plant to be economically feasible and in order to be able to produce sufficient
quantities for international markets. The challenge will lie in scaling up from small
scale (or “greenfield”) to sufficiently large scale. Creating a suitable large-scale sugar
palm plantation might be done via two possible routes; either connecting a large
ii Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
collection of smallholders or via reforestation models, whereby degraded and unused
lands are reforested in mixed models, allowing more control over spacing and lay-out.
Successfully establishing new agro-forestry production systems and realizing high
yields - especially outside the area where sugar palm naturally occurs and the local
population has experience with growing and tapping palm trees - will be challenging.
In addition, the projections of empirical data from small plantings to large-scale in
mixed forest conditions still need to be proven in practice. Further research is also
needed to determine whether propagation by seed from what seems to be a wild plant
will result in uniform and high yields, as well as plants that are insusceptible to
disease/pests.
The next step in development of large-scale sugar palm cultivation, initially, should be
limited to pilots in areas of interested regencies (districts) to gain experience and
ensure proper understanding and management.
29 August 2011 iii
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Samenvatting
De meeste van de huidige biobrandstoffen komen uit gewassen zoals palmolie,
koolzaad en soja (biodiesel) en suikerriet, maïs en tarwe (ethanol). Er zijn ook
verschillende "nieuwe" veelbelovende gewassen voor biobrandstoffen, waarvan nog
weinig bekend is over hun technische en duurzaamheidsprestaties.
Eén voorbeeld daarvan is suikerpalm; hoewel er slechts beperkte empirische gegevens
uit een klein aantal bronnen beschikbaar is, lijkt suikerpalm onder de juiste
omstandigheden zeer productief met een hoge ethanolopbrengst. Suikerpalm groeit in
‘mixed stands’ (wat mogelijkheden biedt voor aanvullende bronnen van inkomsten
voor kleine boeren), heeft bepaalde milieuvoordelen en vereist weinig onderhoud.
Dit onderzoek beoordeelt of suiker palm een geschikt gewas is voor biobrandstoffen
en hoe de productie van ethanol uit suikerpalm op grote schaal duurzaam en
economisch haalbaar is.
Veldgegevens zijn verzameld uit twee gebieden met bestaande suikerpalm aanplanten
in Indonesië; van acht dorpen in Batang Toru in Noord-Sumatra en van zes locaties in
Tomohon, Noord-Sulawesi. Er bleek grote variatie in de empirische gegevens wat
betreft opbrengst per productieve suikerpalm en het aantal productieve palmen per
hectare. Deze variaties zijn te verklaren door heterogene smallholder systemen,
tapvaardigheden, plaatselijke omstandigheden en klimaat, en het gebrek aan een
betere kwaliteit zaden / zaailingen die zijn geselecteerd voor een hoge en uniforme
sapproductie.
Met behulp van de empirische gegevens, hebben we een economische analyse van
verschillende modellen van grootschalige suikerpalmteelt en ethanolproductie
uitgevoerd en geanalyseerd op duurzaamheid. Uit deze analyses bleek dat suikerpalm
de mogelijkheid heeft om een bron van duurzame en rendabele bio-ethanol te bieden.
Onder conservatieve veronderstellingen, toonde de economische analyse een
interessante business case. Een aspect om uit te lichten is de relatief lange
terugverdientijd (na 13,7 jaar), doordat het 5 tot 10 jaar duurt voordat nieuwe
aanplant productief wordt. De belangrijkste onzekere parameters met de grootste
gevolgen voor de business case zijn de plantingsdichtheid van productieve
suikerpalmen en hun opbrengsten per jaar.
Suikerpalm hoeft niet per se op grote schaal te worden gecultiveerd om te worden
omarmd als bron voor biobrandstoffen vanwege de duurzaamheidsprestaties en de
positieve bijdrage aan kleine boeren. Het tappen van suikerpalm gebeurt nu al op
kleine schaal met wilde en gedomesticeerde suikerpalmen. Echter, om economisch
haalbaar te worden zal een zekere schaal nodig zijn voor een conventionele
ethanolfabriek, evenals om voldoende hoeveelheden te kunnen produceren voor
internationale markten. De uitdaging zal liggen in het opschalen van kleine schaal (of
iv Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
“greenfield”) naar voldoende grote schaal. Het creëren van grootschalige suikerpalm
aanplant kan via twee mogelijke routes; ofwel het bundelen van een grote collectie
kleine boeren, ofwel via herbebossingmodellen, waarbij gedegradeerde en ongebruikte
gronden worden herbebost (in ‘mixed stands’), waardoor er meer controle is over de
dichtheid en lay-out.
Het zal een uitdaging zijn om succesvol nieuwe agro-forestry productiesystemen op te
zetten en hoge opbrengsten te realiseren - vooral buiten gebieden waar suikerpalm
van nature voorkomt en de lokale bevolking ervaring heeft met het tappen. Daarnaast
moeten de projecties van gegevens van kleine aanplanten op grote schaal in gemengd
bos omstandigheden nog worden bewezen in de praktijk. Verder onderzoek is ook
nodig om te bepalen of de voortplanting door zaad van ogenschijnlijk een wilde plant
zal resulteren in uniforme hoge opbrengsten en planten die ongevoelig zijn voor
ziekten / plagen.
De volgende stap in de ontwikkeling van grootschalige suikerpalmteelt, moet worden
beperkt tot pilots in geïnteresseerde gebieden (districten) om ervaring op te doen en
een goed begrip en management zeker te stellen.
29 August 2011 v
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Table of contents
1 Introduction ............................................................................................. 7
1.1 Reading guide ....................................................................................... 7
2 Sugar palm characteristics and cultivation ............................................... 9
2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 9
2.2 From sugar palm seed to ethanol............................................................. 9
2.3 Other uses of sugar palms .....................................................................13
2.4 Monoculture .........................................................................................17
2.5 Yields ..................................................................................................17
3 Data collection and empirical findings .................................................... 20
3.1 Study locations.....................................................................................20
3.2 Data collection methodology ..................................................................21
3.3 Overview of findings .............................................................................21
3.4 Description of findings...........................................................................23
4 Economic analysis .................................................................................. 32
4.1 Sugar palm establishment and cultivation ................................................33
4.2 Conversion to Ethanol (and/or Sugar) .....................................................38
4.3 Outcomes mixed model .........................................................................38
4.4 Outcomes monoculture plantation model .................................................41
4.5 Discussion of main parameters ...............................................................45
5 Sustainability analysis ............................................................................ 48
5.1 Introduction .........................................................................................48
5.2 Sustainability criteria of the RED.............................................................48
5.3 Other sustainability aspects ...................................................................54
5.4 Integration ..........................................................................................55
6 Bioenergy potential of sugar palm and recommendations ...................... 56
6.1 Conclusions..........................................................................................56
6.2 Recommendations and policy implications................................................58
vi Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Reference sources ........................................................................................ 59
Appendix A Different types of palm ......................................................... 61
Appendix B Description of data collection locations ................................ 64
B 1 Batang Toru.........................................................................................64
B 2 Tomohon .............................................................................................65
29 August 2011 | 7
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
1 Introduction
Most of the current biofuels come from crops such as oil palm, rapeseed and soy
(biodiesel) and sugar cane, corn and wheat (ethanol). In addition, there are several
“new” promising crops of which little is known about their technical and sustainability
performance. One example is sugar palm.
However, little empirical data from a small number of sources is available on yields
and costs of sugar palm cultivation as energy crop. The claimed yields of sugar palm
in a large-scale and sustainable setting still have to be demonstrated. Analyses of the
sustainability of (large-scale) sugar palm cultivation and ethanol production are
lacking. At present there are few existing large-scale sugar palm plantings, and even
fewer that aim at biofuel production.
Although a limited number of scientific studies are available on sugar palm, they all
suggest that under the right conditions sugar palm can be very productive, with
ethanol yields even exceeding those of sugar cane. Furthermore, sugar palm is praised
for requiring little maintenance and growing in harmony with other natural forest
ecosystem components (including valuable timber trees and food crops such as
bananas, cocoa, vanilla and cloves) which can generate additional incomes to the
farmer from the same piece of land.
This study evaluates whether sugar palm is a suitable crop for biofuels and how
production of ethanol from sugar palm in a large-scale setting is sustainably and
economically feasible. Key questions are:
• Are the assumed high yields realistic in practice for sustained periods in large-
scale plantations?
• Can sugar palm indeed compete economically with other crops for biofuels?
• What are the effects of large-scale cultivation and processing of sugar palm for
the natural environment and the local community?
1.1 Reading guide
To answer these questions, Ecofys and Winrock have assessed the feasibility of large-
scale sugar palm cultivation for the production of ethanol using empirical data from
existing sugar palm plantings. We analysed two production models to investigate the
range of outcomes when varying important parameters: i) a conservative system,
whereby sugar palms are mixed with other crops and ii) an intensive system to
explore the theoretical maximum yield when solely focusing on sugar palm
As background, Chapter 2 first describes the process of sugar palm cultivation, the
“tapping” and conversion into ethanol. Chapter 3 describes the data collection by
Winrock. It presents an overview of the collected field data and explains the main
empirical findings. Chapter 4 elaborates the two production systems and presents the
8 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
results of the economic analyses (summarized in cash flow diagrams showing the
timing of costs and benefits). Chapter 5 analyses the possible sustainability risks and
benefits of sugar palm ethanol and investigates the integration possibilities of sugar
palm in agro-forestry systems with other crops. Finally, Chapter 6 concludes by
evaluating the potential of sugar palm as a source of biofuel and providing
recommendations.
29 August 2011 | 9
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
2 Sugar palm characteristics and cultivation
2.1 Introduction
Although the origin of sugar palm (Arenga pinnata, syn. Arenga saccharifera) or Aren
is not known with certainty, it seems to originate from North Sulawesi in Indonesia. It
was probably a source of plant sugar for human consumption long before sugar cane
was cultivated for that purpose. Today the palm grows in Southeast Asia, with its main
distribution and best varieties in Indonesia and some presence in Malaysia, Thailand,
Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam. Usually it grows close to human settlements where
anthropic propagation plays a major role. Otherwise it prefers secondary forest at the
border of primary rainforests1. Occasionally it is found in virgin forests where its fruits
are scattered by wild hogs, fruit bats and civet cats. Optimal growing conditions are
determined by temperature (warm climate), water availability (minimum of 1,200
mm/year for good productivity) and soil qualities. The palm is found on a wide variety
of soils (Widodo, 2009).
The sugar palm is a perennial C4 plant, which means that it has more efficient
photosynthesis than other C3 crops (e.g. wheat and barley) and needs less water. In
general, C4 crops are more efficient and can work at higher temperatures and light
levels than C3 crops, but they need higher temperatures and/or light levels to begin
photosynthesis. Other well-known C4 plants are generally limited to high productive
annual plants in tropical areas, such as corn and sugar cane.
Box 1 – Different types of palm
For thousands of years, several species of palm have been tapped to collect a juice very rich
in sugar (10 to 20%) which was used for local sugar production (and sometimes wine
production). Especially in Asia, highly sophisticated techniques of tapping were developed and
there exists an enormous amount of indigenous knowledge on the tapping of palms and use of
the sugar juice. Traditionally, palm cultivation has played a major role in sustainable farming
systems, thereby contributing to the alleviation of poverty throughout the tropics. Also in
more temperate regions the sugary juice from trees is collected, such as maple syrup in North
America (which contains only 3% of sugar) and birch water.
Appendix A presents an overview of other palm types that are tapped for their sugar juice.
2.2 From sugar palm seed to ethanol
Seed production
A precondition for the fast development of large-scale plantations is the availability of
planting stock. The germination of the seed is unpredictable and takes from one
1 In general, secondary forest is seen as forest which has re-grown after human interventions (e.g. timber harvesting). Primary forest is characterized by the absence of human interventions.
10 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
month to more than one year (WUR 2009). As with all species of plants – the use of
nurseries can help by producing seedlings of uniform age and size. The systematic
collection, sorting and pre-treatment of seeds will also help produce better quality
seedlings. Hence, the best method of producing planting stock is through nursery-
raised seedlings from selected seeds. Direct sowing is possible but the seed is short-
lived and seedlings take a long time to establish well (van Dam, 2007). Research is
underway on micro propagation (tissue culture) of sugar palm, effectively cloning
existing palms, but this technology is not yet applied commercially on sugar palms. In
order to give the plants a better chance to survive, selected seeds are brought to a
nursery to develop into small plantlets before planting in the field. In the nursery, the
plants are kept until the largest leaves are about two metres high which takes
approximately two years (personal communication Dr. Smits, August 2011).
Availability of seed and nursery requirements are determined by the following
assumptions: one palm will produce on average five (and more) female inflorescences
(flowering bunches) over its lifetime with on average 120 strings that contain 30 fruits
with three seeds (5 x 120 x 30 x 3 = 54,000 seeds per palm). Assuming an 80%
chance of emerging, 43,200 seeds will be available for propagation per source palm
(van Dam 2007).
Cultivation
Sugar palms have a relatively long youth phase before they start producing flowers
which can be tapped. The period from seedling to full grown sugar producing palm
(when the first flowers appear) varies between 5 – 12 years. The importance of a high
temperature shows from the slow growth at higher altitudes. At sea level, flowering
begins after 5-7 years and at 900m altitude after 12-15 years (Martin, 1999). Also the
amount of exposure to direct sunlight (it is suggested that some shade in early years
help the sugar palms to develop) and additional nutrient supplies play a role.
Sugar palm thrives best in warm tropical (equatorial) climate with plenty of sunshine
and abundant rainfall. Although sugar palm grows best on fertile soils, it grows on
various soils from heavy clay to loamy sand and laterite soils, provided they do not
regularly flood. The palm can even be discovered on infertile soils and on slopes.
Although sugar palm grows best near the equator, it can also be found at higher
latitudes (up to 30 ° latitude), characterized by a more intense dry period. Sugar
palms can reach heights of up to 24 meters with stems covered in strong fibres.
The sugar palm crop is highly resistant against pest and diseases. Pesticide application
is not used. Except for minor infestations with insects when the outer bark is
damaged, no serious threats are yet known in sugar palm production (van Dam
2007).
Nutrient requirements
The sugar palm is well adapted to many soil types and is know for its versatility. The
requirements for nutrients are relatively low and only essential in the first years of
29 August 2011 | 11
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
crop establishment. The mature palm possesses long and deep roots (up to 6.5m) and
is capable of efficiently collecting its nutrients.
The required nutrients can be supplied by adding compost plus 50 kg / ha TSP
fertilizer and for the first planting Calcium (25 kg / ha). The nutrient requirement only
in the second year after planting (maintenance) is (K, P, N) 100 kg / ha, Ca 50 kg / ha
and compost 0.3 bags per palm. To boost the palm for early production additional
fertilizer can be given in the year it is ready to produce its first inflorescence. Note
that most sugar palms used by local people do not receive any fertilizers.
About half of the minerals taken up by the palm are exported through the juice (the
other half is stored in the palm, which can be returned to the soil if it is left to
decompose) (van Dam 2007). Once the roots of the palm reach maturity they are able
to bring nutrients into the cycle from deeper soil layers. Hence, fertilisation application
is only useful during the early establishment years of the plants (personal
communication Dr. Smits, August 2011).
Tapping
The sugar juice from sugar palms is obtained by tapping the male inflorescence (called
‘mayang’, which do not contain any fruits). The male inflorescences start appearing
when the palm has reached its full height and stops growing (on average at a height
of 15 metres, but this can also be as high as 25 metres tall). Sometimes the juice is
obtained simply by tapping the inflorescence, making a cut from which the juice flows,
but more often the inflorescence needs to be beaten over a period of time with a
wooden stick, and then cut a little each day to keep the juice flowing. The terminal
buds and inflorescences are located at the top of the trunk, which is often over 10m
high. Climbing the palm and beating the inflorescence in the right way requires
considerable skill, and productivity is therefore largely a function of the tapper’s
experience. Figure 2 - 1 shows a tapper at work in an Aren palm, and the tools used
for beating the inflorescence (wooden stick) and plastic jerry can for juice collection.
Figure 2 - 1 Tapping an Aren palm (left) and tappers tools (right). Source: Winrock
12 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Figure 2 - 2 Cut infloressence (left) and collection in jerry cans in a 10 meters high aren with 2
flowers (right). Source: Winrock
The juice that exudes is caught in a hollow joint of bamboo and typically collected in a
plastic jerry can (sometimes in bamboo containers), in which it can be transported to
a central collecting point.
Preserving the juice before conversion
The juice that is removed contains wild yeasts, which will ferment the sugar rapidly,
unless it is inhibited. In order to preserve the sugar until it reaches the conversion
plant, several techniques exist. The juice can be boiled to prepare a brown sugar. The
fresh juice can be consumed, but cannot be stored for long as it spoils rapidly.
For ethanol production, the best option is to increase the concentration of the juice as
close to the source as possible. This can be done through evaporation of water, which
is traditionally done in open kettles (see Figure 2 - 3) which requires a heat source
(firewood). Tapergie International has developed small-scale stoves that make
efficient use of available local biomass (branches, wood from other plants etc).
Figure 2 - 3 Traditional boiling stove and kettle for concentrating juice. Source: Winrock
29 August 2011 | 13
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Conversion to ethanol
The direct fermentation of the sugar juice into ethanol is a well established method on
small and industrial scale. The stochiometric equation for the conversion of sugar into
ethanol is give here: C6H12O6 � 2 CO2 + 2 C2H6O
On a weight basis, the ethanol production from palm sugar has a maximal efficiency of
52% (theoretical). Well established ethanol fermentation systems may achieve more
than 90% of the theoretical efficiency, thus yielding 46-49 weight % ethanol.
For use of the ethanol as a bio-fuel in combustion engines, distillation is required to
remove the water content. The use of ethanol as source for electricity generation is
not recommended because of its relative low overall efficiency.
2.3 Other uses of sugar palms
The interest in ethanol from sugar palm as a transportation fuel is relatively new, but
sugar palms have traditionally provided people with many different products, such as
sugar, alcoholic beverages, starch, building materials and fibres. Below is an overview
of the products sugar palms provide.
• Sugar: Sugar palms are an important source of sugar for local people in the
visited areas2. If the sugar juice is to be used for sugar production, it will be
collected twice a day, as fermentation has to be avoided as much as possible. In
order to slow down the fermentation of the juice, containers in which the juice is
collected are rinsed after every use. In some cases, local farmers put the bark or
leaves from different tree species in the containers. These pieces of bark slow
down the fermentation. To produce a brown sugar, the sweet unfermented juice is
thickened by boiling the juice so the water evaporates, until a sufficiently thick
syrup is obtained out of which sugar will crystallize on cooling. Often this is done
by boiling in an open kettle. This inefficient process consumes a lot of fire wood.
Two different types of sugar are produced; gula batu, which is usually sold in half
coconut shells and gula semut, which is further refined. Because it takes more
time, energy and fuel wood to process gula semut, farmers are usually reluctant
to produce gula semut, unless they receive a special order with a better price.
2 Palm sugar is also the preferred sugar for certain cultural foods in various Southeast Asian cuisines.
14 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Figure 2 - 4 Two type of sugar products that are marketed: gula batu (left) and gula semut (right).
Source: Winrock
• Alcoholic beverages: from the sugar juice people produce alcoholic beverages
with alcoholic content from 5% up to even 70% using distillation processes. If
nothing is done to prevent it, sugar juice will automatically ferment to produce
(low amounts of) alcohol and then acetic acid (vinegar). After fermentation, the
yeast can be removed from the sediment and used in bread baking.
In Tomohon there is some production in the area of tuak saguer (with <5% alcohol)
content and tuak cap tikus (with 45-70% of alcoholic content):
a) Tuak saguer: is produced by (natural) fermentation. From 1 litre of sugar juice,
1 litre of tuak saguer can be produced. For tuak saguer production, bamboo
containers are used as the bamboo contains fermented material which helps
fermentation of the juice (see Figure 2 - 5). In some cases fermented material
is specially added to the juice, in which case the tuak can be stored for 3 weeks
in stead of 3 days (without additives)
b) Tuak cap tikus: is produced using a distillation process. For tuak cap tikus, the
containers have to be cleaned from other material before tapping. Farmers
usually use plastic container instead of bamboo containers, as these are easier
to clean From about 10 litre of juice one bottle of tuak cap tikus is produced.
For tuak cap tikus production, a half oil drum is used to cook the tuak, as well
as at least 30 meters of bamboo to distillate the tuak and fire wood
29 August 2011 | 15
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Figure 2 - 5 Tuak cap tikus with around 50-60% of alcoholic content (left). Bamboo container which
is used to produce tuak saguer. A common bamboo container can hold approx 10-15
litre (right). Source: Winrock
Figure 2 - 6 Stove to distillate Aren juice for tuak cap tikus production. Source: Winrock
16 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Figure 2 - 7 Distillation stove for tuak cap tikus production. The installation is constructed from half
an oil drum and bamboo pipes. This installation in Tomohon consists of a bamboo pipe
of 6 meters high with diameter of 10-15 cm; a diagonal pipe of 18 meters with
diameter 5-10 cm and a 12 meter pipe of bamboo with a diameter of 5-10 cm that was
installed horizontally Source: Winrock
• Fruit: The sugar palm produces edible fruits (‘kolang-kaling’). The demand for
kolang-kaling is greatest during the annual Ramadan holiday. Local knowledge
dictates that if fruit is picked, sugar content in the juice will decrease. If fruit
harvesting takes place (where tapping also takes place), people will do this only
very selectively;
• Starch: When the sugar palms reach the end of their life, they are often cut
down. Starch can be obtained by cutting the palm and opening the trunk. The
interior fibrous parts of the trunk are cut into small pieces. These chips are then
crushed, pulverized and washed with water several times. The starch sinks, the
wood floats, and soluble substances stay in solution. Washing the starch in this
fashion several times results in a very fine, almost pure product. The wet starch is
dried in the sun and then ground (flour), or is dried on a hot plate over a fire to
produce starch pearls, such as tapioca. The starch-flour or pearls are used as
staple food in place of rice in numerous native dishes (e.g. for cakes and noodles),
but also as principal food for survival. It is estimated that a full-grown palm
contains about 50-70 kg of starch that can be extracted (Widodo, 2009).
• Fibres or thatch: The stem of sugar palms is a source of a tough, black fibre,
from which a durable rope can be made, tolerant of both fresh and salt water,
used for marine work and for thatching.
• Fuel: Old woody leaf bases, as well as the long leaves, are used for fuel.
• Timber: The very hard outer part of the trunk is used for a range of timber
products (e.g. building material). While the core of the palm is filled with a soft
starch, the cylindrical hardwood of the palm is 5 times stronger than oak and has
a rich, dark colour that makes it excellent for flooring, furniture, decorative
carvings, and other applications.
29 August 2011 | 17
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
• Insect repellent: Some indigenous peoples use the roots of sugar palm as insect
repellent.
2.4 Monoculture
Sugar palm does not grow well in pure monocultures (Personal communication
Winrock, Dr. Smits and Tapergie, April 2011). Sugar palm grows optimally in mixed
secondary forest and requires interaction and inputs from microorganisms and plants
in the forest to grow productively. The exact reasons for this are not yet clear. Some
suggest that mycorrhiza (symbiotic relation between fungi and plant roots), which
appear naturally when the palms grow in mixed-species environment, is the key
reason for this (www.sugarpalmethanol.com). Others have indicated that the main
reason that sugar palms are difficult to establish in monoculture is because of the high
water requirements (personal communication Winrock, April 2011). Their productivity
is closely related to the water availability and humidity at the site. As establishing
monocultures will stress water availability, this makes it harder for sugar palms to
survive in monoculture. Mixed systems usually result in less water stress and higher
humidity.
Theoretically sugar palm might be grown in a monoculture which might be productive
for a short period, a couple of years. However, after that, the soil water availability
might become a problem. Anecdotal evidence also confirms that palms in a
monoculture plot in Tomohon (Indonesia) did not appear in good condition (leaves are
yellowing and not fully expanded), while palms in a nearby mixed plot seem to grow
faster and better at the same age and location (personal communication Winrock, May
2011). At present, there are no monocultures of significant size in practice known.
As sugar palms are not likely to prosper in pure monoculture, this makes data
collection and analysis more complex (e.g. what is the exact cultivation area, how
many palms per hectare, etc). While certainly the mixed systems provide ‘messy
data’, they are also the types of systems that provide benefits to local populations
(particularly ‘risk mitigation’) and environmental conservation benefits (sustainability).
2.5 Yields
Sugar palm can be very productive under optimal growth conditions and proper
management. However, sugar juice yields are highly variable according to the genetic
material, management practices and environmental factors (availability of water,
sunlight and nutrients). In addition, the number of years a sugar palm can be tapped
also differs depending on the management regime for optimal juice production. Under
good conditions, sugar palms can be tapped during a period of 5 - 12 months per year
for several years (3 – 15 years).
Literature provides only a limited amount of measurements which can be used to
estimate overall yields per hectare by extrapolation. As sugar palm is not yet grown
on a large commercial scale for bio ethanol, there is no empirical data yet available on
18 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
large-scale sugar palm. Mogea et al. (1991) report about superior sugar palms in
Sulawesi that produce all year round, with an average of 30 litres a day. However,
note that one should be careful with extrapolating exceptional single palm yield figures
to a larger number of palms. Nonetheless, it illustrates the existence of superior
individuals, which gives confidence to the development of a selection and breeding
programme.
In order to extrapolate daily juice yields from sugar palms and make them comparable
with sugar yields from annual crops, the non-productive years of the palm need to be
accounted for. Also the density of sugar palms plays a major role when extrapolating
to a hectare. For example, with 50 productive palms on one hectare producing 17
litres of juice per day each during the last three years of their 12 year life-cycle, the
adjusted sugar production is 7.65 tonne/ha/year, assuming a juice sugar
concentration of 12% and 300 days of tapping. The corresponding ethanol yield is
then 4,780 litre/ha/year3
Estimates of the sugar yields from sugar palm under good conditions vary from 8.7 to
as high as 25 tonnes/ha/year over the total lifecycle of the palm. This corresponds to
4,610 litres to 12,000 litres of ethanol per hectare per year (WUR, 2009). Dalibard
(1995) estimates ethanol yields between 6,000 to 12,000 litre ethanol per year This is
remarkably high compared to even the productive Brazilian sugar cane which reaches
about 13.5 tonne sugar/ha/year4 (approx 8,100 l) under optimal conditions (van den
Wall Bake, 2006).
Table 2 - 1 show land use efficiency from literature for sugar palm in comparison with
common biofuel ethanol crops.
Table 2 - 1 Land use efficiency of liquid biofuels from different crops Source: IEA 2011 (except for
sugar palm)
Type of biofuel Annual yield (litres/ha)
Sugar palm ethanol* 4,600 – 12,000
Sugar cane ethanol 4,900 – 8,100
Sugar beet ethanol 4,000
Maize ethanol 2,600
Palm oil biodiesel 3,600
Rapeseed biodiesel 300
Soy biodiesel 800
* Dalibard, 1995; WUR, 2009.
3 With a conversion efficiency of 90%, and 1 kg of sugar yielding theoretically 0.51kg of ethanol. 4 Based on 90 Tonne of cane /ha/year, and 150 kg of recoverable sugars per tonne of cane
29 August 2011 | 19
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
These data suggest that sugar palm has the potential to produce sugar and ethanol
very efficiently. The next chapter describes empirical findings of sugar palm planting in
Indonesia.
20 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
3 Data collection and empirical findings
This chapter describes the method for data collection and the main empirical findings.
3.1 Study locations
In order to evaluate the feasibility of large scale sugar palm cultivation, we use field
data from two areas with existing sugar palm plantings collected by Winrock, see
figure and description in table below.
Batang Toru
North Sumatra - Indonesia
Tomohon
North Sulawesi - Indonesia
Batang Toru
North Sumatra - Indonesia
Tomohon
North Sulawesi - Indonesia
Figure 3 - 8 Study areas in Indonesia
Table 3 - 2 Description of study locations
Study location Description
Smallholder villages,
Batang Toru, North
Sumatra
Eight villages where Aren contributes significantly to the livelihood
of many farmer families in the Batang Toru area (North Sumatra).
It still is a ‘non-timber forest product’, relying on natural
propagation, but with secure palm ownership and controlled
harvesting. In many parts of Indonesia, Aren is in a similar low
level of ‘domestication’ (Mogea et al. 1991). The Batang Toru area
is unsuited to large-scale commercial use of Aren due to rain
forest and orang-utan populations.
Smallholder villages and
Masarang Foundation,
Tomohon, North Sulawesi
Masarang Foundation is an environmental non-governmental and
non-profit organisation located in the highlands of the Indonesian
province of North Sulawesi that has established a smallholder
cooperative and a palm sugar factory. Besides the larger area of
plantings that are part of the Foundation, five other villages were
visited. In addition, Masarang has plans for large-scale
reforestation, including sugar palm cultivation for ethanol.
29 August 2011 | 21
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
3.2 Data collection methodology
The main research technique used during the field research was the semi-structured
interview. During these interviews, quantitative and qualitative data was collected.
The field visits typically started with establishing contact with people in the different
villages at the study locations. One village usually has the same type of Aren
management and harvesting techniques. Based on discussions with three to five
farmers in one village and based on direct observations in the landscape of each
village, Winrock summarised the information to represent village conditions. Before,
data collection templates were compiled to ensure consistent data collection for the
different locations. In total, 14 data sheets were compiled (eight villages in Batang
Toru; five villages and one for Masarang Foundation in Tomohon). Additional
information was provided by Masarang Foundation and Tapergie International during
different meetings in The Netherlands.
The data collected includes empirical yield and input data, as well as more qualitative
data on, for instance, sustainability and tapping techniques. The fieldwork in Indonesia
was conducted in June and July 2010. Actual visits to sugar palm plantings in Batang
Toru (North Sumatra) took place from 26 to 30 June 2010 and actual field work in
Tomohon (North Sulawesi) took place from 4 to 9 July 2010. In total, more than 40
interviews were held. The next sections present the main quantitative and qualitative
findings of the empirical research. A description of the data collection locations is
included in Appendix B.
The main challenges in the data collection and analysis relate to the variations in data
from the different locations. This is in part due to the nature of mixed systems and on
the other hand because of variation in palms/ha, management system, and
biophysical conditions. As the locations studied consist mainly of smallholder systems
which are heterogeneous in structure, management, farmer objective and main
products. In addition, most smallholders do not keep detailed records of the
management, inputs or outputs. We dealt with these problems by triangulation of
sources (different interviews per location and different locations) and iteration and
cross checking data/information until there was a consistence or pattern.
3.3 Overview of findings
The table below provides a summary of the main empirical data collected. This data is
used as a basis for the economic analysis in Chapter 4. Section 3.4 further describes
the numbers and parameters presented in the table.
22 | Sugar palm ethanol
A SUSTAI N ABLE ENERGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Table 3 - 3 Summary of data collected in Batang Toru
Parameter\ Village Unit Lumban
Lobu Pagaran Tulason
Simangumban sub district
Sigiring-giring
Hutaraja Banuaji
IV Hutagurgur
Paran Julu
Average (non-
weighted) Min Max
Total area Hectares 200 200 500 200 200 350 500 200 0 0 0
Average number of palms / ha Palms / ha 100 50 20 10 10 10 10 10 27.5 10 100
Average no. productive palms / ha Palms / ha 10 12 5 3 3 3 5 5 5.75 3 12
Average number of work hours per day to tap Hours / day 2.67 3.20 2.13 1.75 1.88 2.13 1.33 2.40 2.18 1.33 3.20
Average juice production per productive palm Litres juice / day
25 60 64 25 30 80 10 64 44.75 10 80
Average sugar content sugar juice (%) % 16.32 16.7 15.6 9.4 18.75 15.6 15 15.6 15.37125 9.4 18.75
Average monthly income per palm tapper € / month 113 183 239 103 150 164 59 163 147 59 239
Total number of palm tappers Persons 50 25 40 50 50 40 40 35 41 25 50
Ethanol Production5 litre/ha/year 7,112 20,958 8,701 1,229 2,941 6,526 1,307 8,701 7,184 1,229 20,958
Table 3 - 4 Summary of data collected in Tomohon
Parameter\ Village Unit Masarang Foundation Rokrok Tara-tara Pinaras Kayawy Rurukan Average (non-weighted) min max
Total size Hectares 10,000 100 100 100 100 100
Average number of palms / ha Palms / ha 60 50 20 20 20 20 31.7 20 60
Average no. productive palms / ha Palms / ha 7 6 7 5 6 4 5.8 4 7
Average number of work hours per day to tap Hours / day 12 2 2.55 1.5 2.4 2.1 3.8 1.5 12
Average juice production per productive palm Litres juice / day 17.8 50 82.5 80 108 60 76.1 17.8 108
Average sugar content sugar juice (%) % 13 12 11.83333 12 12 12 12.1 11.8 13
Average monthly income per palm tapper € / month 209 222 323 319 288 278 273.0 208.7 323.5
Total number of palm tappers Persons 6285 50 100 100 around 200 around 50 1633.8 50 6285
Ethanol Production5 litre/ha/year 3,435 6,275 11,911 8,367 13,554 5,020 8,094 3,435 13,554
Section 3.4 provides further clarifications and explanations of the parameters presented in the table.
5 Calculated assuming 300 tapping days per productive palm/year, a theoretical yield of 0.51 kg of ethanol per kg of sucrose, a conversion efficiency of 90% and ethanol density of 0.79kg/m3
29 August 2011 | 23
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
3.4 Description of findings
This section describes the collected data presented in Table 3 - 3 and Table 3 - 4 and
the assumptions made for the collection of these parameters. The economic analysis
in Chapter 4 will use these parameters. A justification of the data used for the
economic analysis can be found in section 4.2.
1 Total area
The total area where Aren occurs, the total amount of sugar palms and the
establishment date are difficult to estimate because Aren trees are mostly scattered all
over the landscape. Since in most locations, the sugar palm trees regenerate
naturally, there is no uniform establishment date, except for the locations that begin
to domesticate the Aren trees in the landscape (e.g. Lumban Lobu, Pagaran Tulason
and Banuaji IV). The total amount of hectares reported is based on the interviews with
farmers.
Masarang Foundation is by far the largest location included. At present, there are
6125 farmers in Tomohon that are a member of the Masarang Foundation.
Approximately 10,000 ha of land are managed by those 6125 farmers. Note that sugar
palm is only a part of their activities. The Aren density varies from 1-2 trees per ha to
60 trees per ha.
2 Average number of trees / ha
At most of the locations the sugar palm trees have grown naturally, causing a large
variation in the amount of sugar palm trees per hectare. The amount of trees per
hectare also varies significantly within the hectares of one location. The data reported
here presents conditions in the hectares with most trees (e.g. of the 200 hectares in
Pagaran Tulason some might have no sugar palm trees, while the most dense
hectares have 50 sugar palm trees).
Note that when establishing one’s own sugar palm plantings (in stead of using
naturally grown trees) there is more control over spacing and number of trees per
hectare.
3 Average no. productive trees / ha
Not all sugar palms will become productive, i.e. provide (significant amounts of) sugar
juice. In cases where the trees are domesticated, selection also plays an important
role. In communities where sugar juice and alcohol plays an important role higher
yielding trees are found (e.g. Christian communities), while for other communities
other products such as fruit or fibres are more important, leading to selection of other
24 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
genetic materials (e.g. Muslim communities)6. Note that also some farmers do not use
all potential productive trees (e.g. due to time limitations).
The amount of productive Aren trees was estimated based on the interviews with
farmers. In some areas the amount of sugar palms which become productive is quite
small (e.g. only 10% of sugar palms in Lumban Lobu become productive). This is
likely due to a high variation in trees and genetic material in different locations.
Further selection, propagation and management of the palms in its early years could
further improve the amount of productive trees.
In general, the production cycle period for an Aren tree is almost the same in
Tomohon and Batang Toru. In both areas, farmers said that Aren trees can be tapped
for 10 to 15 years depending on the amount of productive flowers of a tree. However,
in Tomohon farmers generally said 10 years is the productive period of an Aren tree.
After 10 years, farmers will go to other trees to be tapped. In Batang Toru, farmers
mostly said that 15 years is the general productive period of an Aren tree. Winrock
distinguished the general productive period of Aren trees for the two locations, i.e. 10
years for Tomohon and 15 years for Batang Toru. The differences maybe caused by
the fact that more Aren trees are available in Tomohon than Batang Toru, thus
farmers will have more options to tapped productive trees that they want.
The age of an Aren tree when it is ready to be tapped differs and is influenced inter
alia by the intensity of tree maintenance activity (e.g. the removal of Aren thatch).
4 Number of tapping days
In general, the number of tapping days in both sites is almost the same. When talking
to farmers, they said that tapping of the Aren trees occurs year round (with rare
exceptions of special holidays).
5 Average number of work hours per day to tap
Average number of hours per day to tap is estimated from time needed by the farmers
to tap one flower (i.e. 5 to 8 minutes in Batang Toru and 6 minutes in Tomohon) times
the amount of tappable trees visited per day. Farmers usually needed 0.5 to 1 hours
to travel from one trees to other trees. Note that most of the time a farmer spends on
sugar palm related work is not on the actual tapping itself, but on travel and
processing the juice (thickening).
Depending on the purpose (e.g. sugar or alcoholic beverage), farmers will visit a sugar
palm once or twice a day. A sugar palm should be visited almost daily in order to keep
the juice flow going. In extraordinary cases, for example during festivities, the farmers
will use ingenious ways to stop the juice flow for a limited period of time. They use
6 Tapping of sugar palm is very much related to local cultures. Muslim communities are traditionally not interested in tapping of sugar juice as the juice starts fermenting into wine spontaneously. This has led to quite a different selection than with Christian communities.
29 August 2011 | 25
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
natural coatings to cover the flower stem which prevents the tree from closing the
opening, enabling to continue tapping, even after a few days.
Figure 3 - 9 presents the average number of hours spent by the tappers per day
compared to the concentration of productive trees, in both Batang Toru and Tomohon.
The graph shows that tappers only spend a limited amount of time on actual tapping
of sugar palm. In some cases, this is because most time is consumed by collecting
firewood, thickening the juice and processing the sugar juice into sugar or alcoholic
beverage. In other cases, tapping is an additional source of income and occurs besides
other daily activities. The outlying dot (Masarang Foundation) on the graph is likely
due to organisation and specialisation in the process (i.e. a separation of people
tapping and further processing the sugar juice). It is unclear whether this is a shift
system with different tappers or tappers work 12 hours per day (at the other locations
smallholder households usually do tapping themselves, sometimes accompanied in the
processing of the sugar juice by a family member). The figure shows that, for
example, a tapper needs two hours for tapping three productive trees per day. This is
mainly determined by the distance between the trees. Hence there is only a small
increase in tapping time per day as the amount of productive trees per hectare
increases.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
productive trees per ha
Avera
ge n
um
ber
of
ho
urs
per
day t
o t
ap
Batang Toru
Tomohon
Figure 3 - 9 Tapping hours per tapper and productive tree density
6 Average juice production of productive tree
There is a significant variation in the amount of juice yields. It is difficult to specify the
quantity of ‘sugar juice’ the ‘average farmers’ harvests per period because within the
sites, between the sites and between farmers (both within and between sites) vary
26 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
greatly. In both areas, farmers’ annual activities and intensity of management are not
always the same because they opportunistically implement a variety of activities to
meet their livelihood needs. Those activities include annual crop production, perennial
crop production (including sugar palm), and off-farm activities. If flowers are available
to tap, most farmers will tap them daily. However, if other opportunities arise that
promise a better financial return farmers will forego Aren tapping. Even if all farmers
at both sites tapped the same number of flowers over the same time period yields
would not be uniform because: i) management intensities and technologies differ; ii)
age of trees differ; iii) origin of seed / seedlings differ and genetic material differ
(some selection of better performing material might have been done locally, but not
systematically); and iv) processing technologies are different. Also it should be
acknowledged that farmers don’t keep written records and the reported data are
estimates.
Juice production per productive sugar palm is influenced by several different aspects.
The main factors that explain differences in yield are: genetic material, tapping skills,
climate and local environment and climate (including soil, water and nutrient
availability), the amount of flowers (mayang) tapped, which flower is tapped (first or
later flowers), the season and time of day. Another reason why yields vary greatly is
that Aren grows on many soil types and survives on soil which may be considered of
low fertility.
Most of the time one flower at a time is tapped, but in some cases farmers tap 2
flowers at the same time (leading to higher juice production per day, but decreasing
the amount of time a tree can be tapped). Farmers indicated that tapping three
flowers at a time will cause the tree to die.
If the tree is tapped twice a day, the amount of juice is usually higher in the morning
than in the afternoon (e.g. in the range of 20 litre in the morning and 10 litre in the
afternoon). There is also a difference between the first flower and the following
flowers, whereby the first usually produces most sugar juice. After the pre-tapping
activities, the sugar juice production increases during the first month, remains stable
for a few months and than decreases in the last month before the flower is finished.
Usually, a flower can be tapped for 5 months, use of different flowers allows for
continuous tapping throughout a year.
Juice production per day is assumed from the amount of juice that was collected by
farmers in one day, which can be from 3 to 12 trees per day. The average juice
production was based on the average amount of juice collected by the farmers in the
last two to three years. Most of the farmers said that there is limited variation in
amounts of juice production except in the dry season, where usually juice production
is decreasing but the sugar production is still the same as the amount of sugar content
increases in the dry season.
29 August 2011 | 27
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
In Tomohon area, especially the Masarang Foundation keeps an elaborate
administration of juice per farmer per flower. At Masarang, farmers usually will
produce some 17.8 litres of Aren juice per day with maximum production around 25-
35 litres of Aren juice per day. In Kayawy exceptional amounts of 108 litre / day are
reported from an extraordinary tree.
7 Average sugar content sugar juice (%)
The average sugar content of Aren juice reported in Batang Toru is a bit higher than in
Tomohon. In Tomohon the average sugar content was measured using a brix meter7.
For Batang Toru, Winrock estimated the sugar content from the amount of sugar
produced from litre of Aren that was cooked. There might be biases for both methods,
however, based on the observation, the range for sugar water content in both sites is
from 9.40% in Sigiring-giring (elevation is 200 meter above sea level (masl)) to
18.75% in Hutaraja (elevation is 600 masl). In general, 12 to 14% sugar content is
the common situation in both sites, which matches with what was observed by Mogea
et al (1991).
Variations in sugar content can be explained by a combination of genetic material,
water availability, the season and time of day. In general, the sugar content will be
higher in the dry season compared to the rainy season. However, the amount of juice
will be lower in the dry season compared to rainy season. These effects level out for
sugar production, resulting in no significant difference in production during the dry or
rainy season, while for the tuak (alcoholic beverage) production, it will give a
significant difference. In one location in Tomohon (Tara-tara), the sugar content in the
morning varied between 10.1 to 12.5% (depending on the trees and the mayang
position) and in the afternoon the sugar content increased up with 5% compared to
the sugar content in the morning. In other places, this difference is not observed. The
first mayang usually has a higher sugar content compared to the next mayang.
Figure 3 - 10 presents the sugar content compared to the average juice production per
tree in both Batang Toru and Tomohon. The graph shows that there is no obvious
relationship between the two parameters and that a sugar concentration between 12%
and 17% can be expected. With the exception of two outliers in Batang Toru, the
sugar content is relatively stable.
7 A brix meter is used to measure the sugar content of liquids. The result is expressed in brix, a measure to indicate the percentage of sucrose by weight (grams per 100 millilitre of water)
28 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Average juice production per tree (litres/day)
Av
era
ge
su
ga
r c
on
ten
t o
f ju
ice
(%b
rix
)
Batang Toru
Tomahon
Figure 3 - 10 Sugar content and total juice production
8 Other sugar palm products
Research by Winrock in 2008 in four villages in Batang Toru (Paranjulu, Pagaran
tulason, Hutagurgur and Lumban lobu) revealed that at that time sugar provided a
weekly income for farmers (main source of income, 50% of weekly income). Thatch
provided a yearly income, contributing less than 10% of yearly income of Aren
farmers. Thatch can be harvested a maximum of 2 times a year. Alcoholic beverage
(‘tuak’) provided 40-50% of weekly income of producer families. Producers are mostly
Christian. Community members, who gather in Tuak cafés, commonly drink Tuak
daily. Aren fruits (‘kolang kaling’) provide a yearly income and contribute 20% of
yearly income of Aren farmers. Fruits are usually harvested once a year.
Although currently, the government in Tomohon prohibits tuak cap tikus production in
the area, there is still some production. For saguer it is usually sold at the price of Rp
1000/bottle (600 ml; € 0.09) or Rp 1500 to Rp 3000 per bottle on the market (€ 0.13
– € 0.26), while the tuak cap tikus is sold at Rp 7000/bottle (600 ml; € 0.61) and on
the market it can be sold up to Rp 10,000/bottle (600 ml; € 0.87). Tuak production
can be regulated by varying the way the flower is tapped. When the cut made before
tapping is thinner, less juice will be produced.
In Tomohon, thatch and fruits are not harvested nor sold except when there is a
special order, which is very rare. Traders for the tuak and sugar usually come
personally to the village, so no transport cost are incurred by farmers to sell their Aren
products.
29 August 2011 | 29
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
In most of the visited locations, sugar and alcoholic beverages are the main products
from the sugar palms. The table below indicates what products are collected and their
value. Note that
Table 3 - 5 Other valuable products from the Aren palm
Product Production
quantity
Product value8 Harvesting effort
Sugar 1:6
(kg sugar / kg
juice)
8,0009 - 9,000 Rp/kg
(€ 0.70 - € 0.78)
5-8 min per tree for juice
tapping; boiling and
processing
Tuak Saguer 1:1 (l/l) 1,000 - 3,000 Rp /
bottle (600ml)
(€ 0.14 – € 0.43 / l)
Natural fermentation
Tuak cap tikus
(45% alcohol)
11:1 (l/l) 7,000 - 10,000 Rp /
bottle (600ml)
(€ 1.01 – € 1.45 / l)
Distillation
Fruit10 1.260 - 3,600kg
/ha/year
2500 Rp / kg
(€ 0.22 / kg)
1 – 5.25 labour days/year
Thatch11 6.5 – 30 kg / ha
/ year12
13,000 Rp – 30,000 /
ha / year
(€ 1.13 – € 2.61 / ha /
year)
1 - 8 labour days/year
For a detailed description of other products from sugar palm, see chapter 2.3.
9 Ethanol Production
The ethanol production is calculated for each location based on the juice production
per tree per day, the productive trees per hectare and the sugar content of the juice.
These figures are not corrected for the unproductive years. Figure 3 - 11 presents the
theoretical yield of ethanol per hectare (assuming 0.51 kg of ethanol per kg of
sucrose, a conversion efficiency of 90% and ethanol density of 0.79kg/m3). The range
of ethanol yields per hectare varies significantly due to varying amount of productive
trees per hectare and sugar content, and large variations in sugar juice yields per
tree.
8 Note that there is not always a market for these products and some are consumed by the producers themselves. This is especially the case for thatch. 9 Price quoted at Masarang Foundation. Other villages sell for 9,000 Rp/kg. 10 Collected at five of the 14 locations. 11 Collected at six of the 14 locations. 12 Based on data collected at BanuajiIV-25. Note that thatch could be harvested from non productive trees as well.
30 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
Mas
aran
gFou
ndat
ion
Rok
rok
Tara-
tara
Pinar
as
Kayaw
y
Rur
ukan
Lum
ban L
obu
Pagar
an Tu
laso
n
Siman
gum
ban
subd
istri
ct
Sigiring-
giring
Hut
araj
a
Banua
ji IV
Hut
agurg
ur
Paran
Jul
u
Mea
nM
inM
ax
Eth
an
ol p
rod
ucti
on
(litr
e/h
a/y
ear)
Batang ToruTomohon
Figure 3 - 11 Theoretical ethanol production per site
10 Average monthly income per palm tapper
For Tomohon, usually, farmers who tap Aren only for tuak cap tikus production
(alcoholic beverage with high alcohol content) tap Aren trees one time per day.
Farmers collecting sugar juice for sugar production usually tap twice a day.
Only in Tomohon a price is paid for the sugar juice, where the juice is sold to
Masarang Sugarpalm factory. The price paid varies from Rp 1000 to Rp 2000,
depending on the sugar content of the juice. In Batang Toru, average price paid per
litre of Aren juice can only be estimated in Hutagurgur or other Tuak producing
villages, with Rp 1000 to Rp 1700 per litre of Aren juice.
Average daily income per palm tapper was estimated based on the average of income
from different products that commonly produced by Aren farmers in the village, which
can be sugar, tuak, tuak cap tikus, kolang-kaling or thatch.
Technologies to tap, processing sugar, processing tuak (both the 5% and 45% alcohol
content), fruit processing for kolang kaling, and thatch harvesting are generally similar
in both areas. The difference will be, in Batang Toru, farmers use ‘hara-hara’ (natural
preservative) for sugar production and ‘raru’ (natural yeast) for tuak production. And
in Batang Toru farmers use 2 pans to boil the juice of sugar production, while in
Tomohon, they only use 1 pan. In Tomohon, farmers cook Aren juice for sugar
everyday while in Batang Toru farmers cook only maximum twice a week.
Labour and fuel wood are two main important things that in the reality were not
calculated in the operational cost by the farmers. Labour usually come from their
29 August 2011 | 31
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
family member, so farmers don’t have to pay them. Fuel wood is mostly collected
from the surrounding gardens or other tree-based land use types, so farmers rarely
buy fuel wood to produce sugar, tuak cap tikus or kolang-kaling.
Conversion rate used is Rp 11,500.00 equals 1 Euro. The average labour wage rate in
Batang Toru is Rp 30,000.00 per day, while in Tomohon is Rp 50,000.00 per day.
11 Total number of palm tappers
The total number of palm tappers per village is based on discussions with farmers. The
number varies from 25 persons per village (i.e. in Pagaran Tulason, Batang Toru) to
200 persons per village (i.e. in Kayawu, Tomohon).
32 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
4 Economic analysis
The economic feasibility of bio ethanol production from sugar palm is virtually
unknown (WUR, 2010). A positive factor is the potentially very high yields while the
long non-productive juvenile phase and the high labour are a negative factor. In order
to evaluate the technical and economic potential of sugar palm cultivation and ethanol
production, we have selected two different production systems. These systems are
summarised in the table below and provide insight into the range of possibilities and
highlights the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches of sugar palm
cultivation for ethanol. Note that these models can be considered extremes, and that
many intermediate models are possible. These models serve to give insights, and are
a starting point for further environmental, social and economic optimisation.
Table 4 - 1 Overview of selected production systems
System type Mixed system
(conservative)
Monoculture plantation model
(intensive)
Sugar palm tree spacing 10m x 10m 3m x 3m
Trees/ha 100 1090
Rotation 12 years
Tapping in years 10 – 12
12 years
Tapping in years 10 – 12
Productive trees 50% 50%
Establishment model - Establishment in strata (i.e.
planting in year 1-4-7-10)
- Total establishment time 12
years
- Establish plots (i.e. all trees in
one plot have the same age)
- Total establishment time 12
years
Maintenance - Fertiliser inputs in year 1 and 2
- No irrigation
- From year 5 onwards remove
thatch (2 times / year)
- Fertiliser inputs in year 1 and 2
- No irrigation
- From year 5 onwards remove
thatch (2 times / year)
Total area 10,000 ha 10,000 ha
Previous land-use Imperata grassland Imperata grassland
When comparing the systems, we allow for variations in parameters such as tree
density (trees/ha) and management system. The systems selected are a mixed
system (conservative), whereby sugar palms are intercropped with other (undefined)
crops. The aim for this business case is to analyse a conservative model from an
investor perspective with attention for benefits to the environment (biodiversity) and
local farmers (diversification of income). At the other end, we have added an extreme
business case to investigate the theoretical maximum as an intensive monoculture
model. The aim for this second model is to go for a practical and efficient model from
business perspective solely focussing on sugar palm cultivation. Note that such an
intensive spacing will likely lead to competition for water, sunlight and nutrients
29 August 2011 | 33
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
between different sugar palm trees. Also planting sugar palm in monoculture is
unlikely to lead to sustained yields (see also section 2.4). This intensive system has
nonetheless been included to explore the theoretical maximum when solely focusing
on sugar palm.
The reforestation model (as promoted by Dr. Smits), used by the Masarang
Foundation, lies within the range of these two systems with spacing of 3 x 9 m and
use of annual and perennial intercrops.
4.1 Sugar palm establishment and cultivation
4.1.1 Mixed System - Development
For the mixed model, we chose for establishment in strata. This means that no two
rows of palms of the same age are going to be standing next to each other, and
therefore there will be less competition for nutrients and water. Disadvantage is that
the distance to tappable trees is potentially larger. In this model Aren palms are
planted at 10m x 10m spacing (density of 100 trees per hectare). Palm trees are not
all planted at the same time, but progressively fill each plot, as indicated in Figure 4 -
1. For each hectare, 25% of the trees are planted at 3-year intervals. Planting starts
in a different year for each plot and the entire area is covered by year 12. This way,
each plot can be tapped continuously from the moment the first planted trees reach
maturity (at age 10). Furthermore, other crops can be planted between the rows of
sugar palms. For example, annual cash crops that provide income on the short term
and diversification of income on the long term. In the analysis below we only include
costs and revenues from sugar palm.
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Year 4 Year 5 Year 6
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Figure 4 - 1 Mixed Model plantation development year 1-6
34 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Table 4 - 2 shows the plantation development of the total area, where each ‘q’
represents a quarter (25%) of each plot. The table illustrates that with this system, a
plot needs to be cleared entirely, before the first quarter can be planted (in year 1 of
each cycle). The tapping years are shown with green background and land clearing
with the red background.
Table 4 - 2 Plantation development, showing the state of each plot and plot sub-division
year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
q1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
q2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5
q3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2
Plot 1
q4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
q1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
q2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4
q3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1
Plot 2
q4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
q1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6
q2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3
q3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Plot 3
q4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Green = tapping year | Red = land clearing
4.1.2 Monoculture Model – Development
In this model, Aren palms are planted at 3m x 3m spacing (density of 1089 trees per
hectare). Palm trees are planted successively in four plots at 3-year intervals. This
means that planting only occurs in year 1, 4, 7 and 10 (see figure below). By year 10
the entire area is covered. Tapping occurs from the moment the first planted trees
reach maturity (at age 10), whereby each plot will be tapped for three years in a row
(year 10-12), replanted and tapping shifts to the next plot.
Year 1 Year 4 Year 7 Year 10
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Plot 4
Figure 4 - 2 Monoculture Model plantation development year 1-10
29 August 2011 | 35
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Table 4 - 3 shows the plantation development over the years. The table shows that
with this system, land clearing can be deferred over four phases, the last of which
occurs in year 9.
Table 4 - 3 Plantation development showing the state of each plot per year
year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Plot 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Plot 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5
Plot 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2
Plot 4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Green= tapping year | Red = land clearing
This diagram shows that tapping can occur continuously from year 10, on a constant
land area, meaning a stable cash flow and need for workforce (mainly tappers).
4.1.3 Comparison of establishment models
Table 4 - 4 Comparison of advantages of selected production models
Mixed system
(conservative)
Monoculture plantation model
(intensive)
Density
Low density allows for other crops to
be mixed:
- this is good for both nutrient cycling
(demand is spread in time),
- some crops can be nitrogen fixers,
reducing need for fertiliser
- annual crops bring income at end of
year one
- possibility to satisfy more local needs
(especially diversity in food production)
High density means:
- Potentially higher sugar productivity.
- Trees are closer to each other, making
it relatively cheaper to install
scaffolding, and improving tapper
productivity (reduced costs)
- Lower costs of land per m3 ethanol
- smaller total area needed for same
ethanol output
Establishment model Plots have palms of different ages:
- less competition for resources (light,
nutrients, water)
Plots have palms of same age:
- area covered by tappers is smaller
4.1.4 Development activities and costs
The activities that need to occur on each plot depend on the state, and therefore age
of the sugar palms. The activities are listed below in the order they should be applied
to each plot.
Land clearing and site preparation (year 0)
To prepare grasslands covered with Imperata (‘Alang-alang’) for the planting of sugar
palm, the Imperata needs to be removed. Key operations required are: slash or roll
36 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
and then spray several times with glyphosate to kill the Imperata, plant legume cover
crops (this could for instance be a cash crop), fertilize the soil and install a basic
infrastructure including roads, pipelines for sugar juice and worker camps.
Box 2 – Establishment on Imperata grassland
Many natural tropical forests in Indonesia have become fallow or wasteland after being
cleared and burned and – as a result – have been overgrown by Imperata. This grass
prevents the land from developing naturally into secondary forest and is therefore considered
to be particularly problematic (Reinhardt et al., 2007). The total area of Imperata grassland in
Indonesia alone is estimated at 8.5 Mha (Garrity et al., 1997), compared to an area of 4.5
Mha planted with oil palm in 2007 (FAO, 2009).
Although known as a persistent weed on plantations, Imperata may fairly easily be controlled
through the establishment of cover crops until shading out by the trees takes place (UNU,
1995). Fairhurst and McLaughlin (2009) demonstrated that establishing oil palm plantations
on Imperata is economically attractive and helps to restore lands covered with Imperata.
Planting (Year 1)
Planting includes the cost of all seedlings (and nursery costs) and field labour by
workers to plant the sugar palms.
Maintenance and fertilisation (Year 1 and 2)
Maintenance operations include the weeding of the field in the first years and fertiliser
costs. No irrigation is applied, using only rain for irrigation. From year 5, thatch is also
removed regularly (two times per year). In our model we assume that the costs for
the removal of thatch are offset by the value of the fibrous material.
Tapping of sugar juice
Tapping of the sugar palms begins in year 10. Although many palms already start
producing flowers from an age of 5 or 6, it is expected that the total production of
juice from the tree will be less when tapped at a young age. Tapping is done twice per
day (in the morning and afternoon).
Transport of sugar juice to the conversion plant
The canisters that contain the juice are taken to local collection points, where the juice
is concentrated from 12-15% brix13 to 67% brix by boiling it in kettles on stoves, in
order to avoid unwanted fermentation and associated losses during transport (see
section 2.1). We assume that enough biomass is available from the plantations in the
form of branches, fruit bunches and deceased wood, to supply the thermal energy for
this concentration step. The 67% brix juice is then taken to a central conversion plant
where it is fermented into ethanol. Traditionally this is done by truck, or using oxen,
but plastic pipelines can also be used (Tapergie).
13 One degree Brix corresponds to 1 gram of sucrose in 100 grams of solution and thus represents the strength of the solution as a percentage by mass
29 August 2011 | 37
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Harvesting Aren Palm (end of year 12)
The core of the Aren tree is filled with a soft starch, and the cylindrical outer part is
made of hardwood that is 5 times stronger than oak and has a rich, dark colour that
makes it excellent for flooring, furniture, decorative carvings, and other applications
(Tapergie). In our model we conservatively assumed that there are costs for felling
the palms. It might be the case that the market value of the wood covers the costs
and generates a positive revenue stream. This assumption likely leads to
underestimated revenues in case the wood is sold, but could lead to overestimated
revenues in case the trees are left to rot in situ (for nutrient cycling for instance).
Table 4 - 5 gives an overview of the plantation development and exploitation cost-
parameters that were used in the models.
Table 4 - 5 Summary of main cost parameters
Item Unit Value Source/comment
Price Ethanol (at plant gate) USD/m3 460 70% of price in Rotterdam (680 USD/m3).
Price palm wood (year 12) USD/tree 25 Conservative assumption, to cover felling costs (see below)
Land clearing / site preparation USD/ha 1200 Source = WWF. Based on previous land use = Alang-alang, and including infrastructure and glyphosphate.
Planting USD/ tree 4 based on 400 USD/ha (based on WWF) and 100 trees/ha
Maintenance USD/ha 300 Ecofys own estimate, including low level of fertilization
felling USD/tree 25 Ecofys own estimate based on felling costs eucalyptus trees with chainsaws
tapper wage USD/year 2500
Estimation (close to Income farmers Masarang / approx 2.5 times minimum salary Indonesia). Note difference between costs perspective investor vs. income tapper
tapper hours per day h/day 8 1 Fte
working days / year days/year 240 Own estimate
tapper cost USD/day 10.42 calculated
average tapper productivity trees/day 40.00 from field data Winrock (low end of range 5-8min /tree) -> unclear if 6-8 min is for 1 or 2 tappings per day
tapping cost USD/tree tap.day 0.26 Assuming 2 tappings/day
Planting density trees/ha 100 1089
for Mixed plantation for Monoculture
productive trees % 50% 50%
For mixed model (conservative estimate) For monoculture model (conservative estimate) Tapergie expect s maximum to be around 80%
Juice yield l / tree / day 17 Mean of all Masarang sample (provided by Masarang)
Juice sugar content kg sugar / kg juice 12.0% Average from Tomohon. In Batang Toru, average is 15.3
Sugar conversion yield kg etoh / kg sugar 0.50 Close to theoretical maximum of 0.52. However this could be less if energy used in conversion comes from ethanol
productive days/tree/year days/year/tree 360
Source: Winrock and Tapergie. Although one flower can be tapped for 5 months per year, use of other flowers allows for continuous tapping throughout the year.
ethanol produced yearly litre ethanol/ tree/year 193.67 calculated from above data
Total ethanol plant capacity m3/day
300 5000
For Mixed model For Monoculture Calculated from above data, based on a 10,000 ha estate
Distillery MUSD 40
Based on average from three suppliers for a capacity of 600 m3/day. Using a scaling factor of 0.7 this yields costs of 25MUSD for 300m
3/day and 175MUSD for
5000 m3/day
38 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
4.2 Conversion to Ethanol (and/or Sugar)
Conversion of the thick sugar juice (67% Brix) to ethanol is done in a centralised
distillery, where the juice from the different parts of the plantation is collected.
Energy needs
The processing plant will require energy, primarily in the form of steam, for the
production of sugar and ethanol. This energy is primarily consumed for the
concentration of sugar through evaporation, and for the distillation of ethanol. Typical
needs for distillation are 200 MJ/m3 of ethanol14. Assuming the heating fuel is oil (at
100 USD/bbl), the process heat costs come out at 3.3 USD/m3 ethanol. This is likely
an overestimate, as cheaper fuels are likely available locally. The Masarang plant is
using geothermal heat for example, which has a much lower cost and environmental
impact. Also firewood and other agricultural waste could be used as fuel for feeding
the boilers.
Costs of conversion plant
Costs of the ethanol plant are based on the average from quotations for sugar cane-
based distilleries (40 MUSD for a capacity of 600 m3/day) from three manufacturers in
200815. Note that a large number of parts needed for traditional sugarcane distilleries
are not needed here, like the mill and power station for excess electricity (since there
is no bagasse).
In order to determine costs for varying scales (capacities), we used the scaling law.
The scaling law describes a relation between increases in plant scale and resulting
reductions in capital costs (Blok 2006). The scaling law can be written as:
R
Scale
Scale
Cost
Cost
=
1
2
1
2
Where Cost1 and Cost2 are capital costs for conversion plants of capacities Scale1 and
Scale2 respectively. A scaling factor of 0.7 is used, which is common in ethanol
conversion technologies (de Wit et al, 2009).
4.3 Outcomes mixed model
Below the results are displayed, representing the sum of costs for producing ethanol
delivered at the plant gate, and the resulting cash flow. The cash-flow analysis is used
to determine the pay-back time, which is reached when the cumulative cash flow
becomes positive. The production costs have been calculated by dividing the Net
Present Value of each cost element by the Net Present Value of the total amount of
produced ethanol. A discount factor of 10% has been assumed in both cases.
14 Based on energy needs in a European distillery. 15 Plant manufactures are DSEC, KBK and Vogelbusch and include Engineering, transportation, installation and supervision costs.
29 August 2011 | 39
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
The averaged costs come at 450 USD/m3, which is equivalent to16 321 Euro/m3. When
sold to national markets (plant gate) at a price of 460 USD/m3, this leads to an IRR17
of 11%. When considering export to European commodity markets, the current price
for ethanol imported to Rotterdam (“T1”) is 690 USD/m3 CIF (Platts 2011). The price
has increased from about 570 USD/m3 in 2008 and can be expected to rise further for
ethanol that meets the RED sustainability requirements, especially as the volumetric
demand increases over the next years. This would leave margin of 230 USD/m3 for
freight and handling fees, which should leave room for a healthy profit.
4.3.1 Cost breakdown
Figure 4 - 3 presents the cost breakdown of a cubic meter of ethanol at plant gate.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
USD2011/m3
Opex
Capex
Tree harvesting (felling) (year12)
Tapping (year 10,11,12)
Maintenance (including fertilizer andweeding)
Planting (year1)
Land clearing / site preparation (year 0)
Feedstock
production
Conversion
Figure 4 - 3 Cost breakdown of one m3 of ethanol from the mixed model over 20 year lifetime
using a NPV calculation over
The figure shows that the majority of costs reside in the wages for the tappers (45%),
the capital costs for the distillery (19%) and the costs for the land clearing and site
preparation (17.5%).
16 At an exchange rate of 1 Euro = 1.4 USD 17 The internal rate of return (IRR) is a rate of return used in capital budgeting to measure and compare the profitability of investments.
40 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
4.3.2 Cash flow and payback time
Figure 4 - 4 shows the cash flow of the mixed model. It shows that the cumulative
cash flow becomes positive at the end of year 13, reaching the payback period after a
bit less than 14 years. It takes long to reach payback, because the sugar palms only
become productive after 10-12 years. From that moment onwards, income is stable. A
possibility to shorten the payback time is by planting and selling (annual) intercrops or
selling some of the by-products.
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
0 5 10 15 20
MU
SD
Yearly costs
Yearly revenue
Net Cashflow
Cumulative Cashflow
Figure 4 - 4 Cash flow diagram of mixed plantation model
The increase in costs noted in year 8 and 9 are due to the investment in the
conversion plant.
4.3.3 Sensitivity
Figure 4 - 5 shows how the cost of ethanol is affected by the most important
parameters. The most sensitive parameter is the sugar juice yield per day. Increasing
sugar juice yields would further strengthen the profitability. Tapper wages are an
important part of the operational costs and have a significant influence on the costs of
the ethanol.
Payback time = 13.7 years
29 August 2011 | 41
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
40% 140% 240% 340% 440% 540% 640%variation of parameter (%)
Co
st
(US
D/m
3)
Land clearing / site preparation
Juice yield
Cost conversion plant
tapper wage
100 l/day
15 MUSD
35 MUSD
10 l/day
3,000 USD/year
1,500 USD/year
Figure 4 - 5 Sensitivity of ethanol costs to variations in main parameters for the mixed model
4.4 Outcomes monoculture plantation model
The monoculture model shows what is theoretically possible if sugar palms could be
grown as a monoculture crop. Although this would lead to a number of disadvantages
like low biodiversity, and likely higher needs for fertilizers and pesticides18 etc, the
business case looks very attractive indeed. The averaged costs come out at 275
USD/m3, which is equivalent to about 200 Euro/m3. When sold to domestic markets at
a price of 460 USD/m3, this leads to an IRR of 43%. When considering export to
European commodity markets, where ethanol is traded around 690 USD/m3 CIF (Platts
2011), this would leave a margin of 415 USD/m3 for freight and handling fees, which
leaves significant room for profit.
4.4.1 Cost breakdown
The cost breakdown of a cubic meter of ethanol at the plant gate is given in Figure 4 -
6.
18 Note that with current (small-scale) mixed plantings sugar palms does not suffer from any serious pests or diseases. This could change when trying to grow sugar palm in monoculture.
42 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
USD2011/m3
Opex
Capex
Tree harvesting (felling) (year12)
Tapping (year 10,11,12)
Maintenance (including fertilizer andweeding)
Planting (year1)
Land clearing / site preparation (year 0)
Feedstock
production
Conversion
Figure 4 - 6 Cost breakdown of one m3 of ethanol from the monoculture model using a NPV
calculation
Since the production of juice per hectare is much larger in this case than in the mixed
model, the fixed costs per ha, such as land clearing and maintenance are relatively
lower in their share per cubic meter of ethanol. The wage for the tappers is very
dominant at over 73% of total costs, followed by the capital costs for the plant (13%)
and tree harvesting costs (10.5%).
4.4.2 Cash flow and payback time
The cash flow for the monoculture model is shown in Figure 4 - 7.
29 August 2011 | 43
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
0 5 10 15 20
MU
SD
Yearly costs
Yearly revenue
Net Cashflow
Cumulative Cashflow
Figure 4 - 7 Cash flow diagram for monoculture model
The figure shows that the cumulative cash flow becomes positive after year 10, and
therefore that the payback period is approximately 10 years, for an IRR of 43%, which
is very attractive for the industry. The wave-like shape of the cumulative cash flow is
caused by the reoccurring investments in planting every three years (in stead of
annually as in the mixed model).
4.4.3 Sensitivity
Figure 4 - 8 shows how the cost of ethanol is affected by the most important
parameters.
Payback time = 10 years
44 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500% 600% 700%variation of parameter (%)
Co
st
(US
D/m
3)
Juice yield
Cost conversion plant
Discount rate
tapper wage
productive trees
90% productive trees
250 MUSD40%
prod.
trees
yield= 100 l/day/tree
yield= 10 l/day/tree
75 MUSD
1,500USD/year
3,000USD/year
Figure 4 - 8 Sensitivity of ethanol costs to parameters for monoculture model
We see that wages for the tappers allow for a large variation in the final price, which is
not surprising considering the labour intensive nature of the work. Furthermore, yield
of over 100 litre of juice per tree and per day have been reported in the field (Winrock
2010), which suggests that these numbers are technically possible. These numbers
show the potential for improvement of the business case, and make a case for
investing in further research in breeding and silvicultural management practices.
29 August 2011 | 45
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
4.5 Discussion of main parameters
Table 4 - 6 shows a summary of the main characteristics and outcomes of the two
models compared in this chapter.
Table 4 - 6 Summary table
Model Mixed model Monoculture model
Density 100 palms/ha 1089 palms/ha
Adjusted ethanol
production19
4,780 l/ha 52,000 l/ha
Additional outputs • High grade timber from
other trees
• Intercrops
Additional benefits • Higher biodiversity
• Less competition for
water and nutrients
• Diversification of income
for smallholders
• More similar to current
plantation management
models
Disadvantages • Requires ‘innovative’
plantation management
models
• High uncertainty about
feasibility of
establishment in
monoculture
• Likely higher fertiliser
needs
• Possible water stress
• Higher risk of pests and
diseases
• High dependence on
only one crop
• Longer period before
first revenue
Below the main parameters used in the calculations in this chapter are justified.
Number of productive trees
The factors that determine a sugar palm’s productivity are numerous and require
further investigation. When sugar palms are planted on a large-scale in a plantation
fashion, the environmental factors will be very similar for each tree, and genetic
qualities can be controlled through breeding programmes, improving the percentage
of productive trees. In our model we assumed that half the palms at potential
productive age are tappable. In practice the amount of productive trees is hard to
19 Average over the lifetime of a sugarpalm (over a period of 12 years, a tree can be productive 360 days per year, over 3 years). Conversion efficiency assumed: 0.08 l ethanol per litre of juice, and 12% sugar content of juice.
46 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
establish as the smallholders interviewed often only tap a selection of trees (and make
no further attempt with other trees as long as the old ones are still producing). The
50% assumption is based on conversations with Winrock and Tapergie. The amount of
productive trees can be improved via selection of seeds and through improved pre-
tapping techniques. Tapergie believes the amount of productive trees per hectare
could go up to 80% in the future.
Number of productive years and age
In our model we assumed that all trees are tapped from the same age, and are
harvested (felled) at the end of their 3 years of production. It is likely that many
palms are still productive after 4 or 5 years of tapping, although the juice production
would decline. In some of the villages sugar palms are tapped for 10 – 15 years
(albeit not always continuously, e.g. one flower per year). Tapping and felling at equal
age leads to a simplified operational plan (and modelling) but likely also leads to an
underestimate of the yearly adjusted ethanol potential of a plantation.
In our model we assume that palms reach maturity at 10 years of age. In practice and
literature, examples are known whereby sugar palms became productive already after
5-7 years, but also after 15 years. This depends to a large extent on the local
environment and climate (e.g. rainfall, temperature, sun light, soil and nutrient
availability) and genetic material. It is expected that in controlled environments
(plantations with added fertilizer, selected varieties from nurseries etc) the age of
maturity can be reduced significantly. Tapergie expects to start tapping palms from an
age as early as 7 years. We assumed that tapping starts at year 10.
Yields
Juice yields of tappable palms in existing plantings vary significantly. At the same
time, the sensitivity analysis shows that this is the parameter with most influence on
the costs and economic feasibility.
Therefore, we have used a conservative value for this important parameter. The value
used in our model (17 litres per tree and per day) is at the low end of data found
during this study. Only in the village of Hutagurgur a lower value is reported (10 litre
per day) (see also section 3.4).
In comparison, the average production of a sample of 93 Aren palms over 4 villages
and 28 tappers, during Q2 of 2009 in Tomohon was 17.2 litre per day (data provided
by Masarang foundation). The field data have shown that individual palms can produce
over even 100 litres per tree and per day. We expect that this figure comes from an
exceptional tree, but it gives a hint of what (theoretically) might be possible under
optimal conditions.
Furthermore, the number of days a single palm can be tapped in a year is reported to
be anywhere from 5 to 12 months. A single inflorescence can be tapped between 5 –
10 months (personal communication Winrock, March 2011). In reality, before a
29 August 2011 | 47
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
particular inflorescence stops producing, new ones will already have appeared, making
palms tappable throughout the year. Furthermore, the length over which an
inflorescence can be tapped is highly linked to the tapper’s skills and palm variety.
Tapergie expects productive palms to be tappable year-round, so our assumption of
tapping each productive palm only 360 days per year is leaves some room for five
special holidays when no tapping is done.
Tapper productivity
Average number of hours per day to tap is estimated from time needed by the farmers
to tap one flower (i.e. 5 to 8 minutes in Batang Toru and 6 minutes in Tomohon) times
the amount of tappable trees visited per day. When a tree is tapped twice a day, this
leads to an average productivity of around 40 palms tapped per tapper per (8-hour)
day. This number is likely to increase as the tappers gain experience and is relatively
conservative compared to Tapergie’s assumption of 60 palms per day.
48 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
5 Sustainability analysis
This chapter provides a qualitative analysis of the effects of (large-scale) sugar palm
cultivation in relation to the sustainability criteria of the EU Renewable Energy
Directive (GHG, biodiversity, carbon, and peatland) and other sustainability aspects
(soil, water, air, social, ILUC).
5.1 Introduction
The sustainability of a biofuel depends on the specific details of the supply chain it was
sourced from (e.g. how and where the feedstock was cultivated, the previous land use
and emissions from the different steps in the supply chain). Virtually all biofuels know
good and bad practice examples. For example, palm oil can be a very sensible
feedstock for biofuel, but draining peatlands to produce it causes GHG emissions that
offset any of the savings compared to fossil fuels for several decades. Nonetheless, it
is possible to do an analysis of the sustainability of sugar palm ethanol in general and
see whether specific risks or sustainability benefits can be expected. Note that to
assess the sustainability in a specific case, for example whether a batch of sugar palm
ethanol complies with the EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED), one needs to look at
the specific supply chain it originated from, including the feedstock production
location.
5.2 Sustainability criteria of the RED
The RED sets out a number of carbon and sustainability criteria for biofuels and
bioliquids20. Only biofuels that meet minimum criteria counts towards Member States’
renewable energy targets and may receive support from Member States.
The mandatory sustainability requirements fall within four categories, with additional
requirements for biofuels produced from feedstocks sourced from within the EU. The
four sustainability criteria relate to:
1 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions
2 Biodiversity
3 Carbon Stocks
4 Peatland
The sections below analyse sugar palm ethanol against these requirements.
20 The Fuel Quality Directive (FQD) contains the same sustainability critreia.
29 August 2011 | 49
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
GHG emission reductions (RED article 17.1)
Biofuels must achieve a minimum Life Cycle GHG emission reduction compared to
fossil fuels. This minimum reduction is increased until 2018, and must be:
a. 35% from the start (2011)
b. 50% from 2017
c. 60% from 2018 for installations whose production has started from 1
January 2017 onwards.
The RED provides default values for biofuels produced with no net carbon emissions
from land use change (see Figure 5 - 1). The default for sugar cane ethanol provides
the highest greenhouse gas emissions savings (71% compared to its fossil fuel
comparator).
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
sugar
beet
sugar
cane
maize
wheat_NG
palm
rapeseed
soy
sunflower
fossil
Ethanol Biodiesel fossil
gCO2eq/MJ
Typical (RED)
60% Threshold
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
sugar
beet
sugar
cane
maize
wheat_NG
palm
rapeseed
soy
sunflower
fossil
Ethanol Biodiesel fossil
gCO2eq/MJ
Typical (RED)
60% Threshold
Figure 5 - 1 Typical default values for biofuels in the RED compared to the 60% threshold (from
2018 onwards for new installations)
The RED also sets out a mandatory methodology to ensure uniform calculation of GHG
emission reductions. As there is no default for sugar palm ethanol, greenhouse gas
emissions from the production and use shall be calculated as:
E = eec + el + ep + etd + eu – esca – eccs – eccr – eee
Where:
E = total emissions from the use of the fuel, expressed in grammes of CO2 equivalent
per MJ of fuel.
eec = emissions from the extraction or cultivation of raw materials;
50 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
el = annualised emissions from carbon stock changes caused by land-use change;
ep = emissions from processing;
etd = emissions from transport and distribution;
eu = emissions from the fuel in use;
esca = emission saving from soil carbon accumulation via improved agricultural
management;
eccs = emission saving from carbon capture and geological storage;
eccr = emission saving from carbon capture and replacement; and
eee = emission saving from excess electricity from cogeneration.
In general, we expect sugar palm ethanol to have a good GHG performance. Yields are
high and there are little emissions from cultivation (limited application of fertilisers or
pesticides; perennial crop so no tillage). Assuming establishment of plantings on
Imperata grasslands in reforestation models, there is no negative emission from land
use change expected (possible even some carbon storage via improved agricultural
management, see also section below). Emissions from processing will depend strongly
on the fuel source used in the ethanol plant and will likely form the biggest part of
emissions. Emissions from transport / distribution are usually relatively small (e.g.
typical transport and distribution default for palm oil biodiesel, which comes mainly
from Southeast Asia, is 5 gCO2eq/MJ. For sugar cane ethanol, mainly from Brazil is 9 5
gCO2eq/MJ).
Carbon effects of establishment on Imperata grassland
The establishment of plantations on Imperata grassland can provide additional
benefits such as carbon sequestration and soil protection via permanent groundcover.
Perennials such as oil palm or sugar palm typically have no negative impacts on soil
carbon due to no tillage. In addition, perennials store carbon in above-ground
biomass. Ecofys (2007) shows that conversion from Imperata grassland to oil palm
increases carbon stocks significantly, see Figure 5 - 2.
29 August 2011 | 51
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
-0.02
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
CP
O B
ase
Ca
se
CP
O c
on
ve
rte
d
Tro
pic
al R
ain
fore
st
CP
O d
rain
ed
Pe
at
So
il
CP
O c
on
ve
rte
d
Imp
era
ta
Gra
ssla
nd
Gre
en
ho
use
ga
s e
mis
sio
n (
kg
CO
2 e
qu
ivale
nt/
MJ
)
Peat land emissions
LUC above ground
End-use
Fossil indirect
Fuel distribution
Conversion
Feedstock transport
Feedstock production
0.46
Figure 5 - 2 GHG emissions of Crude Palm Oil (CPO) Base Case Scenario without LUC compared
with CPO scenarios with LUC. Source: Ecofys, 2007
Carbon benefits are gained mainly through increased carbon stocks in above ground
biomass. Research carried out in Sumatra and Kalimantan demonstrated that
Imperata grasslands contain around 39-47 ton C/ha while oil palm contains around 91
ton C/ha (Murdiyarso et al., 2002). Kamp et al. (2009) found comparable soil carbon
stocks for Imperata, secondary forest and primary forest in East Kalimantan, which
are, however, considerably lower than in Sumatra. Kamp et al. compiled the table
below based on own measurements (East Kalimantan) and those in other studies. It
should be noted that carbon stocks in Imperata grasslands (and forests) may vary in
different situations, due to local circumstances and variations (e.g. in soils and
climate).
52 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Table 5 - 1 Aboveground biomass and carbon stocks in forests and Imperata grasslands (source:
Kamp et al., 2009)
Location
Land cover
Aboveground C
stocks (ton / ha)
Soil C stocks (ton /
ha)
Total Carbon
stocks (ton / ha)
Papua New Guinea
Imperata grassland 6.7 85.7 92.4
Sumatra
Primary forest 219.6 84.4 305
Secondary forest 133.6 85.6 219
Imperata grassland 2.4 44.6 47
East Kalimantan
Primary forest 154.7 33.2 187.9
Secondary forest1 43.8 40.0 82.8
Secondary forest2 22.7 40.0 61.7
Imperata grassland 3.5 36.2 39.6
1 33 years after fallow.
2 10-12 years after fire.
Biodiversity (RED article 17.3)
In order to protect areas with high biodiversity value, certain areas are excluded from
the production of raw materials for biofuels. The reference date for determining the
status of the land is January 2008.
Categories of land that do not qualify for biofuels production are:
• Primary forest and other wooded land
• Nature protection areas
o Areas designated by law or by the relevant competent authority for nature
protection purposes
o Areas recognized by the Commission for the protection of rare, threatened
or endangered ecosystems or species21
• Natural and non-natural highly biodiverse grasslands.
Exceptions to these rules are possible and include:
• Nature protection areas can be used if evidence can be provided that the
feedstock did not interfere with those nature protection purposes, or
• Non-natural highly biodiverse grasslands can be used if they require raw material
harvesting to maintain the grassland.
21 The Commission may recognise areas for the protection of rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems or species recognised by international agreements or included in lists drawn up by intergovernmental organisations, such as the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). This requires recognition of the Commission before such areas are excluded and differs from the previous type of areas that are excluded as soon as they are designated by (national) law or the relevant competent authorities as nature protection areas.
29 August 2011 | 53
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
The European Commission shall establish the criteria and geographic ranges to
determine which grasslands fall under the definition of highly biodiverse grasslands.
The criteria and geographic ranges are not yet published. This will be developed by a
Committee on the Sustainability of Biofuels and Bioliquids (so-called Comitology
procedure).
Note that the biodiversity criterion will be relevant only for plantations established in
or after January 2008, which represents a minority of the total feedstock used today.
However, in the case of new sugar palm plantations this is relevant.
The biodiversity aspects require further attention and investigation on a project level:
• Sugar palm seems to combine very well with nature protection purposes (e.g.
Masarang Foundation work in Sulawesi and Sumatra). As a perennial crop, it
contributes to biodiversity in case of reforestation in mixed models (note that a
monoculture model, if possible, would provide no significant biodiversity benefits)
and biodiversity conservation of forest when planted in secondary forests.
Interestingly, because of the long phase before the palms become productive, the
area will be relatively undisturbed in the first few years. It is unclear how
reforested low biodiverse grasslands would develop in such a period and how big
these effects are;
• The lay-out of any new plantation will also impact biodiversity (e.g. corridors and
buffer zones around riparian areas provide shelters and enable wildlife to cross the
plantation);
• Attention should be paid to the plantation management model and how trees are
replaced at the end of their life-cycle as this will have effects on biodiversity. For
instance, clear cutting whole areas for replanting will have a significant impact,
especially compared to (manually) replacing the old trees and replacing them.
• Note also that as currently the EC’s definition of highly biodiverse grassland is
unclear, it is uncertain how compliance with this RED criterion can be
demonstrated when grasslands are converted.
For the biodiversity, the carbon stock and the peatland criterion the status of the land
in January 2008 will need to be known and demonstrated.
Carbon stocks (RED article 17.4)
In order to protect carbon stocks, some areas are excluded from the production of raw
materials for biofuels. As for the protection of biodiversity, the reference date for
determining the status of the land is January 2008.
Categories of land that do not qualify for biofuels production are:
• Continuously forested areas, defined as land spanning more than 1 hectare with
trees higher than 5 metres and a canopy cover of more than 30%;
• Forested areas with 10-30% canopy cover, and
• Wetlands
54 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Exceptions to these rules are possible and include:
• Production of biofuel feedstock is permitted if the status of the land has not
changed compared to January 2008 (e.g. it is still a wetland);
• Cultivation of feedstock in forested areas with 10-30% canopy cover can be
allowed if evidence can be provided that the land use still meets the appropriate
GHG threshold with the carbon stock loss taken into account
Note that all GHG effects of any land use change must be included in the GHG
calculation. Land use change occurs, for example, when forest land is converted to
crop land. Changing from one crop to another is not considered a land use change.
As for the biodiversity criterion, the carbon criterion will be relevant only for
plantations established in or after January 2008, which represents a minority of the
total feedstock used today. Nevertheless, in every case the status of the land in
January 2008 will need to be known.
In the case of sugar palm establishment on grassland in a (mixed) reforestation
model, this requirement is not likely to lead to non-compliance of sugar palm ethanol
with the RED.
Peatland protection (RED article 17.5)
In order to protect peatlands, biofuels should not be made from raw materials
obtained from land that was peatland in January 2008.
Categories of land that do not qualify for biofuels production are:
• Peatland
Exceptions to these rules are possible and include:
• Production of biofuel feedstock is allowed when evidence is provided that the
cultivation and harvesting of that feedstock does not involve drainage of
previously undrained soil
This requirement should be considered during selection of the location of new sugar
palm plantings.
5.3 Other sustainability aspects
In addition, to the mandatory sustainability requirements for biofuels in the RED, the
sections below discuss other sustainability aspects.
Soil, water and air
Sugar palm scores well on environmental benefits, under the condition that the
planting density is not too high, especially in mixed stands:
29 August 2011 | 55
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
• Sugar palms contributes to soil stabilization since the palm roots may penetrate
the soil to a depth of 3-6 m and can spread 10 m wide. In practice they are often
planted on steep slopes, which makes it easier to tap them, thereby preventing
soil erosion and using otherwise ‘unused’ land;
• Sugar palm is able to grow on different types of soils and increases soil fertility
and water conservation;
• Sugar palms need little maintenance or fertiliser and usually does not suffer from
any serious pests or disease. This also minimised impacts on soil and water as
minimal amounts of agrochemicals are applied.
Note that in a monoculture model these benefits might not occur or might even lead
to negative environmental effects.
Social aspects
Sustainability related to social aspects often have to do with employment
opportunities that are provided by new biofuel feedstock projects (strongly related to
degree of mechanisation), the quality of those employment opportunities, labour
conditions, effects on local communities and where profits are channelled to.
As sugar palm can provide different products, it offers diversification of income for
local people. The mixed type of systems, in which sugar palm grows best, are also the
types of systems that provide benefits to local populations (particularly ‘risk
mitigation’).
Enabling conditions that would enhance smallholder livelihood and welfare through
Aren activities as a RED or REDD project should include: integrated planning and
project design; establishing clear, stable and enforceable rules of access to land and
trees; managing high transaction costs; and ensuring dynamic flexibility for co-
generating other environmental services.
5.4 Integration
As sugar palms grow best in mixed stands, integration with other crops in an agro-
forestry model provide additional opportunities to use the land most efficiently. An
important consideration in selecting other crops for integration is the shade created by
full-grown sugar palms. Care should be taken when planting it as an agro-forestry
species: light demanding crops such as coffee and pineapple hardly yield under the
canopy of sugar palms. Also the density of planting should allow planting of other
crops without competing for sunlight.
Further research is recommended on what species are most suitable from an
agronomic perspective to integrate with sugar palm. Also the availability of local or
access to export markets will determine the choice of crops. In the locations visited,
sugar palm is combined with cloves, durian (fruit), trees for timber and cocoa.
56 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
6 Bioenergy potential of sugar palm and recommendations
6.1 Conclusions
Sugar palm has the opportunity to provide a source of sustainable and profitable bio
ethanol. Chapter 4 showed the economic feasibility of large-scale sugar palm, whereby
the mixed model under conservative assumptions shows an interesting business
case22. An aspect to consider is the relatively long payback period as for new plantings
it will take 5 to 10 years before any flowering occurs and juice can be tapped. An early
positive cash-flow may be obtained from other crops in the agro-forestry system, but
this will only be realistic if markets can be found for these products (some of which
might be quite perishable and need proper (cold) storage facilities). The main
uncertain parameters with the greatest implications for the business case are the
density of productive sugar palms and their yields.
The variation in existing production is related to heterogeneous smallholder
management systems, tapping skills, local conditions, and, more importantly, the lack
of improved quality seeds / seedlings that have been selected for high and uniform
juice / juice production. There has been limited research to identify ‘best practices’ for
sugar palm production on large-scale. Limited domestification and selection, suggests
potential for improvement in the amount of productive trees and their yields. With
improved selection of genetic material and best practices identified/available sugar
palm ethanol becomes even more attractive.
Sugar palm does not need to be large-scale to be embraced as a source of biofuel
because of its sustainability performance and its positive contribution to smallholders.
Tapping sugar palm already occurs with wild sugar palms and domesticated sugar
palms. However, a certain scale will be needed in order for a conventional ethanol
plant to be economically feasible and in order to be able to produce sufficient
quantities for international markets. The challenge will lie in scaling up from small
scale (or Greenfield) to sufficiently large scale. Creating a suitable large-scale sugar
palm plantation might be done via two possible routes; either connecting a large
collection of smallholders (e.g. Masarang Foundation’s cooperative) or via
reforestation models, whereby degraded and unused lands are reforested in mixed
models, allowing more control over spacing and lay-out.
New large-scale sugar palm plantations require a different approach than that for
conventional biofuel crops cultivated in monoculture plantations (e.g. oil palm),
including a different way of establishment to ensure a practical design of the
22 In the Economic Analysis we have also included an intensive monoculture model to explore the theoretical economic maximum when solely focusing on sugar palm. In practice, we do not expect this model feasible, as sugar palms in monoculture are unlikely to lead to sustained yields. In addition, such intensive spacing will most likely lead to competition for water, sunlight and nutrients between different sugar palms.
29 August 2011 | 57
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
plantation. For example, (indigenous) tapping techniques play a very important role,
sugar palm requires mixed stands and will perform poorly in monoculture (if at all),
cultivation is very labour intensive and requires local smallholder involvement.
Reforestation on idle land / grasslands is preferred to optimize sustainability benefits.
Because of the high labour requirements also the organisation of smallholders or
labourers requires attention.
From an investor’s point of view sugar palm is an interesting crop, worth to be
investigated further, because of its high yields, environmental characteristics and its
sustainability benefits. However, successfully establishing new agro-forestry
production systems and realizing high yields - especially outside the area where sugar
palm naturally occurs and the local population has experience with growing and
tapping palm trees - will be challenging. In addition, the projections of empirical data
from small plantings to large-scale in mixed forest conditions still need to be proven in
practice. Further research is also needed to determine whether propagation by seed
from what seems to be a wild plant will result in a wide range of yields, as well as
plants that are susceptible to disease/pests and hence reduce considerably the
achievable yields.
The next step in development of large-scale sugar palm cultivation, initially, should be
limited to pilots in areas of interested regencies (districts) and provinces. This way, a
rush on a relatively new crop is prevented, while experience can be gained towards
commercial scale cultivation, ensuring proper understanding and management.
Opportunities
• High yielding perennial crop, which is relatively adaptable to most soil types
• Traditional production of sugar palm has not yet benefited from technology
innovation. The dissemination of technology will impact the productivity and
incomes of farmers. The adoption of the technology will help diversify farmers
business and employment opportunities
• Adoption of technology provides opportunity for agribusiness and research.
• Good possibilities for environmental and social benefits
Challenges
• Long juvenile phase, means a longer pay back period
• Knowledge distribution to local farmers and limited human resources with required
skills to cultivate and create added value.
• Difficulty to get superior quality seed/seedling
• Currently there is a minimum use of technology, production management and
processing
• Labour intense production system provides jobs, but might restrict larger scale
cultivation
• No experience yet with large-scale ethanol production from sugar palm
58 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
6.2 Recommendations and policy implications
• Select and propagate the most productive varieties and early-flowering palm
trees. Sugar palm, although planted and used for many centuries, is a relatively
new agro-forestry crop on which limited agronomic research has been done. From
such research great steps forward are to be expected to increase yields. However,
usually it takes many years before agronomic research findings find their way into
practical farming systems
• Identify and revitalize indigenous knowledge on palm cultivation and tapping of
juice
• Integrated pilot projects with current technology applications and agribusiness
orientation are required
• Opportunities to implement pilot projects should be prioritized to regency and
provincial governments that demonstrate interest and commitment. Support
should include financing, management and monitoring.
29 August 2011 | 59
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Reference sources
Ecofys (2007) Commissie Blok: sourcing palm oil from sustainable sources.
van den Wall Bake, Cane as key in the Brazilian ethanol industry, 2006
Dalibard , C. 1995. Overall view on the tradition of tapping palm trees and prospects
for animal production. International Relations Service, Ministry of Agriculture, Paris,
France
De Wit, M., M. Junginger, S. Lensink, M. Londo, A. Faaij, Competition between
biofuels: Modeling technological learning and cost reductions over time, Biomass and
Bioenergy, 34(2), 2009, p. 203-217
Fairhurst, T. and McLaughlin, D. (2009) Sustainable Oil Palm Development on
Degraded Land in Kalimantan, WWF.
FAO (2009), FAOSTAT on http://faostat.fao.org, visited October 2009.
Garrity, D.P., Soekardi, M., Noordwijk, M. van, Cruz, R. de la, Pathak, P.S., Gunasena,
H.P.M., So, N. van, Huijun, G. and Majid, N.M. (1997) ‘The Imperata grasslands of
tropical Asia: area, distribution, and typology’, Agroforestry Systems 36: pp. 3 – 29.
Hamilton L S and Murphy D H 1988 Use and Management of Nipa Palm (Nypa
fruticans, Arecaceae): a Review - Economic Botany. 42(2): 206-213.
IEA, Technology Roadmap - Biofuels for Transport, 2011
Mogea J, Seibert B. and Smits W. 1991 Multipurpose palms: the sugar palm.
Agroforestry Systems 13: 111-129.
Reinhardt, G., Rettenmaier, N., Gärtner, S., IFEU, Pastowski, A. and Wuppertal
Institut für Klima, Umelt, Energie (2007) Rain Forest for Biodiesel?, WWF Germany.
Schick, R., Energetische Probleme bei der Palmsaftverarbeitung, TU Berlin, 2008
(Confidential)
Tapergie, Personnal communications with Tomás Fiege Vos de Wael, 2011
UNU (1995) In Place of the Forest: Environmental and Socio-economic Transformation
in Borneo and the Eastern Malay Peninsula, United Nations University, retrieved from
www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/80893e/80893E0f.htm, visited July 2009.
60 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Van Dam J.E.G., Validation Arenga Palm sugar production. WUR-Agrotechnology and
Food Sciences Group, September 2007 (Confidential!)
Widodo T.W., Elita R., and A. Asari (2009) Sugar Palm (Arenga pinnata Merr)
Plantation for Bio ethanol Production, Sustainable Development and Environmental
Conservation, Presentation Paper for “ Research Workshop on Sustainable Biofuel
Development in Indonesia, 4–5 February 2009, Indonesian Center for Agricultural
Engineering Research and Development (ICAERD)
Winrock and World Agroforestry Centre (2008) Sugarpalm (Arenga pinnata)
Agroforests as Source of Livelyhoods for Farmers and Orangutan in Batan Toru Forest
Block, North Sumatra, Indonesia,
29 August 2011 | 61
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Appendix A Different types of palm
There are different palm types in the world that are being tapped to collect a juice
very rich in sugar (10 to 20%) or provide starch. The table below presents an
overview of palm species to give an impression of the wide range of characteristics of
different palm types that could be a source of biofuels.
62 | Sugar palm ethanol
A SUSTAI N ABLE ENERGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Palm Type Short description and particularities
Geographic presence Yields (from literature)
Uses Remarks and reflections on large scale application for biofuels
Sugar palm (Arenga pinnata). Also known as Aren
palm23,24,25
Male inflorescences can be tapped for sugar juice. Can reach heights of up to 24 meters with stems covered in strong fibres and with the bases of the dead leaf stalks covering it as well. Flowering can begin after 5-10 years, with productive periods of 3 – 15 years.
In the humid tropics of Southeast Asia (0 – 1400 m), wide variety of soils, including steep slopes
Sugar yields are high, claims from 6,000 – 12,000 litres / ha and up
Sugar, sweet juice, alcoholic beverages, fruits, fibres, starch, timber
Requires mixed forests to thrive, labour intensive and different management models required compared to ‘conventional’ biofuel crops (e.g. sugarcane and oil palm)
Nipah or nypa palm (Nypa fruticans). Also known as the Attap Palm and Mangrove
Palm23,26,27
The Nypa palm grows in mangroves and brackish coastal waters (only palm found in mangroves). Grows in soft mud and slow moving tidal and river waters that bring in nutrients. Can survive occasional short term drying of its environment. Nypa palms can be tapped after they are 5 years old and continue to produce until they are about 50
Southern Asia to northern Australia (Papua New Guinea, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, India and has invaded the Niger Delta in Nigeria)
Nypa palm has been reported to have ethanol yields ranging from 6480 to 20,000 litres/ha
Sugar, sweet edible juice, alcoholic beverage, rope-making and thatching (hence the palm's local name 'Attap Chee', from its use in roofing the traditional 'Attap house'), vinegar (cuka nipah), fruit (desserts) and animal feed
Limitation: Natural mangroves are an ecosystem which is already under threat from development. In Papua New Guinea successful propagation trials of nipah palm along the edge of irrigation channels.
Palmyra palm (Borassus flabellifer). Also known as lontar
palm28
Can live 100 years or more and reaches heights of 30 m. Young palmyra palms grow slowly in the beginning but then grow faster.
Tropical regions, southeast Asia and tropical Africa
Tapping; the juice flows for 5-6 months. Each male flower produces 4-5 litres per day; the female flowers yield 50% more. Rubbing the inside of the collecting receptacle with lime paste prevents fermentation.
Sugar juice, sugar, palm candy, alcoholic beverage, the juice is also used as a laxative, medicinal values have been ascribed to other parts of the plant, edible fruits, young plants are cooked as vegetables or roasted and pounded into a meal, construction, fibres (including paper, baskets,
Low germination is handicap to planning and cultivation. Another agronomic drawback is that seedlings are very sensitive; once sprouted they cannot be transplanted or planted-out.
23 Martin, F (1999) MULTIPURPOSE PALMS YOU CAN GROW - The World’s Best, available at www.agroforestry.net/pubs/multipalm.html 24 Elbersen, W and Oyen, L (2009) Nieuwe Grondstoffen voor Biobrandstoffen. Alternatieve 1e Generatie Energiegewassen, SenterNovem. 25 Mogea J, Seibert B. and Smits W. (1991) Multipurpose palms: the sugar palm, Agroforestry Systems 13: 111-129 26 Joshi, L, U Kanagaratnam, and D Adhuri (2006) Nypa fruticans: useful but forgotten mangrove reforestation programs? ICRAF (World Agroforestry Centre), Bogor, Indonesia.2 p. 27 Hamilton L S and Murphy D H (1988) Use and Management of Nipa Palm (Nypa fruticans, Arecaceae): a Review, Economic Botany 42(2): 206-213 28 Morton J.F., (1988) Notes on Distribution, Propagation, and Products of Borassus Palms, Economic Botany 42(3), pp 420 - 441
29 August 2011 | 63
A SUSTAI N ABLE ENERGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Palm Type Short description and particularities
Geographic presence Yields (from literature)
Uses Remarks and reflections on large scale application for biofuels
hats, umbrellas). Sago palm (Metroxylon
sagu)23,29
Sago is the extracted starch of palms, often used as a staple food. Other palm species also provide source of starch (e.g. Arenga, Raphia and Metroxylon). The sago palm is the principal species of palm used for this purpose The tall heavy trunks accumulate starch and just before flowering is initiated, the entire trunk is cut to the ground, and prepared for the extraction of sago. The process is not necessarily destructive, for young basal sprouts immediately begin to replace the old trunk.
In tropical lowland forest and freshwater swamps across Southeast Asia, New Guinea and Micronesia. Tolerates wide variety of soils. In general, natural stands occur under either permanent flooding or flooding during part of the year and the remainder of the year with a sufficient water supply. Often the sago palm stands border on sometimes pure stands of nipah palm
Harvested between the age of 7 to 15 years, just before flowering, when the stems are full of starch stored for use in reproduction.
Major traditional staple food, construction and roofing materials (leaves), fibres (rope). The pith of the palm is also roasted, and the spent pith, after removal of the starch, is used as animal feed. Sago starch is not limited to the food industry, but can also be utilized as a key material input in paper, plywood, and textile industries. It can be fermented to produce biodegradable plastic and ethanol
There are about 2,250,000 hectares of wild stands (Papua New Guinea and Indonesia), 215,000 hectares of semi-domesticated stands (Papua New Guinea, Indonesia and Malaysia). About 10,000 hectares of semi-domesticated stands in the Philippines, Thailand and other countries.
Raphia Palms23
The trunks tend to be short, and the leaves upright, making them the longest leaves of the plant kingdom.
Principally in West Africa, Raphia palms have been introduced to the Americas and one species has become wild in South America. Principally adapted to swampy conditions but also making dense stands on dry land
Unknown Starch, fibres, tapped for sugar juice, alcoholic beverage, fruit (which can also be pressed for oil)
N/A
29 Flach, M (1997) Sago palm - Metroxylon sagu Rottb, Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops 13, Institute of Plant Genetics and
Crop Plant Research, Gatersleben/International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.
64 | Sugar palm ethanol
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Appendix B Description of data collection locations
This appendix provides a description of the locations were empirical data was collected
for this study. The cultivation of Aren at both Batang Toru and Tomohon is primarily
based on natural regeneration and extractive management. Efforts to domesticate
Aren remain rare (as in most parts of Indonesia).
Batang Toru
North Sumatra - Indonesia
Tomohon
North Sulawesi - Indonesia
Batang Toru
North Sumatra - Indonesia
Tomohon
North Sulawesi - Indonesia
B 1 Batang Toru
Batang Toru is located in North Sumatra, Indonesia and covers approximately 105,000
ha in three districts - North Tapanuli, South Tapanuli and Central Tapanuli. Elevation
varies from 200-1500 masl, with annual precipitation of 1500-3000 mm. The
dominant vegetation is primary rainforest.
29 August 2011 | 65
A S USTAI N ABLE ENE RGY SUPPLY FOR EVERYONE
Figure B - 1 Location of the study area in Batang Toru Forest Block, North Sumatra Province,
Indonesia
B 2 Tomohon
Tomohon is located in North Sulawesi, Indonesia and consists of around 14,000 ha of
land, consisting of 5 sub districts; with elevation ranges of 500-1500 masl and annual
precipitation of 1500-2000 mm.
Figure B - 2 Location of the study area in Tomohon, North Sulawesi Province, Indonesia