Success message
error message
warn message
MTE: Promoting Production and Utilization of Biogas (Bio Methane) from Agro Waste in South East Botswana
Commissioning Unit: Botswana
Evaluation Plan: 2017-2021
Evaluation Type: Project
Completion Date: 12/2019
Unit Responsible for providing Management Response: Botswana
Documents Related to overall Management Response:
 
1. Recommendation:

The following PMU arrangement is proposed;

  • The Project is co-managed by BITRI and DWMPC/MENT;
  • BITRI remains the Implementing Partner and MENT the Executing Entity.
  • The Department of Energy (DoE) plays a supporting role.

UNDP will also play a more supportive role and not assume specific responsibility for any project activities or outcomes.

It is proposed that at least one permanent representative from DWMPC/MENT is seconded to the PMU. This would mean that the PMU consisted on the following organizational representatives;

  • BITRI_1 – Project Coordinator          (Permanent)
  • BITRI_2 – Manager of R&D (Permanent)
  • DWMPC/MENT – Operations Manager (Permanent – part-time[1])
  • UNDP_1 – Project Manager [support role] (Permanent)
  • UNDP_2 – Project Engineer [support role] (Permanent)

UNDP_3 – Project Finance & administration [support role] Permanent

 


[1] Depending on the level of effort required at various stages of the project the DWMPC/MENT representative will either be full-time or part-time but either way on a permanent [on-going] basis.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2022/01/17]

Fully accepted:

The following PMU structure is accepted:

  • The Project is managed by Department of Energy (DOE)
  • DOE becomes the implementing partner and MENT remains the executing entity
  • BITRI plays a supportive role through research and development activities
  • DWMPC plays a supportive role through waste management activities
  • UNDP will also play a more supportive role

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Write letters of commitment agreeing on the new roles and structure by cooperating institutions to MENT, copied to UNDP.
[Added: 2020/09/15]
PMU 2019/12 Completed Letter of commitment from new implementing partner, Department of Energy, written in response to letter from MENT
Draft and sign Project Cooperation Agreement between UNDP and DOE
[Added: 2020/09/15]
PMU 2019/12 Completed Letter from DOE to MENT will suffice as agreement.
Revise Project Cooperation Agreement between UNDP and BITRI
[Added: 2020/09/15]
PMU 2019/12 Completed Revise Project Cooperation Agreement between UNDP and BITRI
2. Recommendation:

With regard to specific leadership roles within the PMU, it is proposed that BITRI retain the overall project coordinator role but that the participating DWMPC/MENT staff are accorded clear management responsibilities not only for their area of responsibility but for the overall strategic direction of the project.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2020/09/15]

Rejected:

The recommendation is rejected based on the amended management structure in the management response for recommendation 1.

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation:

Each active output and activity must be assigned to a named staff-member from either BITRI or DWMPC/MENT. In terms of project accountability, staff responsibilities should be specifically allocated, and progress should be monitored.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Fully Accepted

Each institution should appoint staff, as per actions under recommendation 1, accountable for all outputs and activities under that institution. Project Coordinator appointed by DOE will oversee the staff from the different institutions.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
• Assignment of specific individuals to each activity in the AWP.
[Added: 2020/01/12]
PMU 2020/01 Completed
Assignment of specific individuals to each activity in the AWP.
[Added: 2020/09/15]
PMU and Project Coordinator 2019/12 Completed Institution representatives have been assigned specific activities in the AWP and continue to report progress at Project Meetings as well as PSC meetings.
4. Recommendation:

A Gantt chart needs to be developed which will include the full range of activities and outputs under each component, include anticipated time of conclusion as well as progress over time.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2020/09/15]

Fully Accepted:

A Gantt Chart including the full range of activities and outputs under each component will be developed for the remaining period of the project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Develop Gantt Chart with full range of project activities for the remaining duration of the project
[Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2020/09/15]
PMU 2020/01 Completed Gantt chart in the form of AWP has been developed, and progress submitted monthly History
5. Recommendation:

Establish more meaningful partnerships with entities that have significant experience in biogas; this would include SNV, GIZ and Nepal’s AEPC.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Fully Accept

The project has established partnerships and will continue to explore more partnerships.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Engagement with various organisations with significant experience in the biogas industry
[Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2021/06/01]
PMU 2021/12 Completed • Engagements will continue during the lifecycle of the project. • Relationship established with SNV Zimbabwe, Biogas Solutions in Uganda and Nepal’s AEPC. • Engaged other institutions such as UB and DAR through the stakeholder engagement of the biofuels being led by the DOE History
6. Recommendation:

Target of 1,000 units needs to be adjusted. A realistic target needs to be based on consensus between stakeholders. The MTR would suggest in the region of 200 – 300 units within the remaining project implementation period.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Fully Accept

Since Project inception, it has been challenging to identify individuals/institutions able and willing to finance small scale digesters. This is largely due to high cost of the digesters. A study to identify 1000 willing participants of the biogas project at small scale level identified 215 farmers willing to part-finance small scale digesters at USD 500. Based on the findings of the study, the Department of Energy (DOE) fully agrees with the recommendations to adjust the target of small-scale digesters from 1000 units to between 200 – 300 units.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
• Develop implementation plan for 200- 300 more affordable small-scale digesters for remaining project period.
[Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2022/01/17]
PMU 2021/12 Completed The project managed to construction of 170 small scale digesters (previously 32 had been constructed): 30% are 6cbm, 70% are 10cbm History
7. Recommendation:

Small-scale units will be sold with a declining amount of financial support

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Partially Accepted

Due to the limited timeframe of the project, it is proposed that instead of declining financial support, participants be provided with a fixed part-financing amount from the project funds for the more affordable and sustainable design to be developed. The current fixed dome brick and motor design currently being piloted costs at least USD 2,000 per unit. The subsidies should not base on the USD2,000 design but as a hedge between the amount farmers are willing to pay USD500 and cost of more affordable design. 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Inclusion in Annual Work Plan (AWP) budget allocation for the digesters as per the recommendation
[Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2020/09/15]
PMU 2020/12 Completed New budget line included at 5% of entire project funds. History
8. Recommendation:

The Project is advised to consider a number of possible sales scenarios. The scenarios differ in the rate of sales including a ‘slow, moderate and high’ sales scenario. This will assist in determining a reasonable sales figure within the remaining project timeframe.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Partially Accept

Considering the remaining project timeframe consideration of different sales scenarios will be a challenge and therefore participants should rather be provided with a fixed part-financing amount from the project funds for the more affordable and sustainable design to be developed. 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Develop implementation plan for 200- 300 more affordable small-scale digesters for remaining project period.
[Added: 2020/09/15]
PMU 2020/03 Completed Done, and is being used to roll out the 200 digesters.
9. Recommendation:

Working with Banks; the current approach to familiarizing banks such as the Botswana Development Corporation (BDC) and the National Development Bank (NDB) with the biogas technology is too passive. A more interactive ‘partnership’ approach has been recommended.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Fully Accept

The Project has engaged local banks to introduce them to biogas technology. Given the biogas technology immaturity in the country and low understanding of the technology by local banks and how to finance it, more engagement with targeted banks will be undertaken and banks capacitated more.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Encourage banks involvement in the project to give cheaper loans for biogas projects
[Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2022/01/17]
PMU 2021/12 Completed The NDB has agreed to fund, on a trial basis, small scale digesters in the South-Eastern part of Botswana (same districts the project has been piloted in). Discussions are on-going between NDB and DOE on the basis of the MOU existing between the 2 institutions. Once there is an agreement between NDB (as the financier) and DOE (as the technical assurer) funding will commence through an existing product, Ntlhatlosa-Ko-Morakeng, which currently funds agricultural projects. History
10. Recommendation:

Evaluation Recommendation 10:

Improved market awareness and mobilization; a range of activities have been proposed including establishing baselines to measure impacts, the use of energy diaries, demonstration days, placement of signage, demonstrate range of digesters. Etc. which will strengthen levels of market awareness and community mobilization.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Partially Accept

Given that the biogas technology uptake is low in Botswana, the Project through all its stakeholders needs to be more engaged in raising education and awareness on the technology. Different methods of awareness will be employed through the different stakeholders based on what is available to them.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Development of education and awareness plan to engage stakeholders, possible beneficiaries and the public on understanding the technology.
[Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2022/01/17]
PMU 2021/12 Completed the project developed educational videos (using 5 languages commonly spoken in the country) on the biogas technology. These have been uploaded in youtube. Posters and Pamphlets were also developed. History
11. Recommendation:

Evaluation Recommendation 11:

Research and demonstration; the MTR has made a number of recommended on the range of alternative construction materials, digester designs, co-payment options, knowledge platforms, market intelligence, developing business plan packages, which are required to enhance the contribution of R&D to the project’s success.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Management Response: Fully Accept

In order to fully address the MTR recommendation 11, BITRI will conduct a robust research on the different designs of biomass digester plants, the technical and economic aspects of the Biogas technology in Botswana and later conduct a capacity building and awareness on the researched topics.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
• Develop action plan for research and development.
[Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2022/01/17]
PMU 2020/12 Completed • The plan was developed in conjunction with the project partners. A key action from the plan was the conduct of eemote monitoring pilot study was undertaken in 2 biogas digester sites to collect key data such as gas composition and gas flow rate. History
12. Recommendation:

Evaluation Recommendation 12:

The PMU works closely with BMC on advancing the prospects of the entity investing in the proposed biogas digester. Some form of commitment, in writing would be positive in this regard.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Fully Accept

The Project has engaged BMC on the feasibility study produced and presentation made to the BMC executive committee. BMC Board is currently being engaged. The project will continue engaging BMC to promote investing in biogas plant.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
• Engage with BMC to promote investing in biogas technology
[Added: 2021/06/01]
PMU 2020/12 Completed Environmental Management Plan for BMC has been completed.
13. Recommendation:

Evaluation Recommendation 13:

It has been recommended that the financial and technical feasibility study produced for BMC should provide the template for analyzing digester options for both SENN Foods and Kalagadi Breweries Limited (KBL) as well. This is a key outcome for the medium-scale digester component.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Partially Accept

Use of BMC report as template for Senn Foods is possible as they are similar industries, both cattle abattoirs. The Consultant who developed BMC Feasibility Study may be contracted to do the same for Senn Foods.

However, KBL is a different industry with varying substrate. The substrate from KBL is spent grain and yeast which differ from cow dung. Extensive analysis of this substrate would need to be done in order for accurate results to be documented. A pre-feasibility study can be performed to demonstrate the potential for methane from the waste grain and yeast.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
• Engage with KBL/Senn Foods to understand their interest in undertaking a feasibility study (this will include development of ToRs for KBL feasibility study and appointment of a consultant to carry-out the KBL feasibility study)
[Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2022/01/17]
PMU 2021/12 No Longer Applicable [Justification: Due to the advent of Covid19, KBL has lost interest in undertaking implementation of a medium scale biogas digester. Loss of income due to closing of the alcohol industry, travel bans and lockdowns necessitated the brewery to focus only on their core business, production and distribution of alcohol, and not engage in any other subsidiary projects.]
History
14. Recommendation:

Evaluation Recommendation 14:

The MTR recommended that the three EIAs are to be undertaken based on the 3 technical/financial feasibility studies as proposed in the recommendation outlined above (#13)

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Partially Accepted

Considering the remaining project timeframe and budget, the project should propose to the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) that an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) be carried out instead of the EIA. Based on the results of the three (3) feasibility studies the EMP / EIA will be conducted.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Engagement of DEA to propose undertaking of EMP instead of EIA
[Added: 2020/09/15]
PMU 2020/12 Completed DEA has agreed to allow the project to conduct an EMP instead of the EIA.
15. Recommendation:

Evaluation Recommendation 15:

It is important to uncouple the project’s success from the adoption of future policies. 

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12] [Last Updated: 2020/09/15]

Rejected

The project’s success should not be dependent on the development, ratification and adoption of national policy as the timeframes associated with such policy developments are unpredictable while the project timeframes are fixed. But at the same time success is not guuranteed without the relvant strategies and policies.

Key Actions:

16. Recommendation:

Evaluation Recommendation 16:

The MTR recommended that the Public sector takes greater pioneering responsibility in developing medium-scale biogas digesters. Example proposed was school-based amongst others. 

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Rejected

Preliminary studies have indicated that schools do not produce enough waste to warrant establishment of a biogas digester. Use of human waste is still an unacceptable practice.

Key Actions:

17. Recommendation:

Evaluation Recommendation 17:

The MTR recommended that the project work more closely with a private sector organisation such as Kgatleng Beef Producers Association who have expressed an interest in the technology on ‘own-consumption’ power generation options. These private-sector, ‘own-consumption’ options present additional important outcomes for the medium-scale digester component.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/12]

Rejected

The Project has engaged with Kgatleng Beef Producers Association in their interest to undertake a medium scale digester. However, several challenges such as land allocation have been highlighted to them as an issue. The Project remains open to such opportunities however criteria such as availability of land is a critical hindrance.

Key Actions:

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org