I. The first progress report was received on 14 April 2006 with the following details:

Activities Carried Out:
1. Constructing and putting into use biogas facilities as follows:
- Three pits of 8 cu.m
- one pit of 30 cu.m

Immediate Results and indicators:

1. Acceptance of neighbouring community members who once complained about the waste
2. The first trial for household cooking confirming continuous supply of gas for 4 hours
3. Evinced increased harmonious atmosphere among community members ( due to pollution from hogs being substantially reduced )

Project Communication: Launching communication amongst community leaders, members of provincial administrative organization, tambol administrative organization and members of other community network visiting the project

II. The project was visited on October 6 , 2006. The findings and observation are as follows:

A premises of one project member in Baan (village) Wanglao-Huafai, in Erawan District was visited. The location was the construction site for a biogas pit of 30 cu -metres , which 50 or so hogs of young and old supplied their waste in to. The construction was completed a few months back and the pit had been supplying ample amount of biogas to the kitchen , entirely avoiding the use of commercial canned gas and reducing considerable amount of fire-woods. It was felt that the member was satisfied with the facility. None of major technical and institutional problems were voiced out , except a plan to supply surplus gas to the village temple kitchen situated about 200 metres away.

Another project member?s farm in Baan Pha Noi, Wangsaphung District was later visited. The location was to be the construction site of the 100-cu m. pit proposed in the project. There were about 200 hogs in one big pens . Construction was at a beginning stage where land excavation and construction materials were in place. The project led the visiting team to understand that the construction would be completed at the end of 2006.

As the project location is situated in the Loei River Basin - an integrated ecosystems of the Lower Mekhong River Basin, such sustained activities would also generate environment benefits to this international water by reducing excessive runoff of nutrient from agricultural sector, on top of their contribution to climate change focal area.

A brief discussion with project leaders, increased technical capacity of target population had been witnessed. At the beginning of the project, target population possessed very limited skill in construction of biogas facilities. However, after capacity-building activities of the project through training and study tours conducted earlier , all facilities were built by hands of project members , instead of resorting to construction specialists who offered their services with Baht: 1.000/cu.m.

It is interesting to see how the project would fare during the remaining period and beyond.

III. During 18-20 October 2006, leaders of the project participated in the mid-course evaluation. The observation is as follows:

Baan(village) Busai, one of the target village of an OP2, year-4 project, was a venue of the workshop where 45 attendants from 13 projects of OP3 year 2, NSC members, NC and PA gathered together to meet. Literally, these 13 projects were dubbed among SGP Thailand as GEF SGP Class 7/1 with project number starting from THA-05-01 to THA-05-13.

Workshop AT-A-Glance

As the venue was situated in target area of a back project THA-02-18 and adjacent to that of THA-04-22 which had been launching activities to reverse land degradation in watershed area of Lower Mekhong ecosystems, participants had learnt and shared experience with leaders of the two projects during field visits and briefing session. That was the first day.

First session of the following morning saw the NC occupying the floor confirming strategy of GEF SGP: Environment Protection , Community Empowerment, and Poverty Reduction. Then the floor was handed over to participants to conduct the session on sharing and discussion. Each project was given 30 minutes to relate background, activities undertaken and immediate results, problems/issues as well as questions and answers. The session was able to effectively cover 10 projects. That was the second day.

The morning of third day was given to the three remaining projects to cover their stories, to the NSC for observation and suggestion , to the NC to remind the grantees of what to do next according to the MOAs and finally to the grantees to collectively plan activities to strengthen this fledgling SGP environmental network and friendship. At the end, the chairperson , vice-chairperson and coordinator of Thailand GEF SGP class 7/1 emerged to take up coordinating role for all 13 projects. That was the final day of the workshop.

Each grantee was capable of articulating details of undertaken activities and their immediate results to the audiences. Project results were rated as promising. Some even gained recognition and financial supports by other stakeholders. Community members of two projects were able to increase their technical capacity in biogas technology. At an average, three projects were ahead of their proposed timeline , three a little bit behind, and seven just on time.

Nine projects presented through Power Points and audio-visual equipment, even though they are of Community ?Based Organization and not a national, tighter organization. There were four projects who accomplished their jobs by sets of photos and detailed documents.

IV. The second progress report was received on 15 November 2006 , with following details;

Activities Carried Out:

1.Construction of one 100-cu.m and one 30-cu.m biogas pit
2. The completed pits being put into use satisfactorily
3. The project partnering with the White Technology Co., Ltd to use the animal manure left over by biogas process for the production of organic compost to sell to members

Results and indicators:

1.The construction being completed by 80 %
2. With additional financial support from the Erawan Tambol Administrative Organization, one completed pit being supplied cooking gas to the village temple premised situate 200 metres away.
3. More community members being interested to use the produced gas by suggesting canning process

Project Communication:

Launching communication amongst community leaders, members of provincial administrative organization, tambol administrative organization and members of other community network visiting the project.

V. The completion report was received on 26 July 2007, with details as follows:

Date of Participatory Evaluation 5 June 2007
Number of Beneficiary/ Participating personnel:
Woman: 67
Man: 85
Children: 130
Number of person trained/ attending seminars, joining study tours:
Woman: 45
Man: 70
Children: 130

Undertaken activities:
1. Building and putting into use the following biogas facilities:
One 100-cu.m pit
Two 30-cu,m pits
Two 16-cu.m pits
One 8-cu.m pit
2. Conducting technical capacity building of target communities and other communities requiring technical support on construction of biogas pits.

Descriptive results and indicators:
1. Ten households substantially avoiding the use of canned gas from markets and fire-woods
2. The hog raising facilities completely avoiding the use of electricity from grid
3. Biogas technology becoming more acceptable in communities
4. Approximately three tons/day of fertilizer being produced , substantially
reducing the use of chemical fertilizer and production cost
5. Evinced cleaner local environment
6. By product as an organic raw material to process into compost of four tons per year

Additional information from the project on technical aspects of biogas facilities:

Biogas as Renewable Energy:

With minor modification made on existing gas burner appliances and engine, biogas can be burnt as renewable energy, directly or in combination with other gas such as LPG and liquid fuels such as gasoline and diesel. The study of the Ministry of Science and Technology on 65 % -methane biogas can be summarized as follows:
1. One-burner gas stove with its usual gas nozzle of 0.6 -mm. diameter may be used efficiently with biogas when the nozzle is enlarged to 1.2 or 1.6 mm., with gas pressure of 30-80 millbar (30-100 cm of water). The gas flow rate is approximately 400 litres/hr.
2. Gas lamp with its gas nozzle of 1.2 mm. requires biogas pressure at 30-80 millibar with gas consumption of 120-150 litres/hr, depending upon required illumination as pressure.
3. Piggy heater with its gas nozzle of 0.3 mm. diameter may be use efficiently with biogas when the nozzle is enlarged to 0.8 mm, requiring gas pressure at 30-80 millibar , with gas consumption of approximately 200 litres/hr.
4. Compression Ignition engine(Diesel ) , with modification made to system of fuel supply to combustion chamber, may be used efficiently with mixed biogas and diesel fuel, resulting in 50-70 % diesel fuel saving. In addition, such a mixed burning appeared to result in 10 % more energy output than burning diesel fuel alone.
5. Spark Ignition engine (Gasoline ) may be used with biogas alone but the output energy would be reduced by 30-70 %.


Additional information from the project on technical aspects of biogas facilities:

Biogas as Renewable Energy:

With minor modification made on existing gas burner appliances and engine, biogas can be burnt as renewable energy, directly or in combination with other gas such as LPG and liquid fuels such as gasoline and diesel. The study of the Ministry of Science and Technology on 65 % -methane biogas can be summarized as follows:
1. One-burner gas stove with its usual gas nozzle of 0.6 -mm. diameter may be used efficiently with biogas when the nozzle is enlarged to 1.2 or 1.6 mm., with gas pressure of 30-80 millbar (30-100 cm of water). The gas flow rate is approximately 400 litres/hr.
2. Gas lamp with its gas nozzle of 1.2 mm. requires biogas pressure at 30-80 millibar with gas consumption of 120-150 litres/hr, depending upon required illumination as pressure.
3. Piggy heater with its gas nozzle of 0.3 mm. diameter may be use efficiently with biogas when the nozzle is enlarged to 0.8 mm, requiring gas pressure at 30-80 millibar , with gas consumption of approximately 200 litres/hr.
4. Compression Ignition engine (Diesel) , with modification made to system of fuel supply to combustion chamber, may be used efficiently with mixed biogas and diesel fuel, resulting in 50-70 % diesel fuel saving. In addition, such a mixed burning appeared to result in 10 % more energy output than burning diesel fuel alone.
5. Spark Ignition engine(Gasoline) may be used with biogas alone but the output energy would be reduced by 30-70 %.

Some quantitative indicators:

1. Small size biogas pit of six cu.m , is capable of producing six kg. of gas, for one family cooking for one whole day , equivalent to avoided expense at nine Baht/day, or Baht: 270/month.
2. The corresponding figures for the 30 -cu.m pit are 120 kg., 20 families, Baht:180/day, Baht: 4,400/month.
3. The big size pit of 100 cu.m, is capable of producing 240 kg.of gas to be used with water pump, refrigerator, interior illumination and heater, equivalent to the avoided expense of Baht: 360/day or Baht: 10,800/day.

In conclusion, the project is able to reduced the expense by 50 % as proposed , thus certain amount of Carbon dioxide.

VI. Note: on a participatory evaluation upon completion with contemporary projects:

GEF Small Grants Programme: Evaluation upon Completion Workshop At-a-Glance

Country: Thailand
Project Number: THA-05-01 to THA-05-13
Date of Workshop: November 7- 9, 2007
Location: Boy Scout Camp, Khao Khitchakut District, Chanthaburi

1. BACKGROUND OF THE WORKSHOP

Specified in the Country Programme Strategy and long encouraged by Thailand GEF SGP, the workshop aimed to strengthen the participatory evaluation process, build capacity of target communities, and contribute to the formation of a strong network of GEF SGP grantees. The 3-day workshop provided an opportunity for these 13 projects?all nearing completion after 24 months?to present overall results, problems/issues and their solutions, to share lessons learned and to forge partnerships for sustainability.

2. WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS

The Chanthaburi Boy Scout Camp in Khao Khitchakut District, the venue for the workshop, hosted 45 participants from 11 projects of OP3 Year One, a GEF SGP team (composed of a NSC member, the National Coordinator, and Programme Assistants), and a few other major stakeholders. The 11 projects were dubbed ?GEF SGP Class 7/1,? and assigned a project number between THA-05-01 and THA-05-13. In addition, four members from THA-06-02?a project of OP3 Year Two or ?GEF SGP Class 8/1??were present to share experiences. The participants showed great geographical diversity; they had traveled from Nan, Tak, Loei, Mahasarakharm, Kanchanaburi, Ayudhaya, Phayao, Nakhornsithammarat, Songkhla and Pattani Provinces.

3. Workshop At-a-Glance

Beginning in the afternoon of November 7th, several project members began preparing dissemination materials. Photos depicting project activities were posted in the meeting hall; brochures, completion reports, instruction manuals and project products were also available.

To allow all parties to arrive and set up, the exhibition did not commence until the morning of the second day. November 8th began with the official opening ceremony, in which the chief of district officers of Khao Khitchakut District presided and gave an encouraging keynote speech. Following the chief, the GEF SGP National Coordinator delivered his welcoming remarks by reviewing the history of GEF SGP and how he felt about this get-together. After the official opening, the chief spent almost half-an-hour visiting and conversing with project members at their respective dissemination stations in the hall. Also in attendance were other district officers, including staff from local schools and the Provincial Corrective Department, which was a major stakeholder of the host grantee (THA-05-13). The chief, when requested to give his reaction regarding what he had seen and heard, offered relevant and enthusiastic feedback.

The sharing of project summaries and results then began. Throughout the day, ten projects were presented, eight of which used PowerPoint and audio-visual equipment, (an impressive feat considering the limited resources and IT skills of most community-based organizations). Three projects relied upon sets of photos and detailed documents. The remaining session of the day was spent on a site visit to the host grantee?s project.

On the third day, the National Coordinator and his team took the floor to explain the future plan of GEF Phase 4, during which the grantees would work to upscale their current activities, and build and solidify their network. Advice on using interactive online mapping to strengthen the network was also given.

It will be interesting to follow how this group would proceed with their future plans. It is notable that during the workshop, the term global warming was often heard, even from two projects whose activities did not directly address this issue.