TX_1~AT/TX_2~AT International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy | Vol 10 • Issue 6 • 2020370 International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy ISSN: 2146-4553 available at http: www.econjournals.com International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 2020, 10(6), 370-375. Biogas from Cattle Dung as a Source of Sustainable Energy: A Feasibility Study K. Abhaya Kumar1, Prakash Pinto2, Iqbal Thonse Hawaldar3*, B. R. Pradeep Kumar1 1Department of MBA, Mangalore Institute of Technology and Engineering, Moodabidri, Karnataka, India, 2Department of Business Administration, St. Joseph Engineering College, Mangalore, Karnataka, India, 3Department of Accounting and Finance, College of Business Administration, Kingdom University, Bahrain. *Email: thiqbal34@gmail.com Received: 10 June 2020 Accepted: 12 September 2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32479/ijeep.10135 ABSTRACT Many studies have stated that the usage of traditional cooking fuels like firewood, dung, and coal has caused many unfortunate deaths in India. The alternative fuel sources like LPG and electricity are in scarce and. Today, researches in the area of biofuel or bioenergy are of prime interest to many researchers to contribute to sustainable energy sources. Bioenergy from cattle dung is one such area, particularly for a country like India where dairy farms is a major supplier of feedstock. In this study, using logistic regression methodology, we have analysed the socio-economic factors influencing the adoption of biogas digesters among dairy farmers in Karnataka, India. The study revealed that the number of cattle and family size are the key factors for biogas adoption and poor knowledge of the family size and cattle ratio is the key hurdle. Using cross-tabulation and some basic mathematical analysis, we concluded that the optimal number of cattle for one adult in a family is 1. Keywords: Sustainable Energy Source, Biogas, Cattle Dung, Dairy farmers, Socioeconomic Factors, India JEL Classifications: Q4, P28 1. INTRODUCTION The energy crisis and green environment are demanding for a carbon-neutral and efficient source of energy (Mohapatro et al., 2014). Increasing crude prices has resulted in expensive LPG and firewood has become a costlier source of energy owing to increased demand from industries. Biogas is an alternative source of energy for cooking in rural India. Harsdorff (2014) and Hemme et al., (2003) states that India is the largest producer of milk and cattle dung in the world. Biogas is a source of renewable energy generated from the organic wastes of animals. Cattle dung is the major source of animal waste used in rural India to generate biogas. In 1950s country had a large number of cattle, however, the production of milk was not self-sufficient. Oxen and buffaloes were used in the agricultural fields for the farming process, hence a good amount of dung or animal wastes were available. However, increased use of technology in farming has reduced the dependence on animals in the agricultural fields, which has resulted in the reduced yield of the dung. So the generation of biogas in rural India is decreasing. Hence, today biogas from animal waste in rural India is dependent on cattle dung generated at dairy farms. According to Mittal et al. (2018), the availability of feedstock is also a major hurdle for the development of biogas energy among households in India. Some empirical studies on biogas revealed that cattle dung generated at the dairy farm is the best raw material input for the biogas plant. Nandiyanto et al. (2018) suggest, that a combination of dairy farming with a biogas plant is more profitable for rural households. Today the Indian dairy sector stands first in terms of milk production and contributes 20% of the world’s total production (Pant et al., 2019). Farmers in India have witnessed many initiatives from the government to boost the milk production in the country, such as key village scheme (KVS), intensive cattle development project (ICDP) and operation flood (OF) (Pandian This Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Kumar, et al.: Biogas from Cattle Dung as a Source of Sustainable Energy: A Feasibility Study International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy | Vol 10 • Issue 6 • 2020 371 et al., 2015). Dairy enterprise development scheme (DEDS) was launched in the year 2010 to increase self-employment in the field of dairy farming, this may boost the biogas generation among dairy farmers in India. The development in dairy farming may indirectly contribute to increased biogas usage in the country. Smith and Sagar (2014) explored the impact of solid fuel pollution on the health of Indian women and the girl child., According to Gupta and Ravindranath (1997), the low-income families of the urban and rural India are forced to use firewood for cooking, the only feasible substitute is biogas. Policymakers have to come up with suitable strategies to make this biogas transformation possible. Hence, a detailed study on dairy farmers’ perception of biogas and the socio-economic factors deciding biogas is the need of the hour. The aim of this work is twofold; one, to analyze the socio- economic factors contributing to penetration of biogas plant among dairy farmers in Karnataka, India. Two, to find out the optimum number of cattle required to meet the cooking energy requirements for different family sizes because Singh and Sooch, (2004) opined that households in India are not aware of the ratio of family size to cattle requirement. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW Salam et al. (2020) studied the feasibility of biogas generation at the household level in Bangladesh. The study states that cattle dung is readily available in rural villages, which could be a great source of material for biogas. Yazan et al. (2018) have explored the commercial aspects of biogas using cattle dung and claimed that business model works only for large scale operations which operate with more than 20000 ton per year, and this is the indication of the scale of success for biogas plants in the household levels. Narayan et al. (2018) conducted relevant research and argued that the commercialization of biogas in India is not a feasible solution with the present technology, however, financial incentives for dairy farming and direct incentives for household biogas producers may reduce the LPG subsidy burden on the government. Nandiyanto et al. (2018) in Indonesia, claims that the combination of the dairy business and biogas plant is much profitable rather than just dairy business. A study in the US believes that a farm business with a minimum of 3000 cattle will reach breakeven in the commercialization of biogas and the study also suggests that cooperative biogas plant would yield better results (Lauer et al., 2018). Mittal et al. (2018) state that the availability of feedstock, supply chain, policy support, and awareness among households are the strong barriers to the growth of biogas generation in India. The demand for milk in India is growing at 7% and the production of milk is growing at 4.4%. This is mainly because of the presence of traditional practices in the sector and poor access to finance (Pant et al., 2019; Rao, 2017; Jadawala and Patel, 2017). Muvhiiwa et al. (2017) study from the South African perspective states that country is technology-ready and it has enough sources of materials to generate biogas in the rural areas; however, lack of awareness is the major challenge for sustainable development. Traditionally farmers in India were using the by-products of their agricultural products as feed for cattle but today many have moved to commercial crops, which has resulted in a reduction of generation of cattle feed. The land available for cattle rearing is also very less (Kumar et al., 2016). In India because of the low genetic potential of the cattle, the cost of milk production is high and the milk yield is not satisfactory (Kumawat et al., 2016), this may lead to farmers stopping dairy business. Hence, the financial incentives of the government will encourage the dairy farming business. Food and Agribusiness Research Management (FARM) (2015) provided an interesting study, that proper utilization of cattle dung for biogas, direct incentives of the government and financial inclusion from organised banks will make the small dairy farming profitable in India. Heubeck and Craggs (2015) worked on the energy yield and concluded that a kilogram of cattle manure yielded 0.18-0.25 m3 of methane (CH4). 56M 3 of methane is equivalent to 1 tonne of CO2. Therefore, methane yield of 400 cattle manures is equivalent to 0.35t of CO2/day. Bakar et al., 2015 said that biogas kits for dairy farmers are advised as it serves two purposes, i.e. waste management and generation of low-cost energy for households. Wahyudi et al. (2015) opine that 67% of poor Indonesians have occupations in rural agriculture including livestock farming, this is the potential sector to generate biogas by using dairy sector wastes. Keck et al. (2015) studied and reported that in Switzerland, the majority of biogas facilities are attached to the dairy or animal husbandry business. In a report of the international labour organization, Harsdorff (2014) states that increased dairy farming and biogas generation will add 2 million additional jobs in the biogas plants. For the development of farmer level biogas projects in Italy, the government has to think about reframing institutional frameworks with attractive subsidies (Carrosio, 2013). Ibrahim (2012) have studied the opportunity for green energy in Malaysia; the study argues that installing biogas plants in animal farms will give multiple advantages to small scale farmers by reducing their fuel and power costs. Abdulsalam and Mohammed (2012) provided an interesting fact that in Nigeria, Elephant dung is recommended to use as an alternative source of material for cattle dung based biogas plants; however, the challenge is that elephant is a wild animal. From Indian perspectives, technological advancement and a planned supply chain management are necessary for commercialization of bioenergy generation using cattle dung (Kumar et al., 2012); Hence, it is recommended to use biogas kits in the household levels. Bond and Templeton (2011) informs that among developing countries, India and China are the major biogas digester users; the major source of material for this digester is cattle manure. India has immense opportunity to increase the use of biogas digesters, particularly in the household segment using cattle dung, this would increase the opportunity for employment and contributes for environment-friendly sustainable growth (Bhol et al., 2011). Gebrezgabher et al. (2010) study reported that by 2020 all Dutch dairy farms and processors will become energy self-sufficient with the combination of biogas, wind and solar; this is because of the increase in the volume of cattle dung and dairy business. A study by Ali et al. (2008) in fisheries of Bangladesh proved that the survival rate of fishes using a combination of biogas slurry and raw cattle dung is better than the use of raw cattle dung or other supplements. California is technologically ready to produce biogas from dairy manure; However, the small scale of dairy’s in Kumar, et al.: Biogas from Cattle Dung as a Source of Sustainable Energy: A Feasibility Study International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy | Vol 10 • Issue 6 • 2020372 the region is a challenge (Krich et al., 2005). Singh and Sooch (2004) mentioned that biogas from cattle dung will become a great alternative for natural gas in rural India; However, lack of knowledge and awareness of the ratio of family size to biogas plant size is the major hurdle to harness the full potential. Nagamani and Ramasamy (1999) state that despite improved technology for biogas in India, lack of livestock followed by construction defects are the major hurdles for the success of biogas plant in household levels. 3. DATA AND METHODOLOGY In this cross-sectional data study, 231 dairy farmers from the Karnataka state of India were randomly interviewed. State Karnataka is the 8th largest state in India; there are 30 districts with a total area of 1, 91,791 km2. Department of Cooperation (2018) informs that there are 14,256 functioning Dairy cooperatives societies (DCS) and 2.46 million, dairy farmers actively work in the state. A personal and telephonic interview method is used to gather data from dairy farmers. Among 231 dairy farmers, 181 are biogas users and 50 are not biogas users. For a dichotomous dependent variable (biogas user or not), to analyze its dependency on socioeconomic factors (age, religion, education level, number of cattle, and land size) binary logistic regression methodology is used. Reasons for not adopting biogas plant and the usage of alternative source of cooking energy for these non-biogas users are analyzed. Among 50 non-biogas users, 23 mentioned that the quantity of cattle dung is not sufficient to adopt biogas plants for cooking energy. The cross-tabulation, simple average and cross-multiplication techniques are used to obtain the optimal number of cattle requirements for different family sizes. 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1. Dairy Farmers Background and Biogas Adoption Salam et al., 2020 inform that the background of households plays a vital role in biogas plant adoption decision. In Table 1, we have shown the background characteristics of dairy farm respondents. Among 181 biogas users, 81.20% are Hindus, 13.30% are Christians and 5.5% are Muslims. Concerning factor age, there is not much difference between users and nonusers. 39.20% of users and 52% of nonusers fall in the same category of 41-55 age group. Education level also plays a vital role in biogas adoption in rural areas, data shows that 35.9% of biogas users are Pre metric and 46% of nonusers are metric. Post metric, as the education level increases, even the biogas users’ number increases. Data proves that biogas usage is more with large size families, 70% of respondents with a family size of 2-4 are not the users of biogas contradictorily only 2.8% of respondents with a family size of 8 and above are the users of biogas. Further, the number of cattle factor is interesting as maximum numbers are modal values; the maximum biogas users (28.2%) own 3 cattle and the percentage is reducing on both the sides irrespective of the number increasing or decreasing. Finally, 62.4% of biogas users are in the minimum land size category of 0.5-5 acres of land. As the size of the land increases, the number of biogas users is reducing. 4.2. Reasons for not using Biogas as a Source of Energy for Cooking Many studies have mentioned that the availability of cattle dung and lack of awareness about biogas are the major challenges to the growth of biogas usage in India. In this study, all 50 biogas non-users were aware of the concept and economic benefit of biogas. Various reasons for not adopting of biogas by these dairy farmers are presented in Table 2. For an open-ended question, 46% of respondents said that the quantity of cattle dung is insufficient to meet the cooking energy requirement of the family. The cross-tabulation analysis and an optimal number of cattle for different family size analysis in the last section of this study will address this issue of quantity of cattle dung. Table 1: Respondents profile Respondents classification Biogas users Non-Biogas users 181 50 Religion Hindu 81.20 72.00 Christian 13.30 28.00 Muslim 5.50 0.00 Age group 25–40 24.90 22.00 41–55 39.20 52.00 56–70 34.80 22.00 Above 70 1.10 4.00 The education level of the family head Pre metric 35.90 30.00 Metric 30.90 46.00 PUC/ITI 16.00 16.00 Graduate 16.00 8.00 Postgraduate 1.10 0.00 Family size 2–4 55.20 70.00 5–8 42.00 30.00 Above 8 2.80 0.00 Number of Cattle 1 5.00 24.00 2 19.30 24.00 3 28.20 18.00 4 18.20 18.00 5 8.30 10.00 6 7.20 2.00 7 and above 7 13.80 4.00 Land size 0.5–5 acres 62.40 50.00 5.5–10 acres 26.00 32.00 10.5–15 acres 5.50 8.00 15.5–20 acres 3.30 4.00 Above 20 acres 2.8 6.00 Based on primary data Table 2: Reasons for not using biogas by dairy farmers Reasons for not using biogas Frequency Percent Additional man-hour requirement 11 22.0 Availability of land 1 2.0 Capital requirement 5 10.0 Not necessary 1 2.0 Not thought about that so far 7 14.0 Quantity of cattle dung is not enough 23 46.0 Un divided property 2 4.0 Total 50 100.0 Source: Primary data Kumar, et al.: Biogas from Cattle Dung as a Source of Sustainable Energy: A Feasibility Study International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy | Vol 10 • Issue 6 • 2020 373 The next major issue was additional domestic chores. 22% of biogas non-users specifically mentioned additional manpower requirement for processing cattle dung to generate biogas as the reason for non-usage. 14% of biogas non-users gave very light responses as they are aware of biogas however, they have not thought about the installation so far. 10% of biogas non-users said the heavy capital investment is the hurdle for biogas plant installation and this group is particularly looking for attractive incentives from the government agency in the form of subsidy. Very interestingly 4% of biogas non-users were not sure about their cattle shed as it belonged to undivided family property. 2% of non-bio gas users were big landowners and they seem to have enough alternative sources available in their agricultural fields to manage their energy requirements of cooking and hence, biogas was unnecessary. The last category 2% of biogas non- users mentioned that they don’t have sufficient land to place the biogas digesters on their dairy farm. 4.3. Need for Change in Cooking Energy and Dynamics of Cooking Energy Access for Non-bio Gas Users The pollution caused by burning firewood, dung, coal inside the kitchen is causing more than 1.5 million deaths a year, (Rehfuess, 2006). Parikh et al. (2016) inform that nearly 840 million families in India still depend on solid fuels like firewood or dung, burning which, is a tremendous health hazard for the women and children in those families. More than 66% of rural families in India still use solid energy sources for cooking and electric stoves could be the better source (Panagariya and Jain, 2019). Women in India spend more than 2 weeks a year to collect firewood for cooking energy and the same is resulting in nearly one million deaths in a year (Patnaik and Tripathi, 2017). In the year 2005, 364 million rural Indians did not have access to electricity and 726 million rural families were using firewood, dung, or coal as their source of energy for cooking. (Balachandra, 2011). Figure 1 shows that 50% of non-biogas users are using firewood and LPG as a source of energy for cooking and said that firewood is abundantly available and hence, both LPG and firewood are used as cooking energy. 44% of respondents said they use only LPG for cooking. Only 3 respondents are purely depending on firewood for their cooking energy requirement. 4.4. Factors Influencing the Dairy Farmers to Install Bio Gas Plants In this study, the dependent variable is a dichotomous binary variable and the independent variables are continuous or categorical variables. Hence, as this data set is not satisfying the assumptions of the normal regression model, we have employed a logistic regression model to analyze the relationship between biogas usage and other socio-economic factors of dairy farmers. Biogas user or not user was the dependent variable for the model, where Y = 1 if the respondent dairy farmer is the user of biogas and Y = 2 if the respondent is not a user of the biogas. An odds ratio is a commonly analyzed statistic in any logistic regression analysis, ratio >1 indicates that the probability of a dependent variable event occurring is more than the probability of an increase in independent variable and vice versa. In our context, if the Odds ratio >1, the probability of biogas plant installation is more with an increase in any of the socio-economic variables. A coefficient indicates that after adjustment for all other independent variables in the model, how that particular independent variable will impact the outcome of the dependent variable. Wald statistics in logistic regression will test the unique contribution of each independent variable with other independent predictors used in the model (Karl, 2020). Table 3 shows that socio-economic factors like family size and the number of cattle have significantly contributed to the installation of a biogas plant by dairy farmers in Karnataka, India. Further Odd ratio in Table 3 indicates that for an additional family member among dairy farmers, the Odds of adapting biogas reduces by 24.1% or in other words the ratio (0.759 < 1) is less than one, hence the probability of biogas plant installation with an increase in the family size of dairy farmers is lower than 1. The Odds ratio for independent variable land size shows that the probability of biogas plant installation is greater than 1 (1.042 > 1) for every one-acre increase in the land size of dairy farmers. 4.5. The Optimal Number of Cattle’s Requirement for Varying Family Sizes The table shows that 46% of non-biogas user respondents stated that the quantity of cattle dung is the main reason for not installing biogas. We have attempted to make family size and number of cattle requirement analysis to give an optimal cattle number for different size of families. In the data collection process, we have enquired 2 related aspects with biogas users. One, with the current number of cattle, what percentage of cooking energy requirement is satisfied and the other one is to generate 100% of their energy requirement, what is the required number of cattle. The methodology used for the analysis is simple average and cross multiplication. In Table 4, computation procedures are neatly explained using column number definitions. Column no 1 shows respondents family size, the second column shows the no of cattle owned by the respondents, the third column shows how much cooking energy requirement is met by biogas, the fourth column shows respondents estimation of the number of cattle required to meet 100% of their cooking energy requirement. The fifth column in Table 4 shows our estimation of the number of cattle required to meet the respondent’s 100% cooking energy requirement, the sixth column shows the average of our estimation and respondent’s estimation and the last column shows the optimum number of cattle requirements for a family of one member. The same computations Source: Primary data 6.0 50.0 44.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 Fire wood Fire wood and LPG LPG Figure 1: Alternative sources of cooking energy used by non-bio gas users Kumar, et al.: Biogas from Cattle Dung as a Source of Sustainable Energy: A Feasibility Study International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy | Vol 10 • Issue 6 • 2020374 are done for all 181 responses; the same is shown in the annexure section. The final average of 181 observations in the last column of Table 4 shows that the optimal number of cattle requirements for 1 member family is 1; this estimate can be used as the base to compute an optimal number of cattle requirements for different family sizes to meet their 100% cooking energy requirement. 4.6. Cattle Requirement and Available Number of Cattle’s among Respondents – Feasibility Analysis In Table 5, numbers with bold and underlined font are the number of respondents who can install biogas plant, based on the number of cattle requirements in each family size category. On the other hand numbers with Italic font style are the number of respondents who are not meeting the minimum number of cattle requirements to manage their 100% of cooking energy demand. Cross tabulation shows that among 50 non-bio gas user respondents, 12 are with a family of 2 members, and the optimal number of cattle required to meet their 100% cooking energy demand is 2. Hence, 9 out of 12 families of this category can adapt biogas as the number of owned cattle with them is equal to or more than the optimal number. Similarly, there are 4 families in 3 family member categories, and 1 family each with family size categories of 4, 5, and 6 who meet the optimum number of cattle requirements. 5. CONCLUSION Biogas is one source of bioenergy, which can be a good substitute for traditional sources of cooking energy in India. Green environment is looking for sources that can reduce carbon omission and the government agency is also striving to transform the traditional, polluted kitchens to a hazard-free kitchen. Our objective in this study was to analyze the socio-economic factor influencing biogas adoption among dairy farmers in Karnataka, India and the logistic regression analysis proved that family size and the cattle’s number are the two key factors. Data also reveals that the cattle number or dung quantity, additional manpower requirement, and initial capital outlay are the reasons for not installing biogas plants. Further, the study found that among 50 non-bio gas user respondents, there are 16 respondents for whom the adoption of biogas is feasible in terms of the number of cattle, However, other mentioned reasons might be a hindrance. REFERENCES Abdulsalam, S., Mohammed, J. (2012), Production of biogas from cow and elephant dung. Global Journal of Engineering and Technology, 5(1), 51-56. Ali, M.H., Salam, M.A., Rashid, M.H., Barman, A.C., Bashar, M.A. (2008), Fish culture in ponds by using bio-gas slurry and raw cow dung in carp polyculture system. Journal of Agroforestry and Environment, 2(2), 151-154. Bakar, N.H.B., Yusoff, Z., Said, S.A., Amirul, M., Bin, R. (2015), The Table 4: Optimal number of cattle requirement analysis Family size (1) No of cattle (2) % Energy demand met (3) Respondents estimation (4) Our estimation (5)=[100*(2)]/(3) Average for full family (6) =[ (4) + (5)]/2 Optimal no of cattle for 1 member family (7) = (6)/(1) 5 2 50 3.00 4 4 1 3 5 100 4.00 5 5 2 8 3 50 5.00 6 6 1 7 22 100 5.00 22 14 2 4 4 50 3.00 8 6 1 4 3 100 3.00 3 3 1 4 3 80 2.00 4 3 1 8 8 80 8.00 10 9 1 Average from 181 response estimations 1 Source: Authors analysis using primary data Table 3: Logistic regression output Variable Coefficient Standard Error Wald P-value Odds ratio Religion 0.005 0.314 0.000 0.989 1.005 Family size −0.276 0.122 5.095 0.024 0.759 Age of the family head −0.003 0.015 0.044 0.834 0.997 Education Level of the head of the family −0.075 0.167 0.199 0.655 0.928 No of cattle’s −0.292 0.109 7.212 0.007 0.747 Land size in an acre 0.041 0.032 1.666 0.197 1.042 Constant 0.906 1.093 0.687 0.407 2.475 Chi-square 21.999 P-value 0.001 Source: Authors analysis using primary data Table 5: Family size *No of cattle’s cross tabulation Family size No of cattle’s Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2 3 1 1 3 2 1 1 12 3 3 4 0 4 0 0 0 11 4 4 4 3 0 1 0 0 12 5 1 3 2 1 1 0 0 8 6 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 4 7 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Total 12 12 9 9 5 1 2 50 Source: Authors analysis using primary data Kumar, et al.: Biogas from Cattle Dung as a Source of Sustainable Energy: A Feasibility Study International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy | Vol 10 • Issue 6 • 2020 375 Fabrication of a Biogas System to Produce Methane Gas From Cow Dung. India: Technology and Innovation National conference. p231-241. Balachandra, P. (2011), Dynamics of rural energy access in India: An assessment. Energy, 36(9), 5556-5567. Bhol, J., Sahoo, B.B., Mishra, C.K. (2011), Biogas digesters in India : A review. In: National Conference on Renewable and New Energy Systems. Odisha: SIET. p1-6. Bond, T., Templeton, M.R. (2011), History and future of domestic biogas plants in the developing world. Energy for Sustainable Development, 15(4), 347-354. Carrosio, G. (2013), Energy production from biogas in the Italian countryside : Policies and organizational models. Energy Policy, 63, 3-9. Department of Cooperation. (2018), Government of Karnataka, Dairy Sector. Available from: http://www.sahakara.kar.gov.in/dairy.html. Food and Agribusiness Research Management (FARM). (2015), Making Indian dairy farming competitive-the small farmer perspective. YES BANK Ltd and Indian Dairy Association (IDA), 1(1), 1-28. Gebrezgabher, S.A., Meuwissen, M.P.M., Lansink, A.G.J. (2010), Costs of producing biogas at dairy farms in the Netherlands. International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 1, 26-35. Gupta, S., Ravindranath, N.H. (1997), Financial analysis of cooking energy options for India. Energy Conversion and Management, 38(18), 1869-1876. Harsdorff, M. (2014), The economics of biogas: Creating green jobs in the dairy industry in India. International Labour Organization, 1, 1-56. Hemme, T., Garcia, O., Saha, A. (2003), A review of milk production in India with particular emphasis on small-scale producers. International Farm Corporation Network: Pro-Poor Livestock Policy, 3(3), 1-58. Available from: http://www.worlddairymap.org/media/ pdf/2003milkproductionPakistan.pdf%5Cn, Available from: http:// www.faoorg/ag/againfo/programmes/en/pplpi/docarc/wp3.pdf. Heubeck, S., Craggs, D.R. (2015), Is Biogas Technology right for Australian Dairy Farms ? New York: Hamilton. Ibrahim, C.E., Aini, M.N., Siti, S.T., Syed, H.S.A., Kamaruddin, D. (2012), Small-scale biogas plant on a dairy farm. Malaysian Journal of Veterinary Research, 3(1), 49-54. Jadawala, R., Patel, S. (2017), Challenges of Indian dairy industry. Indian Journal of Applied Research, 7(10), 9-11. Karl, L. (2020), Logistic-SPSS. Available from: http://www.core.ecu.edu/ psyc/wuenschk/MV/Multreg/Logistic-SPSS.PDF. Keck, M., Schrade, S., Steiner, B. (2015), Odour impact of an agricultural biogas facility combined with animal husbandry. Agrarforschung Schweiz, 6, 494-499. Krich, K., Augenstein, D., Benemann, J., Rutledge, B., Salour, D. (2005), Biomethane from Dairy Waste: A Sourcebook for the Production and Use of Renewable Natural Gas in California. Prepared for Western United Dairymen. United States: Funded Part Through USDA Rural Development. p1-282. Kumar, G., Rajneesh, D., Singh, R.P., Kataria, R. (2016), Employability of biogas and bio-slurry with algae and cow dung as substrates for continuous advancement. International Journal of Emerging Trends in Research, 1(1), 19-25. Kumar, S., Dev Kumar, H., Babu, K.G. (2012), A study on the electricity generation from the cow dung using a microbial fuel cell. Journal Of Biochemical Technology, 3(4), 442-447. Kumawat, R., Pramendra, Singh, N.K. (2016), Analysis of cost and returns of milk production in Rajasthan. Economic Affairs, 61(1), 71-80. Lauer, M., Hansen, J.K., Lamers, P., Thrän, D. (2018), Making money from waste: The economic viability of producing biogas and biomethane in the Idaho dairy industry. Applied Energy, 222, 621-636. Mittal, S., Ahlgren, E.O., Shukla, P.R. (2018), Barriers to biogas dissemination in India : A review. Energy Policy, 112, 361-370. Mohapatro, R.N., Swain, R., Pradhan, R.R. (2014), A synergetic effect of vegetative waste and cow dung on bio gas production. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 4(11), 184-190. Muvhiiwa, R., Hildebrandt, D., Chimwani, N., Ngubevana, L., Matambo, T. (2017), The impact and challenges of sustainable biogas implementation: Moving towards a bio-based economy. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 7(1), 20-30. Nagamani, B., Ramasamy, K. (1999), Biogas production technology : An Indian perspective. Special Section: Fermentation Science and Technology, 77(1), 1-10. Nandiyanto, A.B.D., Ragadhita, R., Maulana, A.C., Abdullah, A.G. (2018), Feasibility study on the production of biogas in dairy farming. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 288(1), 012024. Narayan, V., Li, B., Timmons, L. (2018), Harnessing the energy potential of cattle dung in India : A policy memorandum to the ministry for new and renewable energy. Journal of Science Policy and Governance, 12(1), 1-7. Panagariya, A., Jain, A.K. (2019), Electricity and Clean Cooking Strategy for India. NITI Aayog. p1-3. Avaialble from: https://www.niti.gov. in/writereaddata/files/document_publication/NITIBlog28_VC- AnilJain.pdf. Pandian, A.S.S., Selvakumar, D.K., Prabu, D. (2015), Impact of dairy development programmes in India-an economic analysis. Indian Journal of Applied Research, 3(12), 131-132. Pant, S., Joshi, J., Yadav, A.S. (2019), Problems and prospects of dairy farming in Almora district of Uttarakhand. JETIR, 6(2), 194-205. Parikh, J.K., Sharma, A., Singh, C., Neelakantan, S. (2016), Providing Clean Cooking Fuel in India: Challenges and Solutions. New Delhi: Integrated Research and Action for Development. Patnaik, S., Tripathi, S. (2017), Access to Clean Cooking Energy in India-state of the Sector. CEEW Report. p1-24. Available from: http://www.ceew.in/pdf/CEEW-CleanCookingEnergyAccessinIndia- 21Oct17.pdf. Rao, M. (2017), Opportunities and challenges in dairy and future ahead. Approaches in Poultry, Dairy and Veterinary Sciences, 2(1), 113-115. Rehfuess, E. (2006), Household Energy and Health. WHO Library Cataloguing-in-publication Data, WA754. Available from: http:// www.who.int/indoorair/publications/fuelforlife.pdf. Salam, S., Parvin, R., Salam, A., Azad, S.M.N. (2020), Feasibility study for biogas generation from household digesters in Bangladesh : Evidence from a household level survey. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 10(4), 23-30. Singh, K.J., Sooch, S.S. (2004), Comparative study of the economics of different models of family size biogas plants for state of Punjab, India. Energy Conversion and Management, 45(1-10), 1329-1341. Smith, K.R., Sagar, A. (2014), Making the clean available: Escaping India’s Chulha Trap. Energy Policy, 75, 410-414. Wahyudi, J., Kurnani, B.T.A., Clancy, J. (2015), Biogas production in dairy farming in Indonesia : A challenge for sustainability. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 4(3), 219-226. Yazan, D.M., Cafagna, D., Fraccascia, L., Mes, M. (2018), Economic sustainability of biogas production from animal manure : A regional circular economy model. Management Research Review, 41(5), 605-624.