Page  2 Food industry wastewater treatment Common practice for treatment of food industry wastewater in Indochina region is Open Ponds as it: 1.reduces biomass content in wastewater successfully as per discharge requirements 2.was only viable alternative when many of the factories where established. 3.still today is the most cost effective way of treating the wastewater

Page  3 Food industry wastewater treatment Sounds great, however… Wastewater treatment in Open ponds is a serious problem in terms of: Air Pollution (H2S, i.e. rotten egg gas) Smell Contamination of nearby rivers and lakes Global Warming Fires

Page  4 Food industry wastewater treatment Air Pollution Wastewater treatment in Open Lagoons leads to release of significant amount of methane into the air: Methane is the worst greenhouse gas at 21 times the potency of CO2 E.g. the lagoons of a medium size tapioca factory will release as much GHG into the atmosphere as cars pollute per year

Page  5 Food industry wastewater treatment Protection of water resources There are several examples in Indochina where Open Lagoons of agricultural factories have leaked directly into rivers or water reservoirs. ->As the water contains high levels of biomass that is suitable for anaerobic digestion, such wastewater spills turn the water resources anaerobic ->killing all living things except the bacteria. Affected people: local community, especially fishermen, are severely affected and cannot practice their livelihood.

Page  6 Food industry wastewater treatment Possible Solutions: 1) Stricter emissions regulation? Not fair against existing factories that would be hit with unbudgeted high costs even if they comply with current regulations: May lead to bankruptcies Would change market dynamics Would not efficiently deal with problem, likely that solutions would be built just to meet new regulations In reality, would implode project development that relies on Clean Development Mechanism (“CDM’) as projects would no longer qualify for carbon credits. Conclusion: no solution, may worsen situation 2) Biogas projects implemented with support of CDM and subsidies. Guaranteed most efficient solutions as higher efficiency means higher biogas and emissions reductions. Conclusion: feasible solution

Page  7 TBEC Tha Chang Biogas Project M CLBR Bio-Scrubber De-watering Blowers Cooler Chillier Condenser CycloneSeparator Reheat Filler Pot WastewaterProducer Open Lagoon Open Lagoon Knockout Pot Flare Settling Pond Agriculture Purpose Liquid Part Gas Part PEA CO 2

Page  8 TBEC Tha Chang Biogas Project

Page  9 TBEC Tha Chang Biogas Project

Page  10 Indochina biogas potential Thailand: Existing factories:215 Vietnam: Existing factories: 50 Cambodia: Existing factories: 10 Laos: Existing factories: 10 Combined GHG emissions: tons of CO2/year million cars yearly pollution or 25 times the annual pollution by cars in Hanoi

Page  11 Challenges for Biogas Thailand has created an enabling environment for biogas thanks to: BOI tax holiday of 8 years VSPP program for direct sales to grid Adder (0,3 THB/kWh) Track record on CDM side EPPO investment subsidy Main challenges for biogas business in region: Higher investment cost (due to import of heavy equipment) Lack of subsidies (so far) Higher country risk (political and economical environment) Thailand: A3 Laos: D Vietnam: B Cambodia: D Conclusion: Biogas in Thailand is heavily supported by Thai government, to make biogas successful in more riskier countries of region, similar support mechanism, either national or international, are needed.

Quality certifications: ISO 9001, Crown Standard Projects: 3 cassava-, 1 palm oil and rubber wastewater project Market share: 40 % in BOOT projects in Thailand Carbon credits: > /year (equivalent to cars pollution) Shareholders: PEMF 75%, ATE 13%, CT 12% Business:to develop, design, finance, implement, and operate biogas projects Organisation: largest biogas O&M personnel in Thailand Established : September 2003 Thai Biogas Energy Company Facts Sheet PEMF Investors: Finnfund, Poyry, Sampo, Pohjola

Page  13 Vision

Page  14 First potential cross-boarder project: LIG Laos, 47 km from Vientiane Host Company: Tapioca starch factory (first factory in Laos) Use of Biogas: heat for drying starch (replacing coal fired heating) Development impact: 1.Technology transfer (first project of its kind) 2.Demonstration project (Open House) 3.Multiplier effect 4.Fuel substitution kgs of coal/year 5.Provides a domestic fuel sources, reducing dependency on imported fossil fuels Environmental Impact: 1.Better air quality due to: fuel substitution removal of H2S destruction of methane 2.Protection of water resources 3.Eliminated smell 4.Reduction of GHG emissions by