3

2

More information on BEEwww.eubee.comCoordination:Barbara Koch, Matthias DeesDepartment of Remote Sensing and LandscapeInformation Systems (FELIS), University ofFreiburgTennenbacher Str. 4, 79085 Freiburg, GermanyEmail:Matthias.Dees@felis.unifreiburg.de

Tel. +49 761 203 3697 Fax. +49 761 203 3701

Pove}e informacii za BEE

http://public.me.com/kpopovski/

Makedonski del na timot:Kiril PopovskiMakedonska geotermalna asocijacija MAGAul. “Dame Gruev” br.1-3/16, 1000 Skopje,Makedonija

Elektronska po{ta:kpopovski@mac.com, issmaga@gmail.comTel. +389 (0)2 3118 686 Faks +389 (92) 3173 717

BEE project is funded by the European Commission under the Framework Programme 7 withinthe "Energy Thematic Area" and contributes to "Harmonisation of biomass resource assessment"activities which focus on assessing and optimising the availability of biomass resources.

FP7 GRANT AGREEMENT N˚: 213417

3

Kiril Popovski/Kiril PopovskiSlave Armenski/Slave ArmenskiElena Popovska/Elena PopovskaSanja Popovska Vasilevska/Sawa Popovska Vasilevska

BIOMASS ENERGY IN MACEDONIAENERGIJA NA BIOMASA VO

MAKEDONIJA

Skopje/Skopje, 2010

4

Energija na biomasa vo MakedonijaBiomass Energy in Macedonia

Avtori: Prof.d-r Kiril Popovski/Prof.Dr. Kiril PopovskiAuthors: Prof.d-r Slave Armenski/Prof.Dr. Slave Armenski

M-r Elena Popovska/M-r Elena PopovskaProf.d-r Sawa Popovska Vasilevska/Prof.Dr. Sanja Popovska Vasilevska

Godina na izdavawe: 2010Year of publication:

Izdava~: Makedonska geotermalna asocijacija – MAGAPublisher: Macedonian Geothermal Association – MAGA

Za izdava~ot: Prof.d-r Kiril PopovskiFor the publisher: Prof.Dr. Kiril Popovski

Recenzija: Prof.d-r Ordan ^ukaliev/Prof.Dr. Ordan CukalievReview: Prof.d-r Vlatko Andonovski/Prof.Dr. Vlatko Andonovski

Tira`: 250Printing: 250

Copyright: Site prava se zadr`ani od strana na izdava~ot.Kopirawe na delovi od publikacijata e dozvole-no samo so polno citirawe na izvorot.All copy rights are kept by the publisher. Copying ofparts of publications is allowed only with full citing ofthe source.

ZABELE[KA: Ovaa publikacija ne e od komercijalen karak-ter. Istata }e bide besplatno distribuirana dorelevantni dr`avni institucii, univerzi-teti, istra`uva~ki organizacii, investitori idrugi zainteresirani lica.

NOTE: This publication is not of commercial character. Itshall be distributed free of charge to the relevantstate institutions, universities, research organizati-ons, investors and other interested persons.

5

Sl.1. Pokrienost na zemji{teto na teritorijata na Republika MakedonijaFig.1. Land covering of territory of the Republic of Macedonia

SODR@INA

Voved ………………………………… 6

1. Biomasata kako energetski izvor 8

2. Drvni otpadoci ………………… 11

3. Otpadoci od zemjodelieto ….. 17

4. Gradski otpad …………………. 22

5. Biogoriva ………………………. 25

6. Zaklu~ok i preporaki ……………… 31

CONTENTSIntroduction ……………………………… 6

1. Biomass as energy source ……….. 8

2. Wood residues …………………….. 11

3. Agricultural waste ………………… 17

4. Urban waste ………………………. 22

5. Biofuels ……………………………. 25

6. Conclusion and recommendations 31

6

VOVEDBiomasata kako energetski resurs

bila i e va`en del na energetskiot bi-lans na Republika Makedonija. Kontinu-irano, vo tekot na zadnite triesetinagodini, ogrevnoto drvo u~estvuva vo negoso otprilika 8-10%. So ogled na prisut-nite sevkupni preispituvawa na mo`-nostite za zgolemuvawe na u~estvo nadoma{nite resursi vo popravawe na lo-{ata energetskata situacija vo zemjata,se nametnuva pra{aweto dali e posvete-no dovolno vnimanie i na ovoj resurs,t.e. dali postojat mo`nosti za negovopodobro iskoristuvawe i, {to e u{te po-dobro, zgolemuvawe.

Koga e vo pra{awe biomasata, naj-prvo treba da se ras~isti {to se pod-razbira pod toj poim, da se sogledaatmo`nostite za energetsko iskoristuva-we na poedine~nite kategorii, za na krajda se istra`i momentalnata situacijavo Makedonija i mo`nostite na nivnotoiskoristuvawe.

Pod biomasa se podrazbira bilo ko-ja organska materija, dobiena so process-ot na fotosinteza vo rastitelniot svet.Toa e prakti~no bio-razgradliviot delod produktite, otpadocite i ostatociteod zemjodelstvoto (vklu~itelno rasti-telnoto proizvodstvo i sto~arstvoto),{umarstvoto i industrijata za prerabot-ka na drvo, kako i bio-razgradliviotdel na komunalniot i industriskiototpad. Evidentno e deka se raboti za triposebni sektori, sekoj so svoi posebnikarakteristiki i mo`nosti za razvoj,t.e.:- [umarstvo;- Zemjodelie i sto~arstvo;- Komunalen i industriski otpad.

Pri toa, treba da se potencira deka:1. [umite sami za sebe se aktiven en-ergetski resurs na ~ija golemina i pro-duktivnost mo`e da se vlijae preku:- Nagolemuvawe na po{umenite povr-{ini;

INTRODUCTIONBiomass, as energy resource, has been

and is an important part of the energy balan-ce of the Republic of Macedonia. Continual-ly, during the recent 30 years, firewood par-ticipates in it with about 8-10%. In accordan-ce with the present reinvestigation of possi-bilities for increasing the participation of ho-me energy resources in order to improve thebad situation in the country, arises the ques-tion if enough attention is paid to this re-source, i.e. are there possibilities for its bet-ter use and (which is better), its enlarging?

When biomass is in question, first of all itis necessary to make clear what is under-stood under this term and then to investigatepossibilities for energy use of different cate-gories of it. After that, present situation andpossibilities for its ameliorations in Macedo-nia can be investigated.

Under the term biomass, any organicsubstance get by the process of photosyn-thesis in vegetation is understood. That ispractically the biodegradable part of the pro-ducts, waste and residues of agriculture (in-cluding plant and livestock production), fo-restry and wood processing industry, andbiodegradable part of the urban and Indus-trial waste.

It is evident that three particular sec-tors are in question, each one with own cha-ractersistics and possibilities for develop-ment, i.e.:- Forestry;- Agriculture and animal husbandry;- Urban and Industrial waste.

It is necessary to underline that:1. Forests are an active energy resourcewhose capacity can be influenced by:- Enlarging forested area;

7

- Voveduvawe na namensko odgledu-vawe na drvni vidovi so nepogoden kva-litet za industriska upotreba, no somnogu brz rast i formirawe na drvnatamasa;- Organizacija na sobirawe i prera-botka na otpadot pri se~a i ras~istu-vawe na {umskite povr{ini; i- Organizacija na sobirawe i prera-botka ili direktna upotreba na otpadotod drvnata industrija.2. Zemjodelstvoto mo`e isto taka dabide golem energetski resurs ako seorganizira:- Sobirawe na otpadoci po `etvatana redica zemjodelski proizvodi;- Sobirawe na otpadoci po kroewe naovo{nite nasadi;- Sobirawe na otpadoci od sto~ar-skoto proizvodstvo; i- Organizacija na proizvodstvo naenergetski kulturi za proizvodstvo nabiogoriva.3. Urbanite koncentracii i industri-jata vo ponovo vreme isto taka dobivaatkarakter na energetski resursi prekuorganizacija na sobirawe na biorazgrad-liviot del od otpadot i negovata obra-botka ili direktno koristewe vo ener-getski objekti.

Evidentno e deka vo momentot voMakedonija mnogu malku se koristat nab-rojanite mo`nosti, t.e. osven sobirawe-to na drvoto za gorewe i nekolku malikotlarnici vo drvnata industrija, ne sekoristi ni edna od niv.

Pra{aweto, koe se nametnuva, ekolkava e goleminata na ovoj energetskiresurs, dali mo`e da se organizira e-konomski opravdano koristewe na mo`-nostite koi sega ne se koristat i dalise isplati investirawe vo zgolemuvawena postojniot resurs, sporedeno so pot-rebnite vlo`uvawa vo drugi konkurent-ni doma{ni i uvozni energetsi resursi?

Odgovor na predhodnite pra{awamo`e da se dobie po organizacija na po-opse`ni istra`uvawa, koi treba da o-bezbedat podatoci za analiza na gole-minata i karakteristikite na postojniotresurs, prirodnite, ekonomskite i dru-gite vlijatelni faktori za optimizacijana negovoto koristewe i eventualno zgo-lemuvawe. Za `al, prva realna pre~ka,so koja se sudruva bilo koj istra`uva~, enedostatok na relevantni podatoci. VoMakedonija ne postoi sihronizirano na-mensko sobirawe, obrabotka i public-kacija na istite, a toa podrazbira indi-vidualno inicijalno anga`irawe pri or-ganizacija na bilo kakvo istra`uvawe.So ogled na toa deka pri toa se upot-rebuvaat razli~ni metodologii, se do-bivaat i razli~ni rezultati, a toa vli-jae na kone~nite rezultati na predmet-

- Introduction of growing of trees with a lowquality of wood for industrial purposes butwith very fast development of wooden mass;- Organization of collection and proces-sing or direct use of waste of logging andcleaning the forests; and- Organization of collection and processingor direct use of waste of wood industry.2 Agriculture can be also a big energy re-source, if it is organized:- Collection of waste after harvesting of alist of agricultural products;- Collection of waste after cutting orchardsbranches;- Collection of livestock waste; and- Organization of production of energy cul-tures for biofuels production.3. Urban concentrations and industry arealso getting character of energy resourcesduring the recent years. It is going by orga-nization of collection of biodegradable part ofthe waste and its processing or direct use inenergy production.

Evidently, listed possibilities are nearlynot used in Macedonia. Except collection offire wood and several small boilers in woodprocessing industry, no one of them is ap-plied in the country.

Question of the moment is how big is thisenergy resource, is it possible to organizeeconomically justified use of possibilitieswhich are not presently applied and is it pro-fitable to invest in enlarging the existing re-source in comparison to investments in com-petitive home and imported other energy re-sources?

Answer to above listed questions canbe given after organization of wider investi-gations, which should give necessary infor-mation and data for the shape and charac-teristics of the existing resource, natural,economic and other influencing factors foroptimization of its use and eventual enlar-ging. Unfortunately, the first constraint forany investigator is the absence of relevantdata. There is no synchronized concrete col-lection of data, their elaboration and pub-lication, i.e. individual collection and elabo-ration is necessary for any investigation.Normally, each investigator uses differentmethodologies and getting different results,which influences final results of the inves-tigations and their practical applicability.

8

nite istra`uvawa i nivnata prakti~naupotreblivost.

Zada~a na ovaa publikacija e daobezbedi inicijalno nadminuvawe naovoj nedostatok so primena na zaedni~kiusvoenata harmonizirana evropska meto-dologija, barem za delot koj se odnesuvaza otpadocite vo {umarstvoto, zemjodel-stvoto i sto~arstvoto, kako i urbaniot iindustriski otpad.

Purpose of this material is to enable ini-tial overcoming of this shortage by applicati-on of the commonly accepted harmonizedEuropean methodology, at least for the partrelated to the waste and residues from fo-restry, agriculture and animal husbandry, ur-ban and industrial waste.

1. BIOMASATA KAKO ENER-GETSKI RESURS

Za procenka na potencijalot na pos-tojnite izvori na otpadna biomasa se ko-ristat razni metodologii, tipovi napribli`uvawa, pojdovni pretpostavki ipodatoci. Soglasno realnata situacija ipostignatata soglasnost vo timot naBEE, vo ovoj materijal e koristena sta-tisti~kata metoda, orientirana konmo`nostite na resursot. Pri toa, proce-nuvani se:- teoretskiot potencijal;- tehni~kiot potencijal; i- ekonomskiot potencijal.

Teoretskiot potencijal e maksimal-nata koli~ina na otpadna biomasa, kojae na raspolagawe soglasno potencijalotna nejziniot izvor.

Tehni~ki potencijal e del od teo-retskiot potencijal, koj mo`e da se is-koristi za energetski potrebi so ze-mawe vo predvid na ograni~uvawata vr-zani na momentalnite tehnolo{ki mo`-nosti, mo`nata upotreba vo ~ovekovatai ishranata na stoka, kako i ekolo{kiteograni~uvawa.

Ekonomskiot potencijal e potencija-lot koj mo`e da se iskoristi pod mo-mentalnite ekonomski uslovi, t.e go za-dovoluva kriteriumot da bide profita-bilen.

Kako osnovni izvori na podatoci sekoristeni:- Statisti~kiot godi{nik na Repub-lika Makedonija;

1. BIOMASS AS AN ENERGY RESOURCE

Different methodologies for estimation ofthe energy potential of waste biomass canbe used, different types of iterations, initialsuppositions and data. According to the realsituation and reached agreement of the BEEteam, the simple resource orientated statisti-cal methodology is used in this material. Fol-lowing values have been under attention:- Theoretical potential;- Technical potential; and- Economical potential. Theoretical potential is the maximal quan-tity of waste biomass, which is on disposalaccording to the potential of its source.

Technical potential is part of the theo-retical one, which can be used after takinginto account the limitations connected to thepresent technological level, possible use forhuman and animal feeding, and ecologicallimitations. Economical potential is the potentialwhich can be used under the present econo-my conditions, i.e. satisfying the criteria to beprofitable.

Following basic data sources have beenused:- Statistical Yearbook of Republic of Mace-donia;

9

- Godi{ni izve{tai, proizvodni ifinansiski planovi na javnoto pretpri-jatie Makedonski {umi; i- Nau~no-istra`uva~ki studii i iz-ve{tai za koli~inite na cvrstiot ko-munalen i industriski otpad vo R. Ma-kedonija.

Energetskata vrednost na poedinitipovi na biomasa se procenuva spremanejzinata t.n, toplinska mo}, t.e. koli-~ina na toplina koja se osloboduva pridirektno sogoruvawe na 1 kg od istata.Se razlikuva gorna i dolna toplinskamo}. Kaj gornata, vodata vo biomasata e

- Annual reports, production plans and fi-nance reports of the Public Utility “Macedo-nian forests”; and- Scientific-investigation studies and re-ports for the quantities of rigid communaland Industrial waste in Republic of Mace-donia.

Energy value of each type of biomass isestimated according to its heat value, i.e.heat quantity produced by direct burning of 1kg of it. We are differing the so called upperand low heat value. For upper one, the water

Toplinska vrednost na otpadna biomasa od zemjodelstvo i {umarstvo, vo zavisnost odizvorot Tabela 1

Heat value of waste biomass from agriculture, depending on source Table 1Toplinska vrednost

Heat value, kJ/kgToplinska vrednost

Heat value, kJ/kgTip na ras-tenie

Type of plant

Topl.vr.Heatvalue,kJ/kg

Tip na ras-tenie

Type of plant @etvaharvesting

Prerab.Process.

Tip narastenieType of

plant@etva

harvestingPrerab.Process.

@itarici - Grain plants Sto~na hrana - Fodder cereals Ind. Rastenija - Industrial plantsP~enica sla-ma/wheat-straw 15750

Detelinaclover 14600 13140

[e}ernarepa/sugarbeet

15100 9060R` slamarye-straw 15450

Alfalfaalfalfa 15100 12830

Tutuntobacco 15900 11300

Ja~men slamabarley-straw 14800

Senomotley-hay 16100 13680

Pamukcotton 16000 13600

Oves slamaoat-straw 15050

Graorkaforage peas 15350 13050

Son~ogl..Sunflower 14700 13200

P~enkamaize 14700

Fura`p~enkaforage maize 14700 12500

Piperind.pepper 13900 9730

Oriz slamarice-straw 15600 Fura`-{e}.r.

for.sugar beat 15100 12830Afionpoppy 14800 12500

Orizova arparice- shell 15590 Zelen~uk - Vegetable plants

Ovo{tarstvo i lozarstvoFruit trees and vineyards

Kompiripotatoes 13240 9660

Jabolkiapple 17600 11440

Gravbeans 16240 11850

Kru{ipears 17500 11370

Wood wasteTopl.vr.Heat val.

Zelkacabbage 14400 9360

Duwiquinces 17400 10440

kJ/kgDomatitomatoes 13700 8900

Sliviplums 18100 10860

ListopadniDeciduous 18250

Piperkapeppers 13900 9730

Cre{nicherries 17550 10530

IglolisniConifers 19000

Luk i kromidgarlic & onion 12800 8960

Vi{nisourcherries

17550 10530Bostanwatermelons 12200 7680

Kajsiiapricots 17400 10440Praskipeaches 17450 10440Oreviwalnuts 15750 12600Lozovi gr.Vineyardbranches 16500 9900

10

Долна топлинска моќ на цврст отпад од разни извори во случаи: без и со 25%и 40 % рециклирањеLow heat value of rigid urban waste of different sources: without and with 25% and 40%recycling Табела 3 – Table 3

Долна топлинска моќ, kJ/kgLow heat value, kJ/kg

Со рециклирање – With recyclingБез рециклирањеWithout recycling 25% 40%

ИзворSource

Gрадскиurban

Селскиrural

Градскиurban

Селскиrural

Градскиurban

Селскиrural

Комунален – Communal 7862 4098 6437 3288 5570 2802Клинички – Hospitals 16134 13973 11861Градба-рушењеBuilding-Destroying 2567 1745 862Индустриски – Industrial 4751 3997 3105

vo te~na sostojba, a kaj dolnata istata evo gasna sostojba.

Dolnata (Hd) i gornata (Hg) toplin-ska mo} se presmetnuvaat so upotreba narelaciite:

pri {to sodr`inite na jaglerod (S), vo-dorod (N), sulfur (S) i voda (W) predhod-no se utvrduvaat so elementarna anali-za na biomasata vo pra{awe.

Vo tabelite 1, 2 i 3 se dadeni pres-metanite vrednosti za dolna toplinskamo} na raznite otpadoci od biomasa, zauslovi vo Republika Makedonija. Istitese upotrebeni pri vr{eweto na procen-ki na nivnata energetska vrednost.

content is in liquid state, and for the low onein the gas state.

Upper (Hg) and low (Hd) heat values arecalculated by the use of following relations:

where quantities of carbon (C), hydrogen(H),sulphur (S) and water (W) are determined byelementary analyses of biomass in question.Values for the calculated low heat value ofdifferent biomass waste for the conditions inRepublic of Macedonia are given in the tab-les 1, 2 and 3, They are used for estimationsof their energy values.

Proizvodstvo na biogas od edna tona na |ubrivo od sto~arstvo i `ivinarstvoBiogas production from 1 ton livestock and poultry manure Tabela 2 / Table 2

Proizvodstvo nabiogas

Biogas production

Toplinska mo}

Heat valueTip na stoka -`ivinarstvo

Kind of livestock–poultry

Broj na stoka za pro-izvodstvo na 1 t/dNumber of livestock

for 1 t/day production

Sodr`ina nasuva masa %

Contents ofdry mass, % m3/t MJ/m3 biogass

Goveda / cattle 20-40 12 25 23-25Sviwi / pigs 250-300 9 26 21-25Koko{kihen-poultry 8000-9000 30 90-150 23-27

Piliwa/chicken— chicken

10000-15000 60 50-100 21-23Proizv.na hranaFood processing 15 46 21-25

11

2. DRVNI OTPADOCI Vo tek na se~eweto i eksploatacijana {umite, kako i pri industriskataprerabotka na drvoto, se dobivaat osta-toci i otpad vo vid na iskr{eni i o{-teteni trupci, lisja, koreni i stebla.Pri se~ata, samo debelite stebla itrupci se izvlekuvaat i magacioniraat,dodeka kro{nite (se sostojat od granki ilisja) i korenite se ostavaat kako ot-padno drvo. Pri toa, okolu 6-9% ostato-cite se sostojat od lisja i 10-15% odkora.

Ova otpadno drvo mo`e da se ko-risti ili kako gorivo, ili kako suro-vina vo nekoi tehnolo{ki procesi vodrvnata industrija (prerabotka vo teh-ni~ko drvo, iverica ili celuloza). Di-rektnoto sogoruvawe mo`e da se vr{i voprilagodeni kotlovski postrojki, me|u-toa mnogu poefikasno e ako istite pred-hodno se prerabotat vo popogodni obli-ci za sogoruvawe, t.e so upotreba na bri-ketirawe, paletizirawe, gasifikacija,piroliza i sl.

Generalno, otpadnoto drvo mo`e dase podeli vo dve grupi: otpad dobien prise~eweto na {umite i otpad dobien priprerabotka na drvoto vo drvnata indus-trija. Nivniot sostav se razlikuva. Ot-padot od se~ata se sostoi od korki,granki, iverki, strugotini, penu{ki, ko-rewa i lisja. Mo`na e i sodr`ina naopo`areni, suvi i iskr{eni drvja, kakoi drvja o{teteni od bolest i insekti, odpoplavi, itn. Otpadot od industriskataprerabotka na drvoto se sostoi od kor-ki, iverki, strugotini, ise~oci od krae-vite na trupcite i delovite koi se izra-botuvaat, fina drvena pra{ina dobienapri {mirglawe na drvoto, itn.

Otpadnoto drvo mo`e da se koristiza dobivawe na {perplo~i, drvena gra-|a, hartija i celuloza, kako i izrabotkana drveni plo~i (iverica). Treba da sezeme vo obzir deka vakvata upotreba }erasne vo idnina, paralelno so interesot

2. WOOD RESIDUESTimber harvesting process produces

waste wood in the form of: broken logs, de-cadent timber, foliage, stumps and treetrunks. During the timber harvesting, only thebillet or log is extracted from the forest, whilethe crown (consisting of foliage and branch-es) and the stumps are considered to bewood waste. Between 6 and 9 % of the dryweight of the bole consists of the foliage, andbetween 10 to 15 % is bark.

The waste wood can be used as fuel oras raw material in some wood industrial pro-cesses (processing in technical wood, play-wood or cellulose). Direct burning can beperformed in accommodated boiler plantsbut it is much more efficient if they are pre-viously processed in more convenient pro-ducts for burning as it is briquetting, produc-tion of pellets, gasification or pyrolisis, etc.

Generally, waste wood can be dividedin two groups: waste get during cutting ofwood in forests and waste get during thewood processing in industry. Their composi-tion is different, i.e. waste wood from timberharvesting is consisting bark, trunks, chips,sawdust, tree stump, tree roots, tree leavesand others. Wood residue from wood pro-cessing facilities mainly includes chips, saw-dust, shavings, bark, broken logs, reject wo-od and ends, edgings, knots, lathe cuttings,lily pads, panel trims, peeler cores, rejectstrips, sander dust, shake blocks, slabs,wood chunks and other wood fragments.

Waste wood can be used for productionof wooden plates, wooden construction ma-terials, paper and cellulose, etc. It’s neces-sary to take into account that such uses shall

12

Sl.2. [umski povr{ini vo Republika MakedonijaFig.2. Forested area in Republic of Macedonia

za negovo koristewe kako gorivo. Kakogorivo, otpadnoto drvo mo`e da se ko-risti direktno, no i kako surovina zadobivawe na razni vrsti na cvrsto, te~-no i gasno gorivo.

Vkupniot {umski fond na Republi-ka Makedonija iznesuva 947.653 ha (Ta-bela br.4). Najgolem del od toa se ~istinasadi od listopadni drvja (58,4%).25,6% se me{ani {umi od listopadni iiglolisni drvja, 8,98% se nasadi od ig-lolisni i 6,34% se iglolisni me{ani solistopadni drvja. Vo tabelata e dadenoi podetalno u~estvo na poedini tipovina drvja.

89,26% od {umskiot fond e vo dr-`avna sopstvenost, a 10,74% vo privat-na (Tabela 4). Fondot vo dr`avna sops-

increase in future, in parallel with the interestto use it as fuel. As fuel, waste wood can beused directly or as raw material for produc-tion of different rigid, liquid and gas fuels.

Total forests area in Republic of Mace-donia occupies 947.653 ha (Table 4). Mostof it are forests of deciduous trees (58,4%),mixed deciduous with conifers (25,6%), coni-fers (8,98%) and mixed conifers with decido-us (6,34%). Table gives also more detailedcomposition of tree species on it.

89,25% of forests is under stateownership and 10,74% is private property(Table 4). State owned forests are maintai-

13

Tabela 4/Table 4[umi po tip na sopstvenost (ha)Forests by type of ownership, (ha)Povr{ini pod {uma –

{umi po vidovi,Sostojba na 31.12.2004Forest area - forests byspecies,Situation as of 31.12.2004

Dr`avni{umiState

forests

% odvkupno

% of total

Privat.{umi

Privatelyownedforests

% odvkupno

% oftotal

VkupnoTotal

% odvkupno% of all

total

^isti nasadi odlistopadni drvjaPure tree stands ofdeciduous tree

480279 86,78 73177 13,222 553456 58,40

Buka / Beech 217639 93,33 15552 6,67 233191Dab (site vidovi)/ Oak (all) 230825 82,06 50477 17,94 281302Drugi tvrdi listopadniOther hard deciduous 27311 80,52 6605 19,47 33916

Topola / White poplar 921 76,75 279 23,25 1200Drugi meki listopadniOther soft deciduous 3583 93,14 264 6,86 3847

^isti nasadi od iglolisnidrvaPure tree stands ofconiferous tree

76510 89,90 8594 10,10 85104 8,98

Smr~a / Spruce 1453 98,11 28 1,89 1481 Elka / Fir 3010 97,54 76 2,46 3086 Crn bor / Black pine 54170 87,94 7429 12,06 61599 Bel bor / Scots pine 11587 91,83 1031 8,17 12618 Drugi iglolisniOther conifers 6290 99,52 30 0,47 6320

Me{ani nasadi odlistopadni drvjaMixed tree stands ofdeciduous trees

225298 92,85 17355 7,15 242653 25,61

Buka, dab i drugilistopadniBeech, oak, other deciduous

27351 87,62 3863 12,37 31214

Buka i drugi listopadniBeech-other deciduous 19803 82,33 4249 17,67 24052

Dab i drugi listopadniOaks-other deciduous 152536 95,75 6766 4,25 159302

Drugi listopadniOther deciduous 25608 91,18 2477 8,82 28085

Me{ani nasadi odiglolisni drvjaMixed tree stands ofconifers

5079 79,43 1315 20,56 6394 0,67

Smr~a, elka / Spruce-fir 296 100 0 0 296 Crn i bel borBlack and Scots pine 1297 49,65 1315 50,34 2612 Drugi iglolisniOther conifers 3486 100 0 0 3486

Me{ani nasadi od listo-padni i iglolisni drvjaMixed tree stands of deci-duous trees and conifers

58708 97,77 1338 2,23 60046 6,34

Buka, smr~a, elaBeech, spruce, fir 10656 100 0 0 10656

14

Crn bor, bel bor, drugiiglolisniBlack pine, Scots pine, otherconifers

2762 99,317 19 0,6832 2781

Drugi listopadni iiglolisni drvjaOther deciduous andconiferous trees

45290 97,17 1319 2,8299 46609

Vkupno / All Total 845874 89,26 101779 10,74 947653 100 (Source: Statistical Yearbook of the R. of Macedonia)

Prose~na bruto volumenska koli~ina na drvo od se~a vo R. Makedonija vo2002 - 2004 i 2006 / 2008 Tabela 5Average annual gross wood volume quantity from timber harvesting in R. of Macedoniafor 2002 – 2004 and 2006 – 2008 Table 5

2002 2003 2004ise~enoharvested

ise~enoharvested

ise~enoharvested

Tip na drvoType of wood

x103 m3/yr%

x103 m3/yr%

x103 m3/yr%

Tehni~ko drvoTechnical wood 133 16,42 142 15,269 141 16,686Drvo za goreweFire-wood 602 74,321 709 76,237 642 75,976Otpadno drvoWaste wood 75 9,2593 79 8,4946 62 7,3373Vkupno bruto volumenTotal gross volume 810 100 930 100 845 100

2006 2007 2008ise~enoharvested

ise~enoharvested

ise~enoharvested

Tip na drvoType of wood

x103 m3/yr%

x103 m3/yr%

x103 m3/yr%

Tehni~ko drvoTechnical wood 143,907 18,166 144,047 17,373 178,718 20,386Drvo za goreweFire-wood 566,712 71,538 602,588 72,677 606,447 69,177Otpadno drvoWaste wood 81,559 10,296 82,5 9,9501 91,492 10,436Vkupno bruto volumenTotal gross volume 792,178 100 829,135 100 876,657 100

(Source: Statistical Yearbook of the R. of Macedonia)

Asortiman na volumenot na drvo vo R. Makedonija od se~ata 2006 Tabela 6

Assortment of wood volume from timber harvesting in R. of Macedonia for 2006 Table 6

Tehni~ko drvoTechnical wood

Drvo za goreweFire-wood

Otpadno drvoWaste wood

VkupnoTotalTip na drvo

Type of woodx103 m3/yr % x103 m3/yr % x103 m3/yr x103 m3/yr

Buka / Beech 96,419 67,00 308,537 54,44 404,956Dab / Oak 0,18 0,12 253,218 44,68 253,398Elka / Fir 12,229 8,49 0 0 12,229Bel bor / Pine-white 17,908 12,44 0 0 17,908Crn bor / Pine-black 16,83 11,69 0 0 16,83Drugi / Other 0,341 0,24 4,957 0,88 5,298Vkupno / Total 143,907 100 566,712 100 81,559 710,619

(Source: Statistical Yearbook of the R. of Macedonia)

15

Vkupno proizvodstvo na drvo vo 2008 Tabela 7

Gross wood volume production in 2008 Table 7

Planirano proizvodstvo na drvo vo 2008Planed wood mass production in 2008

Red

.br.

Ord

. Num

ber

Podra~na edinicaBranch Office

Mak

s. G

odi{

na s

e~a

/Max

imum

ann

ual

felli

ng (m

3 )

Pl

anir

ana

god

i{na

se~a

/ P

lane

d an

nual

felli

ng (

m3 )

% n

a ko

rist

ewe

% o

f util

izat

ion

tehn

i~ko

drv

ote

chni

cal w

ood

(m3 )

ogre

vno

drv

o /

fire-

woo

d (m

3 )

Vku

pno

Tota

l woo

dvo

lum

e (m

3 )

Otp

adno

drv

vow

aste

woo

d (m

3 )

% n

a ot

pad

nod

rvo

/

% o

fw

aste

woo

d (m

3 )

1 2 3=7+8 4=3:2*100 5 6 7=5+6 8 9=8:3*

1001 Malesevo-Berovo 56983 42283 74,20 16922 20537 37459 4824 11,41

2Ravna Reka-Pehcevo 23013 17910 77,82 8200 7500 15700 2210 12,34

3 Osogovo-K.Palanka 21411 24082 112,47 3796 17878 21674 2408 9,994 Kratovo-Kratovo 13374 12204 91,25 2113 9524 11637 567 4,655 Osogovo-Kochani 44806 35432 79,08 6630 23834 30464 4968 14,026 Serta-Stip 14852 5856 39,43 0 5250 5250 606 10,357 Plackovica-Radovis 48660 37998 78,09 11000 23200 34200 3798 9,998 Plackovica-Vinica 35300 34665 98,20 11656 19544 31200 3465 9,999 Belasica-Strumica 82224 54222 65,94 9875 38350 48225 5997 11,06

10Salandzak–Valandovo 16866 13322 78,99 0 11984 11984 1374 10,31

11 Kozuv-Gevgelija 50684 39270 77,48 10600 25100 35700 3570 9,09

12Demir Kapija –Demir Kapija 14568 12888 88,47 1000 10600 11600 1288 9,99

13 Bor-Kavadarci 55738 48089 86,28 23953 17595 41548 6541 13,6014 Crn Bor-Prilep 31022 41223 132,88 8862 28239 37101 4122 9,9915 Babuna-Veles 37333 28007 75,02 1350 24035 25385 2622 9,3616 Sumarstvo-S.Nikole 1450 560 38,62 0 500 500 60 10,7117 Kajmackalan-Bitola 65393 43815 67,00 19369 20092 39461 4354 9,9418 Bigla-Demir Hisar 47408 43123 90,96 2032 36779 38811 4312 9,9919 Lipa-Krusevo 11686 15555 133,11 80 13920 14000 1555 9,9920 Prespadrvo-Resen 34545 28593 82,77 1800 23933 25733 2860 10,0021 Galicica-Ohrid 50768 39685 78,17 5532 30184 35716 3969 10,0022 Jablanica-Struga 35400 30523 86,22 3746 23724 27470 3053 10,0023 Stogovo-Debar 11766 10600 90,09 800 8740 9540 1060 10,0024 Lopusnik-Kicevo 96868 67575 69,76 11457 49622 61079 6496 9,6125 Sandanski-M.Brod 61212 45160 73,78 8901 31109 40010 5150 11,4026 Sar-Gostivar 27377 22083 80,66 200 19783 19983 2100 9,5027 Lesnica-Tetovo 21186 14273 67,37 1200 11649 12849 1427 9,9928 Karadzica-Skopje 47151 35116 74,48 2600 29324 31924 3192 9,08

29Kumanovo-Kumanovo 27390 18097 66,07 636 15698 16334 1763 9,74

30 Golak-Delcevo 33956 14445 42,54 4408 8256 12664 1781 12,33

Total 1120390 876654 79,91 178718 606483 785201 91492 10,28(Source: JP Macedonian Forest, production-financial plan for 2006, p-8)

tvenost e upravuvan od strana na javnotopretprijatie “Makedonski {umi”, sosta-veno od podra~ni edinici (Tabela 7),koi ja pokrivaat celata teritorija naRepublika Makedonija.

Vo tabelata 5 se dadeni podatoci za

ned and exploited by the public utility “Mace-donian forests”, composed of regional units(Table 7) all over the territory of Republic ofMacedonia.

Data about the total annual quantity of

16

vkupnite koli~ini na drvo, koi se se-~ele vo Republika Makedonija vo peri-odot od 2002 do 2008, sredeno po namena,t.e. upotreba. Evidentno e nagolemuvawena vkupnata se~a za okolu 8%, pri {tose zabele`uva i promena vo u~estvotona poedinite nameni, t.e. u~estvoto naogrevnoto drvo opa|a od 74,5% vo 2002na 68,2% vo 2006, na tehni~koto drvo od16,4% na 20,4% i na otpadnoto drvo od9,3% na 10,4%. Pri toa, koli~inata naogrevnoto drvo ostanuva prakti~no ista,t.e. se nagolemuva od 602 na 606h103

cutted trees are given in Table 5, for the pe-riod from 2002 to 2008. It is possible tofollow that annual quantity was increased forabout 8% and that participation of wood fordifferent purposes is changed, i.e. participa-tion of firewood is decreased from 74,5% in2002 to 68,2% in 2008, of technical wood isincreased from 16,4% to 20,4% and of woodwaste from 9,3% to 10,4%. However, due tothe fact that quantity of firewood remainedpractically the same (from 602 to 606x103

17

m3/god. Vkupnoto zgolemuvawe se dol`ina zgolemenoto proizvodstvo na tehni~-ko drvo (133 na 178h103 m3/god), {toistovremeno rezultira i so zgolemuva-we na koli~inata i promena na sostavotna otpadnoto drvo. Vo tabela 6 e dadensostavot na vkupno ise~enite drva spre-ma tipot na drva, kade se gleda dekaiglolisnite se upotrebuvaat samo kakotehni~ko drvo, kako i deka otpadnotodrvo u~estvuva so 11,5%.

Vo tabelata br.8 e napraveno rezimena vkupnoto prose~no godi{no proizvod-stvo na otpadno drvo vo Republika Ma-kedonija po vid na drvo (od listopadni iiglolisni drvja) i po poteklo, t.e. ope-racija od koja poteknuvaat.

Soglasno izvr{enite ispituvawa(Armenski, 2008), vo makedonski usloviekonomski e opravdano da se transfor-mira vo energija 65% od tehni~kiot po-tencija na otpadot pri se~eweto na {u-mite, 60% od otpadot pri podgotovka naogrevno drvo, 90% od pilewe na trup-cite i obrabotkata na tehni~ko drvo.

Toa rezultira so vkupen mo`en eko-nomi~en kapacitet za proizvodstvo naenergija od 1,22 RJ/god. (1,03 RJ/god.) odlistopadni i 0,19 RJ/god. od iglolisni.

m3/yr), total increase is result only due to theincrease of technical wood production (133na 178x103 m3/yr), resulting also with theincrease of quantity and composition of thewaste wood. Composition of tree species inthe total wood volume is given in Table 6. Itcan be followed that coniferous trees areused only as technical wood, and that thewaste wood participates with 11,5%. A summary of average production ofwaste wood in Republic Macedonia is givenin Table 8, arranged according to the origin(deciduous or coniferous) and the operationof which they are produced. According to the realized investigations(Armenski, 2008), in Macedonia is economi-cally justified to use for energy purposes65% of the technical potential of residues get

During the forest cutting, 60% of thewaste is of firewood preparation, 90% of theone produced during the logs sawing andprocessing of technical wood. That resultswith a total economically justified possibleenergy production of 1,22 PJ/yr (1,03 PJ/yrof deciduous and 0,19 PJ/yr of coniferous).

3. OTPADOCI OD ZEMJODELIE- TO I STO^ARSTVOTO

Zemjodelskoto proizvodstvo rezulti-ra, me|u drugoto, so regularna produkcijana golemi koli~ini na razli~en otpad.Toa se ostatoci po `etvata na `itnite iindustriskite kulturi, zelen~ukot, kakoi grankite od kroeweto na ovo{nite ilozovi nasadi. Vo sto~arstvoto, toa e|ubrivoto vo tvrd i te~en oblik.

Sega{na praktika e otpadocite da sezatrupuvaat so orawe, da se palat na li-ce mesto kade se sobiraat, da se ostavatsami da se raspadnat, ili da se iskoris-

3. AGRICULTURAL AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY WASTE

Agricultural production results, betweenother products, with regular production oflarge quantities of waste. These are residuesafter harvesting the grains and industrial cul-tures, branches after regular annual cuttingof orchards and vineyards. In animal hus-bandry, that is the manure in rigid or liquidshape.

Present habit is to burying the waste byploughing, burning at the site where they ha-

18

Просечна количина на отпадна биомаса од житни растенија во Р. Македонија запериодот (1997-2004) година Табела 9Average annual waste from grains in R. Macedonia for the period 1997 – 2004 Table 9

Ожн.Повр.-

Harvest.Area

Сувамаса

Dry mass

Ожн.Повр.

Harvest. Area

Сувамаса

Dry mass

Ожн.Повр.

Harvest.Area

Теорет-ski

Theore-tical

ТехничkiTechnical

Економ-ski

Economi-cal

ha, ha t/g, t/yr ha, ha t/g, t/yr ha, ha t/g, t/yr

Вид на житно растение

1997-2001 2002-2004 Просечно/Average 1979-2004пченица-сла-ма-wheat straw 115899 374353,8 102893 332344,4 112853,9 364518,1 328066,3 91129,5рж-слама –rye straw 6437 7981,9 4310 5344,4 5373,5 6663,1 5996,8 4331,1јачмен-слама –barley straw 50773 147749,4 46549 135457,6 48661,0 141603,5 127443,2 45313,1овес-слама –oat straw 2620 4087,2 2381 3714,4 2500,5 3900,8 3510,7 1560,3pченка – maise(branches andleaves) 36310 81697,5 33437 75233,3 40389,7 90876,8 81789,1 40894,6ориз-слама –rice – straw 29909,3 19075,3   24492,3 22043,1 19593,9ориз-лушпа –rice – shell

4061

9969,8

2590

6358,5   8164,1 7755,9 7755,9Вкупно – Total 216100 655748,8 192160 577527,8   640218,7 576605,1 210578,4

tat kako dobito~na hrana.- Soglasno izvr{enite istra`uvawa,no i prakti~ni iskustva, golem del odovaa biomasa mo`e da se iskoristi zaproizvodstvo na energija. Nekoi od nivmo`e da se upotrebat za direktno sogo-ruvawe, a drugite mo`e da se prerabotatvo te~ni ili gasni goriva, so ~ie sogoru-vawe mo`e da se proizveduva toplinaili elektri~na energija, ili da se upo-trebat kako pogonski goriva.

Vo princip, se koristat tri grupi natehnologii, i toa:- termotehni~ki transformacii (so-goruvawe, gasifikacija i proizvodstvona mata-nol);- biohemiska transformacija (anae-robna transformacija za dobivawe nabiogas i aerobna za proizvodstvo naetanol); i- hemiska transformacija (biodizel imasla za podma~kuvawe).

Vrz osnova na definiranite koli-~ini na otpadna biomasa vo zemjodel-stvoto i sto~arstvoto vo Republika Ma-kedonija i prethodno definiranitevrednosti na dolnata toplinska mo} zasekoj vid na biomasa vo makedonski us-lovi, mo`no e da se opredeli koli~i-nata na energija koja bi mo`ela da seproizvede od istata. Prose~nata eko-nomski raspolo`iva energija od otpad-nata masa od zemjodelstvoto iznesuva6,72 RJ/god. Za delot sobran od samoto

ve been collected, to let them to decay, or touse them for animal feeding.- According to realized investigations andpractical experiences, large amount of thisbiomass can be used for energy production.Some of it can be used for direct burning,and some can be transformed in liquid orgas fuels. By their burning, heat or electricitycan be produced, or they can be used asdriving fuel.

Principally, three groups of technologiescan be applied, i.e.:- Thermotechnical transformations (burn-ing, gasification and methanol production);- Biochemical transformation (anaerobictransformation for biogas production andaerobic for ethanol production); and- Chemical transformation (biodisel andlubricants).

Based on the defined quantities of was-te biomass in agriculture and animal husban-dry in Republic of Macedonia and previouslydetermined low heat values for each type ofbiomass in Macedonian conditions, it is pos-sible to calculate the energy which could beproduced from it. Average economical ener-gy potential from the waste biomass fromagriculture is 6,72 PJ/yr for the part collectedfrom open field and 0,36 PJ/yr for the part

19

Просечна количина на отпадна биомаса од собирање и преработка на градинарскирастенија во Р. Македонија за 1997-2004 Tabela 10Average annual quantity of waste from harvesting and processing vegetable plants in R.Macedonia for the period 1997 – 2004 Table 10

Oтпадна биомасаWaste biomass

Vкупно t/godTotal t/yrOжнеана

површинаHarvested

area

PриносYield

Ожне-ана

Harves-ted

Прера-ботка

Process-sed

Вид на градинарскорaстение

Type of vegetableplant

ha t/yr t/yr t/yr

теорет-ска

Theoreti-cal

ТехничкаTechnical

Еконо-mi~na

Economi-cal

Компир – potato 13333 166352 4019,3 20857,7 24877,0 21145,0 14926,2Грав – beans 17548 13780 4930,2 5569,0 10499,2 9974,2 7874,4Зелка – cabage 3581 67582 544,4 14700,0 15244,4 12958,0 6097,8Domati – tomatoes 6715 126312 1295,0 12211,2 13506,2 12156,0 5402,5Пипер – paprika 7694 111059 1924,5 11343,3 13267,7 11941,0 6633,9Lук, кромид –garlic, onion 5538 39739 751,8 6928,7 7680,5 6528,4 3840,2Бостан – melons andwater melons 7988 117836 760,0 43731,1 44491,2 35593,0 22245,6

Вкупно – Total 62397 642660 14225,2 115341,0 129566 110295,6 67020,6

Просечна количина на отпадна биомаса од собирање и преработка на индустрискирастенија во Р. Македонија за 1997-2004 Табела 11Average annual yield quantities of waste biomass from harvesting and processing ofindustrial plants in R of Macedonia for 1997-2004 Table 11

Отпадна биомасаWaste biomass

Вкупно, t/godTotal. t/yrОжн.

Повр.Harvest.

Area

При-ноsi_Yield Ожнеана

Harvested

Прера-ботка

Proces-sed

Вид на индустрискорастение

Type of industrial plant

хаha

t/god.t/yr

t/god.t/yr

t/god.t/yr

ТеоретскаTheoretical

Технич-ка

Technical

Еконоm-ska

Economi-cal

Шеќ. Репка – sugar beet 1989 58442 513,45 6130,6 6644,07 5315,26 4318,64Тутун – tobacco 22418 26563 6175,82 2470,3 8646,12 6052,28 2161,53Памук – cotton 100 60 40 3 43 34,4 10,75Сончоглед – sunflower 9510 10963 9112,2 1873,6 10985,8 9887,22 7140,77Пипер-инд- pepper-ind. 801 3291 200,25 329,1 529,35 423,48 158,805Афион – poppy 291 183 50 21,5 71,54 57,232 42,924

Вкупно Total 35109 99502 16091,72 10828,1 26919,88 21769,9 13833,4

zemjodelsko proizvodstvo i 0,36 RJ/god.Za delot koj preostatanuva od indus-triskoto proizvodstvo. Toa pravi vkup-no 7,08 RJ/god. Evidentno e golemoto u-~estvo na biomasata od proizvodstvo na`itarici (45,5%) i otpadot od re`ewe-to na ovo{ki i lozovi nasadi (32,1%).Ekonomski opravdanata raspolo`iva en-ergija od sto~arstvoto i `ivinarstvotoiznesuva 0,94 RJ/god.

Interesen e odnosot na teoretskiotsprema tehni~kiot i ekonomskiot poten-cijal. Kako {to e ve}e spomenato, toj serazlikuva za razli~ni tipovi na otpad,

from industrial production. That makes a to-tal of 7,08 PJ/yr. Evident is significant partici-pation of the biomass, collected after grainsharvesting (45,5%) and the one collectedfrom orchards and vineyards (32,1%). Eco-nomical energy potential from animal hus-bandry is 0,94 PJ/yr.

Interesting is the relation between thetheoretical, technical and economical poten-tial. As it was already mentionned, it is differ-ent for different type of waste. However, the

20

Просечна количина на отпадна биомаса од овошни стебла и винова лоза во Р. Маке-донија за 1997-2004 Табела 12Average annual quantity of waste biomass from logging fruit trees and vineyard in R of Mace-donia for 1997-2004 Table 12

Вкупна количина на отпадна биомаса, t/godTotal quantity of waste biomass. t/yrброј на

стеблаnumber of

trees

ПриносYield

От-падWas

teСтеблаTrees

Прера-ботka

Proces-sing

Vид на овошнистебла, лозје

Type of fruit treesand vineyard

x1000 t/g kg/tree t/g t/g

ТеоретскаTheoretical

ТехничкаTechnical

Економ-ска

Econo-mical

Јаболка – apple 3650 69273 2 7300,0 6802,9 14102,9 10577,2 6346,3Круши – pears 558 6952 2 1116,0 620,1 1736,1 1302,1 781,3Дуњи – quinces 51 726 2,5 127,5 120,5 247,9 198,4 111,6Сливи – plums 1516 21777 7 10612,0 2532,3 13144,4 9201,0 5257,7Цреши – cherries 166 3325 4,5 747,0 487,4 1234,4 987,5 555,5Вишни – sourcherries 975,4 4742 4,5 4389,3 659,8 5049,1 4039,3 2272,1Кајсии – apricots 162,4 2819 8 1299,2 286,1 1585,3 1268,3 713,4Праски – peaches 507,7 8541 7 3553,9 914,3 4468,2 3351,1 1787,3Ореви – walnuts 173 2538 5 865,0 505,7 1370,7 1028,0 616,8Лозја – vineyard 91615 205790 1,6 146584,0 11275,6 157859,6 110501,8 63143,9Вкупно – Total 99374,5 326483   176594,9 24204,7 200798,6 142454,6 81585,9

Просечен теоретски, технички и економски потенцијал на отпадна биомаса одсточарството во Р. Македонија (1997-2004) Табела 13Average annual theoretical, technical and economical quantity of waste biomass fromlivestock’s in R. of Macedonia (1997-2004) Table 13

број добитокnumber of livestock

маса eadmass отпадно ѓубре – waste manure

ГрлоHead

МасаMass

ТеоретскаTheoretical

ТехничкаTechnical

ЕкономскаEconomical

Vид надобиток

Type of livestockVкупенброј

total heads

Шталскиstall

heads kg/грлоkg/head

kg/denkg/day

t/godt/yr

t/godt/yr

t/godt/yr

Говеда – cattle 266126 186290 500 32,6 3166633,3 2216664,71 1773331,77Коњи – horses 51217 12805 500 28 523437,74 130867,1 78520,26Свињи – pigs 192275 134593 100 6,5 456172,44 319321,893 255457,514Овци – sheep 1318205 659100 50 2,4 1154747,6 577371,6 173211,48Живина – poultry 3080616 2156431 2,5 0,15 168663,73 118064,608 70838,7649Вкупно – Total         5469654,8 3362289,91 2351359,79

no vkupniot prosek e kako {to sleduva:teoretski potencijal 19,03 RJ/god. (100%), tehni~ki potencijal 14,08 RJ/god.(74,42%) i ekonomski potencijal 7,08RJ/god. (37,20%). Treba da se zeme vo ob-zir deka ovie odnosi se so promenlivkarakter, zavisno od sostavot na zem-jodelski kulturi, organizacijata na pro-izvodstvo i sobirawe na otpadnata bio-masa, kako i pazarnite uslovi za plas-man na proizvedenata energija vo spo-redba so drugite mo`ni primeni na bio-masa.

total average relation is as follows: theoreti-cal potential 19,03 PJ/yr (100%), technicalpotential 14,08%) and economic potential7,08 PJ/yr (37,2%). It is necessary to takeinto account that these relations are of chan-geable character, depending on the compo-sition of agricultural cultures, organization ofproduction and collection of biomass waste,as also the market conditions in comparizonwith the other possible uses of biomass.

21

22

4. GRADSKI OTPADCvrstiot komunalen otpad mo`e is-

to taka da se tretira kako energetskiresurs, so ogled na toa da sodr`i organ-ski materii. Toa dozvoluva negovo sogo-ruvawe so dodavawe na mali koli~inina dopolnitelno gorivo, ili duri i beztoa. Od energetska gledna to~ka, kvali-tetot na otpadot zavisi pred se od ne-goviot sostav. Vo razvienite evropskizemji sostavot ne organski materii dos-tignuva do skoro 80% od vkupniot otpad,od koi nad 65% se od biolo{ko poteklo(hartija, prehrambeni i `ivotinski ot-padoci). Vo Republika Makedonija pri-sustvoto na organskite materii e zna~i-telno ponisko, a so ogled na sporedbenoponiskiot standard na naselenieto.

So ogled na faktot deka vo Repub-lika Makedonija ne se vr{at regularnianalizi na sostavot na cvrstiot otpad,vo ovoj materijal se upotrebeni poda-toci na avtorite od dosega{ni studii iistra`uvawa (Armenski, 2009), vo koi sevklu~eni i rezultatite od pove}e sni-mawa na sostojbite na poedini lokali-teti i analizi na uzorci na lokalniototpad, kako i podatoci od analizi, vr-{eni od organizaciite koi stopanisu-vaat so smetot.

Odlo`uvaweto na cvrstiot otpad inegovoto ponatamo{no tretirawe e edenod najgolemite nere{eni problemi voRepublika Makedonija. Vo pogolemitenaseleni mesta, istiot se odlaga vo ot-voreni deponii, kade naj~esto se spalu-va. Toa rezultira so zagaduvawe na voz-duhot i vodata, uni{tuvawe na obra-botliva zemja, pojavi na nekontroliranipo`ari, kontinualna opasnost po zdra-vjeto na naselenieto i uni{tuvawe naprirodnite resursi.

Skoro edna tretina od naselenietona Republika Makedonija e locirano voSkopje i negovata okolina. Natamo{ni49% od naselenieto `ivee vo 14 gradskiop{tini (Bitola, Prilep, Ohrid, Tetovo,

4. URBAN WASTE Communal waste can be also treated as

energy resource due to the fact that contain-ing organic matters. That allows its burningwith addition of small quantities of other fuelsor even without that. Quality of urban waste,from energetic point of view, depends mainlyon its composition. In developed Europeancountries nearly 80% of total waste is orga-nic. Above 65% of it is of biological origin(paper, food and animal wastes). In Republicof Macedonia this presence is much lower,due to the lower living standard of populati-on.

Taking into account that regular analy-ses of the composition of the communalwaste are not performed, results of own stu-dies and investigations of the authors (Ar-menski, 2009) are used, including the resultsof more scannings of situation of more locali-ties and analyses of samples of local waste,plus data of analyses made by entities go-verning the collection and storing the waste.

Deposition of the communal waste andits treatment is one of the biggest unsolvedproblems in Republic of Macedonia. In big-ger urban centers it is normally deposited inopen deposits, where being burned after-wards. That results with air and water pol-lution, destroying of land, appearance of notcontrolled fires, continual danger for thehealth of population and destroying of natu-ral resources.

About one third of the total population ofMacedonia is located in Skopje and its sur-rounding. Further 49% live in 14 town muni-cipalities (Bitola, Prilep, Ohrid, Tetovo, Gosti-var, Kicevo, Kumanovo, Shtip, Strumica,

23

Prose~na toplinska mo} na cvrst komunalen otpad od gradski i selski naselbivo Republika Makedonija Tabela 18Average heat value of rhe rigid communal waste from towns and villages in Republicof Macedonia Table 18

во %маса% ofmass

Hd накомпо-нента,kJ/kg

Hd of com-ponentkJ/kg

Hd насметот

kJ/kgHd ofwastekJ/kg

во %маса% ofmass

Hd накомпо-нента,kJ/kg

Hd of com-ponentkJ/kg

Hd насметот

kJ/kgHd ofwastekJ/kg

Органска материјаOrganic matter

Градски – Towns Селски – VillagesХартија – Paper 24 14700 2646 18 14700 2646

Отпадоци од храна – Waste from food 20 5735 1147 12 5735 688,2

Отпадоци од кожа-Waste from leather 1,2 19600 235 1,2 19600 235,2

Пластика / Plastics 6,1 26940 1643 4,6 26940 1239

Гума – Rubber 2,4 23250 558 1,8 23250 418,5

Текстил – Textil 4 16275 651 4 16275 651

Улици и дворови – Streets & Yards 1,3 7694 100 1,3 7694 100

Вкупно – Total 59 7862 42,9 5977,9

Sl.br.3.Komunalen cvrst otpad vo R. Makedonija – Grupirawe po regioniFig.3. Communal rigid waste in R. Macedonia – Collection regions

Gostivar, Ki~evo, Kumanovo, [tip, Stru-mica, Gevgelija, Veles, Struga i Ko~ani).Ostatokot `ivee vo selski naselbi, bezregularno sobirawe na smetot.

Za da se ovozmo`i organizacija naregularno sobirawe na smt pod ekonom-ski oravdani uslovi, predlo`eno e dateritorijata na istata se podeli na 7

Gevgelia, Veles, Struga and Kocani). Therest lives in villages without regular collectionof waste.

In order to enable organization of regu-lar collection of waste under economicallyjustified conditions, it is proposed to organize7 regional deposits of waste (Fig.3), where to

24

Vkupno teorisko proizvodstvo na urban cvrst otpad vo regionite voMakedonija Tabela br.19Total theoretical production of rigid urban waste in regions in R. Macedonia Table 19

Вкупна теоретска количина на цврст отпад (t/god)Total theoretical quantity of rigid waste (t/yr)

Ознака на

регион

Sig

n of

the

regi

on Регион – Region

домаќин+

комерција

Res

iden

cies

+ co

mer

/cia

l

Клинич

-ки H

ospi

tals

Градб

+рушење

Bui

ldin

g+de

stro

y-in

g

индус-

трија

Indu

stry

Вкупно

теорет

-ска

Tota

lth

eore

tic-

A Северо-западна (Тетово)Nord/West (Tetovo) 71453,1 265 8122,2 2350 82190,258

B Северна (Скопје)Nord (Skopje) 167129,4 395 19432,6 16320 203277

C Северо-источна (Куманово)Nord/East (Kumanovo) 64291,4 145 4857,9 5835 75129,35

D Југо-западна (Охрид)South/West (Ohrid) 44071 165 5147,9 4065 53448,908

E Пелагониска (Битола)Palagonia (Bitola) 64538,8 250 7142,3 11440 83371,175

F Централно-јужна (Велес)Ceantral/South (Veles) 63464,5 110 5611,7 12240 81426,2

G Источна (Штип)East (Shtip) 83705,5 155 9856,7 12470 106187,25

Σ   558653,8 1485 60171,3 64720 685030,14

regioni, vo koi da se organiziraat regi-onalni deponii na otpad (sl.br.3), kadeponatamu da se tretira so posovremenitehnologii.

Pri procenkata na koli~inite nacvrst otpad po poedinite regioni, ko-risteni se rezultatite od sopstvenimerewa i od merewata na postojnite de-ponii. Usvoeno e deka vo gradskite na-selbi se proizveduva 0.82 kg/den otpadpo ~ovek (300 kg/god), vo selskite na-selbi 0,41 kg/den po ~ovek (150 kg/god), avo komercijalnite objekti 0,14 kg/denspet po ~ovek (50 kg/god).

Normalno, procenetiot teoretskipotencijal ne mo`e tehni~ki da se so-bere i odlo`i vo deponija, za ponata-mo{en tretman, sortirawe na suroviniili proizvodsvo na energija. Dopolni-telno, treba da se zeme vo predvid dekadel od koli~inite (posebno vo selskitenaselbi) na otpadot se otfrla inci-dentno, ili se koristi za sopstvenipotrebi (dobito~na hrana ili sogoruva-we). Toa e pri~inata tehni~kiot poten-cijal da e pomal od teoretskiot.

Pri procenkata na ekonomi~niot po-tencijal, pome|u drugoto, treba da se ze-me vo predvid i toa deka del od otpadotmo`e da se reciklira , t.e. povtorno dase vnese vo industriskite tehnolo{kiprocesi za dobivawe na novi proizvodi,ili za dobivawe na kompost, t.e. organ-sko |ubrivo. Razvoj na vakvi recikla`-ni aktivnosti vo Republika Makedonijae vo tek vo zadnite desetina godini, no

organize its treatment with modern technolo-gies.

For the estimation of quantities of rigidwaste in Macedonian regions, results of ownmeasurements and the ones made by localstaff are applied. It is accepted that in urbanconcentrations 0,82 kg/day per human beenis produced (300 kg/yr), in villages is 0,41kg/day and 0,14 kg/day per human been (50kg/yr) in commercial units.

Normally, the estimated theoretical po-tential cannot be collected and stored in de-posits for further treatment, classification ofraw materials or energy production. Plus, it isnecessary to take into account that a part ofit (particularly in villages) is collected inci-dently or is used for own needs (animal foodor burning). That’s the reason why technicalpotential is smaller than the theoretical one.

For the estimation of economical poten-tial, beside other factors, it is necessary totake into account that part of the waste canbe recycled, i.e. returned back to the indus-trial technological processes for productionof new products or for production of com-post, i.e. organic manure. Development ofsuch recycling activities is in flow during thelast decade in Macedonia, however situ-ation is still far of being satisfactory. In anycase, there are no official data neither for the

25

opfatenosta e seu{te daleku od zadovo-litelna. Vo sekoj slu~aj ne postojat ofi-cijalni podatoci niti za koli~inite nasobran otpad, niti za procentite na re-cikla`a. Toa e i pri~inata da pri pro-cenkata na ekonomskiot potencijal zaproizvodstvo na energija se koristenidve varijanti, t.e. so 25% i so 40% re-cikla`a na hartija i plastika.

Prose~niot vkupen ekonomski poten-cyjal na energija vo gradskiot otpad (voslu~aj na 25 reciklirawe na hartija,plastika i guma) iznesuva 56,7% od teh-ni~ki raspolo`iviot potencijal, a voslu~aj na 40% recikla`a, samo 48,1%.

Najgolemo u~estvo vo ekonomski op-ravdaniot potecijal ima otpadot od do-ma}instvata (66,7%), komercijalniot ot-pad (19,5%) i industriskiot otpad (10,3%). Otpadot od gradba i ru{ewe i kli-ni~kiot otpad imaat zanemarlivo u~es-tvo (2,9% i 0,7%).

Na nivo na zemjata, prose~niot vku-pen ekonomski energetski potencijal (so25% recikla`a na hartija, plastika iguma) iznesuva 2,33 RJ/god., a vo slu~aj na40% recikla`a 1,98 RJ/god.

Dadenite procenki mo`e da pretrpatzna~ajni izmeni, vo zavisnost od odluki-te, koi }e bidat doneseni po odnos nana~inot na odlagawe i tretmanot nagradskiot otpad, t.e. orientacija konproizvodstvo na biogas, ili kon "trajnosogoruvawe. Zasega ne e izrabotena niedna sporedbena studija, koja da ilus-trira prednosti i negativni "strani nanivna primena vo makedonski uslovi.

quantities of collected waste nor for the per-cents of recycling. That is the reason why,for the need of estimation of economical po-tential for energy production, two variantshave been used, i.e. 25% and 40% recyclingof paper and plastics.

The average economic potential for en-ergy production (in the case of 25% recyclingof paper, plastics and rubber) is 56,7% of thetechnically available quantity of waste, and inthe case of 40% recycling it is only 48,1%.

The waste of households has the biggestparticipation in the economically justified en-ergy potential, then it is waste of commercialunits (19,5%) and industrial waste (10,3%).Participation of the waste from civil engi-neering activities and hospitals can be neg-lected (2,9% and 0,7%).

At the country level, the average eco-nomically justified energy potential is 2.33PJ/yr (with 25% recycling of paper, plasticsand rubber) and 1,98% with 40% recycling.

Given estimations can be significantlychanged, depending on the decisions whichshall be taken for the way of deposition andtreatment of the waste, i.e. orientation to-wards direct burning or biogas production.Temporarily, there is no any comparativestudy on disposal, illustrating advantagesand disadvantages of their application in Ma-cedonian conditions.

5. BIOGORIVA

Pra{aweto za mo`nostite, obemot ina~inot na razvoj na t.n.”biogoriva” e vomomentot pod centralno vnimanie nanau~nata javnost i energetskata politi-

5. BIOFUELSThe question of possibilities, volume and

ode of development of s.c.”biofuels” is pre-sently under central attention of scientistsand energy policy in Europe, at least when

26

ka na Evropa, barem koga se vo pra{aweobnovlivite energetski izvori. Edinobiogorivata nudat mo`nost za baremdelimi~no osloboduvawe od sega{nata100%-na uvozna zavisnost vo transport-niot sektor i toa pod mnogu povolni us-lovi vo odnos na za{tita na ~ovekovataokolina. Pod posebno vnimanie e mo`-nosta za proizvodstvo na “biodizel”, kojvo potpolnost mo`e da ja zameni upo-trebata na dizel gorivoto, ako se upot-rebuva samostojno, ili da mu gi podobrisvojstvata po odnos na negativnoto dej-stvo na okolinata, vo kolku se upotrebu-va kako dodatok.

renewable energies are in question. Onlybiofuels offer possibility of escaping of thepresent 100% dependence of import in thetransport sector and that is under very con-venient conditions, when influence to the hu-man environment is in question. Productionof “biodiesel” is under particular attention be-cause enabling full substitution of diesel fu-els, when used independently, or to improveits characteristics related to the negative im-pact to the environment when being added.

Technology of biodiesel production isalready developed and proved all over theworld. New investigations are directionedtowards its improvements related to the in-

Seme od rastenija kako surovina za dobivawe na biodizel Tabela br.20Plant seed as raw material for production of biodiesel Table 20

Maslo sodr`ano vosemeto

Oil contained in seed

Oil contained in seed

Izvadeno maslo od 100 kgseme

Produced oil of 100 kg seedVid na rastenie

Type of plant% kg

Kikiritki – Peanuts 46-48 42Son~ogled – Sunflower 32-40 30Seme od repka – Beat seed 38-45 37Seme od pamuk – Cotton Seed 18-22 13Soja – Soya 18-22 14Susam – Poppy 52-56 50

Tehnologijata na proizvodstvo nabiodizel e ve}e vo potpolnost sovlada-na i doka`ana {irum svetot. Novite is-tra`uvawa se usmereni kon nejzino uso-vr{uvawe, vo odnos na nagolemuvawe naefikasnosta na transformaciite i op-remata, kako i sni`uvawe na tro{kovi-te na proizvodstvo.

Osnovna surovina za proizvodstvona biodizel se maslata, sodr`ani voodredeni vidovi na rastitelni kulturi(Tabela 20). Istite mo`e da se ektrahi-raat i, kako takvi, direktno da se upo-trebuvaat kako gorivo vo redica na di-zel motori. Sepak, a pred se zaradi pos-tigawe na potrebnata viskoznost, nor-malno maslata se dorabotuvaat prekutransformacija vo esteri, kako op{toprifaten oblik na biodizelot. Treba dase napomene deka esterite mo`e da sedobijat ne samo od rastitelni masla,tuku i od `ivotinska mast i otpadnomaslo za gotvewe, koi se isto taka tri-gliceridi.

Prednoto zna~i deka sekoja zemja

icrease of the efficiency of transformationsand equipment, as also for the decrease ofproduction costs.

Basic raw material for production ofbiodiesel are the oils, contained in someplant cultures (Table 20). They can be ex-tracted and directly used as fuels in manytypes of diesel engines. Anyhow, and due tothe need to reach requested viscosity of thefuel, they are normally improved by trans-formation in esters, as generaly acceptedshape of biodiesel.

It is necessary to underline that esterscan be get not only from plant oils but alsofrom animal fat and waste edible oil, whichare triglicerids, too.

The above said means that each countrycan organize its own production of biodiesel,in the frame of possibilities of own agri-cultural production and animal husbandry.Limitations are related to the influence of theexisting (end requested in future) foodproduction. Their overcoming requests orga-nization of wide investigations and determi-nation of sustainable development strategy

27(Armenski, 2009)

28

Prose~na koli~ina na otpadno maslo za jadewe od doma}instva i ugostitelstvoAverage quantity of wasye oil of households and restaurants Tabela br.23/Table 23

Specifi~enotpad

Specificwaste

Otpadnomaslo

Waste oil

Otpadnomaslo

Waste oil

Otpadnomaslo

Waste oil

VkupnoTotalBroj doma}instva

Number ofhouseholds

kg/domkg/home

t/godt/year

Broj na`iteli

Populationkg/`itelkg/head

t/godt/year

t/godt/year

502000 3 1506 2050000 1,0 2050 3556(Armenski, 2009)

Procena na mo`ni koli~ini na biodizel vo R. Makedonija [t/god] Tabela br.24Estimation of possible quantities of biodiesel in R. Makedonija [t/year] Table 24

SurovinaRaw material

Koli~inaQuantity

Rastitelnimasla

Vegetable oils

Recikliranomaslo

Recycled oil

@ivotinskamast

Animal fat

VkupnoTotal

Vlezni surovini – Raw materialsRafinirano masloRefined oil 1000,00 3556,40 3556,00 4484,00 11596,4

Metanol - Methanol 107,00 380,53 380,49 479,79 1240,81

KOH - KOH 10,00 35,56 35,56 44,84 125,96

Kiselina - Acid 8,00 28,45 28,44 35,87 100,77

Voda - Water 17,00 60,46 60,45 76,22 214,14Elektricitet, Kwhelectricity, kWh 20,00 71128,00 71120,00 89680,00 231948,00

Izlezni proizvodi - ProductsBiodizel - Biodiesel 1000,00 3556,40 3556,00 4484,00 11596,40

Glicerin - Glycerine 125,00 444,55 444,50 560,50 1449,55

\ubrivo - Fertilizer 23,00 81,79 81,79 103,13 266,72(Armenski, 2009)

Vkupna energetska vrednost na biodizelot vo R. Makedonija Tabela 25Total energy value of biodiesel in R. Macedonia Table 25

BiodizelBiodiesel

Hd

Sodr`ana energija vobiodizelot

Energy contained inbiodiesel

DizelDiesel

Proizvodstvo od:Production from:

kg kJ/kg GJ/god MWh/god t/godRastitelno maslo – Plant oil 3556400 38600 137277,04 38121,83 3431,92

Reciklir maslo – Recycled oil 3556000 39200 139395,20 38721,20 3484,88

@ivotinska mast – Animal fat 4484000 39500 177118,00 76843,03 4427,95

Vkupno - Total 11596400 453790,24 153686,06 11344,76(Armenski, 2009)

mo`e da organizira sopstveno proizvod-stvo na biodizel, vo ramki koi se de-finirani so mo`nostite na sopstvenotozemjodelsko i sto~arsko proizvodstvo.Ograni~uvawata se odnesuvaat na vlija-nieto na postojnoto (i idnoto potrebno)proizvodstvo na hrana. Nadminuvawetona istite podrazbira {iroki predhodniprou~uvawa i definirawe na odr`livastrategija za razvoj preku reorganizacijana postojnoto proizvodstvo na hrana irazvoj na novi proizvodni povr{ini.

through reorganization of existing food pro-duction and development of new productionareas. The problem is very sensitive andpossible solutions depend very much on ma-ny factors. Present process of globalizationinfluences both, i.e. the food and energymarket. Optimal solutions are in direct corre-lation with the possibility of the country tocover economically its needs for food andexport power to cover the import of more andmore expensive fuels. The most unfavorableis the situation of poor undeveloped coun-

29

Cena na ~inewe na proizveden kg biodizel vo R. Makedonija Tabela br.26Production price of biodiesel in R.Macedonia Table 26

Specifi~na cena – Specific priceInsta-lirankapa-citet

Installedcapacity

MetanolMathanol

Inves-ticiiInvest-ments

Inves-ticiiInvest-ments

Osta-natiOther

VkupnaTotal

IzvorSource

t/god t/god x106 $ $/kg $/kg $/kgRastitelno maslo– Vegetable oil

3432 380,501,89 0,55 0,63 1,18

Recikliranomaslo– Recycled oil 3485 380,50 1,92 0,55 0,52 1,07@ivotinska mast– Animal fat 4428 480,00 2,43 0,55 0,64 1,19Vkupno - Total 11345 1241,00 6,24

(Armenski, 2009)Zemjodelie - Koristewe na zamji{teto Tabela 27Agriculture – Land Use Table 27

Upotreba na zemji{teto – Land Use 1990 – 1999ha

2000 – 2005ha

Obrabotlivo zemji{te – Arable crop land 612.200 634.297 Navodnuvano - Irigated 60.153 31.755 Bez navodnuvawe - Rainfed 550.050 602.500Pasi{ta - Pastures 630.00 707.263[umi i po{umeno zemji{te – Forests and woodland 997.37 934.13Drugo zemji{te – Other land 331.93 191.35

(Armenski, 2009)Problemot e mnogu ~uvstvitelen i

mo`nite re{enija zavisat od mnogu fak-tori. Sega{niot proces na globalizacijaima vlijanie na dvata, t.e. na energet-skiot i pazarot na hrana. Optimalnitere{enija se vo direktna korelacija somo`nostite na zemjata ekonomi~no da gipokrie sopstvenite potrebi za hrana iekonomskata sila za pokrivawe na seposkapite goriva. Najnepovolna e situa-cijata vo siroma{nite nerazvieni zemjiso uvozno orientirani ekonomii i neraz-vieno zemjodelie. Od druga strana, vak-vite zemji raspolagaat so golemi povr-{ini na obrabotlivo zemji{te, koe mo`eda se preorientira kon proizvodstvo na“energetski” kulturi. Makedonija e tipi-~en primer na vakvite tipovi na ekono-mii, t.e. nejzinoto vkupno stopanstvo euvozno orientirano i ne e sposobno da gipokrie sopstvenite potrebi za hrana.Sprema toa, napravenite procenki zamo`no proizvodstvo na biodizel vozemjata (Tabeli br. 21-25) se samo ilus-trativni, t.e osem vo delot za reci-kla`a, upotrebata na “bio-energetskite”

tries with import orientated economy andundeveloped agriculture. On the other hand,such countries have on disposal rather largeareas of arable land, which can be orientatedtowards production of “energy” cultures.Macedonia is a typical example of such typeof economies, i.e. its total economy is importorientated and it is not capable to cover ownneeds for food. Therefore, estimations madefor possible production of biodiesel in thecountry (Tables 21-25) are only for illus-tration purposes, i.e. except in the part withrecycled ones, the use of “bio-energy” rawmaterials would have direct influence to thequality and volume of the supply of nationalfood market. On the other hand, problem ofMacedonian agriculture and animal husban-dry is not absence of possibilities for satis-factory production of food but impossobilityto get enterence to the international marketswith its competitive part of production andabsence of protection of import of foreignsubvencionned products. That results with itsstagnation during the whole period of transi-tion. It’s evident that orientation towards pro-duction of “energy” cultures on the abando-

30

surovini direktno bi se odrazila nakvalitetot i obemot na snabduvawe napazarot na hrana. Od druga strana,problemot na makedonskoto zemjodel-stvo i sto~arstvo ne e nevozmo`nosta nadovolno proizvodstvo na hrana, tuku ot-sustvo na pristap do me|narodnite paza-ri so konkurentniot del na proizvoditei otsustvo na merki na za{tita na sops-tvenoto proizvodsvo od uvoz na stranskisubvencionirani proizvodi. Toa rezul-tira so negova stagnacija vo celiot tekna tranzicioniot period. Evidentno edeka orientacija kon proiz-vodstvo na“energetski” kulturi na del od napu{-tenite i na novoosvoeni povr{ini mo`eda bide re{enie na del od negativnitesostojbi. Ova tvrdewe mo`e da sepodr`i so:- Proizvodnite tro{kovi (Tabela br.26), vo kombinacija so evropskite “zele-ni” merki za podr{ka se, ili }e bidatmnogu skoro prifatlivi, a vo soglasnostso razvojot na cenite na gorivata nasvetskiot pazar;- Ima na raspolagawe dovolno slobod-ni obrabotlivi povr{ini (Tabela br.27);- Toa ovozmo`uva ispolnuvawe na ob-vrskite kon Evropskata Unija, po odnosna usloveno minimalno u~estvo na bio-goriva vo transportot so doma{ni, a nekako sega so uvozni surovini; i kone~no- Otvara proizvoden sektor za zemjo-delstvoto so garantiran plasman i pri-fatlivi otkupni ceni.

So ogled na serioznata usmerenostna EU kon postigawe na zacrtanite celido 2020 i ponatamu 2030 i 2050 god.,problemot na razvoj na sopstveno pro-izvodstvo na biogoriva treba da serazbere mnogu seriozno i da se pristapikon potrebnite tehni~ko/tehnolo{ko/ekonomski istra`uvawa i izrabotka naodr`liva strategija za razvoj. Vo spro-tivno, mo`e da se slu~at povtoruvawana gre{ki, kakva {to e izgradbata napogonot za proizvodstvo na 30.000 t/godbiodizel bez sopstvena surovinska baza.

ned and new arable land can be solution fora part of present negative situation. Suchstatement can be supported with the factthat:- Production costs (Table 26) in combina-tion with European “green” incentives are orshall be acceptable very soon, according tothe development of fuel prices at the interna-tional market;- There is enough free arable land ondisposal (Table 27);- Enable fulfillment of the obligations to-wards EC, related to the conditioned minimalparticipation of biofuels in the transport sec-tor with home and not, as it is presently, withimported raw materials; and finally- It’s opening a new production sector foragriculture with guaranteed market and ac-ceptable buying prices.

According to the serious orientation ofEC towards fulfillment of planned targets for2020 and furthermore for 2030 and 2050, theproblem of development of own productionof biofuels should be understood very seri-ously and it is necessary to begin with tech-nical/yechnological/economy investigationsand preparation of a sustainable develop-ment strategy. If not, country shall face re-petition of mistakes, as it is completion of thebiodiesel production plant with capacity of30.000 t/year, without own raw materialsproduction base.

31

6. ZAKLU^OCI I PREPORAKIIzvr{enite procenki na teoretski-

ot, tehni~kiot i ekonomskiot energetskipotencijal na otpadnata biomasa vo Re-publika Makedonija (otpadno drvo, zem-jodelstvo, sto~arstvo i komunalen ot-pad), kako i mo`nostite za proizvodstvona biodizel, ovozmo`uvaat da se izvr{izbirna procenka na istite i u~estvotona poedinite kategorii vo nea.

Vkupniot prose~en energetski po-tencijal na otpadnata biomasa vo Re-publika Makedonija e pretstaven na sl.br.3, po kategorii i tip na otpadoci, zaperiodot od 1997 do 2004.god.

Najgolemo u~estvo vo vkupniot godi-{en potencijal na otpadnata biomasa voRepublika Makedonija imaat otpadocite

6. CONCLUSIONS ANDRECOMMENDATIONSEstimations made for the theoretical,

technical and economic energy potential ofwaste biomass in Republic of Macedonia(forestry, agriculture, animal husbandry andcommunal waste) enable to make also theestimation of its summary and participationof different categories in it.

At Fig.3, total average energy potentialof waste biomass in Macedonia is presentedfor the period from 1997-2004, arranged ac-cording to criteria and type of waste.

Largest participation in the total econo-mical energy potential of waste biomass in

Sl.4. Prose~en vkupen godi{en energetski potencijal na otpadna biomasavo Republika Makedonija za periodot od 1997 - 2004

Fig.4. Total average energy potential of waste biomass in Republic of Macedoniafor the period 1997 - 2004

32

od zemjodelstvoto, so 7,10 RJ/god. Vtorresurs po zna~aj e komunalniot otpad so2,33 RJ/god, potoa otpadnoto drvo so 1,22RJ/god i, na krajot, energetskiot poten-cijal na sto~arstvoto so 0,94 RJ/god. Toapravi vkupno 11,59 RJ/god.

Zna~eweto na energetskiot resurs odotpadocite od {umarstvoto, zemjodel-stvoto, sto~arstvoto i gradskiot otpadne treba da se tretira oddelno od vkup-niot energetski potencijal na biomasavo Republika Makedonija, t.e. oddelnood energetskiot potencijal na {umite iproizvodstvoto na “energetski” kulturi.Podatocite samo potvrduvaat deka vopra{awe e golem energetski resurs, kojmo`e zna~itelno i pozitivno da vlijaena pokrienosta na energetskata potro-{uva~ka so doma{ni energetski izvori.

Od druga strana, evidentno e dekaotsustvuva poprecizna orientacija zamo`nostite i potencijalnata goleminana energetskiot resurs, t.e.:

Vo uslovi na kontinualno opa|awe na{umskite povr{ini vo zadnite 20-tinagodini, ne postoi odr`ana strategija zarazvoj, bazirana na prirodnite mo`nos-ti i potencijalniot zna~aj za razvojot naenergetikata vo Republika Makedonija.Iako toa e i sega eden od najzna~ajniteenergetski resursi vo zemjata, evident-no e deka so planski pristap {umar-stvoto mo`e da se razvie i da prevzemeu{te pogolemo u~estvo vo energetskiotbilans na zemjata.- Pra{aweto na koristeweto na {um-skiot otpad e direktno povrzano napredhodnoto, a so ogled na toa da istiotiznesuva otprilika 10% od vkupno ise-~enata drvna masa. [umskiot otpad segavoop{to ne se sobira i koristi.- Vrzano na {umskiot fond i negovotokoristewe, neophodno e da se potencirai ilegalnoto nekontrolirano se~ewe,koe sprema nekoi procenki iznesuvaduri 30% od legalnata se~a.- Problemot na otpadocite od zemjo-delstvoto i sto~arstvoto e mnogu kom-pleksen. Tu|ite iskustva ne mo`e da seprimenuvaat vo Makedonija, a so ogledna specifikite na organizacijata naproizvodstvoto, mo`nostite za nivno so-birawe i nivnoto koristewe za drugi na-meni. Pred donesuvawe na bilo kakvikone~ni zaklu~oci i definirawe nastrategija za razvoj, neophodni se detal-ni istra`uvawa i preispituvawa prekuorganizacija na pilot proekti vo raz-li~ni vlijatelni uslovi.- Istoto se odnesuva i za gradskiototpad. Iako se vo tek aktivnostite za

Republic of Macedonia is the one of agri-cultural waste, with 7,1 PJ/yr. Second one isthe communal waste with 2,33 PJ/yr, thenthe wood waste with 1,22 PJ/yr and, at theend, energy potential of the waste fromanimal husbandry with 0,94 PJ/yr. Thatmakes altogether 11,59 PJ/yr.

Importance of the energy resource fromforests, agricultural and waste from animalhusbandry and urban concentrations shouldnot be treated separately of the total biomasenergy potential in Republic of Macedonia,i.e. of the energy potential of forestry andproduction of “energy”cultures. Listed dataonly underline that a big energy source is inquestion, which can significantly and posi-tively influence the level of covering the totalenergy consumption of the country with ho-me energy resources.

On the other side, it’s evident that moreprecise orientation for the possibilities andpotential largeness of the energy resource ismissing, i.e.:

Under the conditions of continual dec-rease of forest areas during the last 20years, a sustainable strategy for recoveryand development, based on the natural pos-sibilities and potential significance for theenergy development in the Republic Mace-donia, doesn’t exist. Even that’s already oneof the most important energy resources inthe country, it’s evident that, by a good plan-ned approach, it can be developed and takelarger participation in the state energybalance;- Question of the use of forests residues isdirectly connected to the above said beca-use it is about 10% of the totally cutted woodmass. Presently, there is no organized col-lection and use of it.- Connected to the forest fund and its use,it is necessary to underline the existence ofillegal cutting in the country. According tosome estimations, it takes about 30% of thelegal one.

Problem of the agricultural and animalhusbandry waste is very complex. Foreignexperiences cannot be used in Macedoniadue to the specifics of production organiza-tion, possibilities for their collection and theiruse for other purposes. Before taking anyfinal decisions and composition of develop-ment strategy, it’s necessary to perform de-

33

organizacija na sobirawe na istiot, evi-dentno e deka energetskata komponentana problematikata e potpolno zanema-rena. Vo slu~ajot na skopskata deponijaDrisla, istata se pojavuva vo razni va-rijanti na ponudenite re{enija, no soorientacija smo kon edna (skapa) tehno-logija, bez da se elaboriraat vkupniteekonomski efekti i mo`nostite na sre-dinata da gi pokrie rezultira~kite or-ganizaciski i pogonski tro{kovi. Iako ejasno deka istata e kompletno nepri-menliva za drugite planirani deponii,ne postoi elaboracija za primenlivostana organizacija na proizvodstvo na bio-gas (landfill technology).- Kone~no, evidentno e deka ne postoiniti osnovna orientacija za mo`nostitei opravdanosta na proizvodstvo na “en-ergetski” kulturi vo Makedonija. Iakotransportniot sektor e kompletno ori-entiran kon skap uvoz na goriva i Ma-kedonija prevzemala odredeni obvrskisprema EU za minimalno u~estvo nabiogoriva vo vkupnata potro{uva~ka, do-sega ne se prevzemeni nikakvi aktiv-nosti za sogleduvawe na realnite pri-rodni mo`nosti i ekonomskata opravda-nost na po{iroka organizacija na sop-stveno proizvodstvo na biogoriva.

Od druga strana, prehodnata disku-sija ilustrira deka se raboti za po-ve}esloen kompleks od ekonomski i teh-ni~ko/tehnolo{ki problematiki, koi us-lovuvaat po{iroki organizaciski merkii aktivnosti za opredeluvawe na opti-malni re{enija i nivna implementacija.Evidentno e deka prednoto ne mo`e dase sprovede bez definirana pozitivnadr`avna politika i inicijale pozitiventretman, vo sporedba so uvoznite fosil-ni goriva. Potrebata za definirawe natakva politika se potvrduva i so pozi-tivnite iskustva od porazvienite zemji,kade istata obezbedila mo`nosti zarazvoj na mali i sredni pretprijatija,t.e. otvarawe na novi rabotni mesta voruralnite sredini. Istovremeno, toa bibil i zna~aen pridones kon unapredu-vaweto na uslovite na `ivotnata sre-dina.

Kone~no, treba da se potencira se-ga{nata energetska situacija vo Make-donija i nejziniot o~ekuvan ponatamo-{en razvoj. Uvozot na energija i ener-getski surovini zazema zna~ajno mestovo vkupniot (negativen) ekonomski bi-lans na zemjata. Negovoto natamo{no na-golemuvawe }e vlijae negativno na vkup-nite ekonomski sostojbi, a so toa i namo`nostite za razvoj na site ekonomskisektori i zagrozuvawe na idninata nazemjata.

tailed investigations and checkings by or-ganization of pilot projects in different influ-encing conditions.- The same can be stated for the urbanwaste. Even the activities for organization ofits collection are in flow, it’s evident that theebergy component of the problem is com-pletelly neglected. It is appearing in differentvariants in the case of the deposit Drisla inSkopje, but with orientation to only one(expensive) technology, without elaborationthe whole economy effects and possibilitiesof the the town to cover the resulting orga-nizational and exploitation costs. Even it isclear that this technology cannot be appliedin the other planned deposits, there is noelaboration made for the feasibilty of biogasproduction (landfill) technology.

Finally, it’s evident that even a basic ori-entation for the possibilities and justifiable-ness of production of “energy” culturesdoesn’t exist in Macedonia. The transportsector is completelly orientated toward theimport of expensive fuels and Macedonia ac-cepted defined obligations towards EC forminimal participation of biofuels in the totalconsumption, but up to now there is no acti-vity for determination of the real nationalpotential and economic justification of widerorganiztion of production of biofuels.

On the other hand, our discussion illus-trates that a multilayer composition of eco-nomic, technological/technical problematicsis in question. It requests wide organizationalmeasures and activities for determination ofoptimal solutions and the way of their imple-mentation. Evidently, it cannot be performedwithout defined positive state policy and in-itial privilleged treatment in comparizon withthe imported fossil fuels. The need of deter-mination of such a policy is confirmed by thepositive experience of more developed co-unyties, where it resulted with developmentof new employment in rural communities bydevelopment of small and medium enterpri-ses. In the same time, it should be a signi-ficant contribution to the improvement ofhuman environment.

Finally, it is necessary to underline thepresent energy situation in Macedonia andits expected further development. Import ofenergy and energy raw materials takes sig-nificant part of the (negative) economy ba-lance of the country. Its further increase will

34

Navedenite podatoci vo ovaa publi-kacija doka`uvaat deka energetskiot re-surs na biomasa vo Makedonija ve}e segae eden od najzna~ajnite vo zemjata. Is-tovremeno, evidentno e deka toj nudimo`nosti za razvoj koi ovozmo`uvaatzna~ajno nagolemuvawe na u~estvoto voenergetskiot bilans i namaluvawe nauvozot na goriva. Negovoto ponatamo{nozanemaruvawe bi pretstavuvalo nedoz-voliv akt kon namaluvaweto na izgle-dite na uspeh na naporite za stabili-zacija na dr`avnata ekonomija.

negatively influence the whole economyand, with that, possibilities for developmentof all economy sectors and future of thecountry.

Listed data in this publication prove thatenergy resource of biomass in Macedonia isalready one of the most important in thecountry. In the same time, it’s evident that itoffers pssibilities for development, enablingsignificant improveent of its participation inthe state energy balance and decrease ofimport of fuels. Furher neglection is an un-allowed act of decrease of chances for suc-cess of efforts for stabilization of the stateeconomy.

LITERATURA - REFERENCES1. Todorova M., Mijovska M., Georgievska,

L. & Nedanovska L. “Statistical Yearbookof the Republic of Macedonia”, 2002,2005, 2008, Skopje

2. Production and financial plan, PU Mace-donian forests, Skopje 2006, 2008 andAnnual Report 2006.

3. K. Popovski: Macedonia. Renewable En-ergy Coordinated Development in theWes-tern Balkan Countries – Acronym:RECOVER.6th Framework Programmeon Research, Technological Develop-ment and Demonstration, 2005-2006

4. K. Popovski: Macedonia. Acceleration ofthe Cost-Competitive Biomass Use forEnergy Purposes in the Western BalkanCountries - Acronym: ACCENT; 6th Fra-mework Programme on Research, Tech-nological Development and Demonstra-tion, 2006-2007

5. K. Popovski: Macedonia. Rural Sustain-able Development through Integration ofRenewable Energy Technologies in PoorEuropean Regions - Acronym: RES IN-

TEGRATION; FP6 “Integrating andstrengthening the European ResearchArea, Specific Measures in support ofInternational Cooperation (INCO)” 2004-2007

6. S. Armenski: “Biomass Energy”, book,Publisher "Alfa-94", 243 pp, Skopje, May2009.

7. Biomass Energy Europe: Harmonizationof biomass resources assessments. Volu-me I. Best practices and methods hand-book, Draft, June 2009.

8. S. Armenski: “Bioenergy from Agricultureand Livestock”, Renewable Energy Sour-ces in R. of Macedonia- MAGA edition ofthe renewable energies identification anddevelopment in Macedonia, pp.14-33,Kat-lanovo 2005.

9. О. Cukaliev: “Production of straw andother agricultural residue in R.of Mace-donia and possibilities for use as biofuel”, Workshop “Cereals straw and agri-cultural residue for bioenergy in NewMember State and Candidate Countries”,2-3 October 2008, Novi Sad, Serbia

❁

35

Мисија на Агенцијата за енергетика на Македонија – АЕРМ е да го поддржуваспроведувањето на енергетската политика на Владата на Република Македонијапреку подготовка на енергетски стратегии, развојни планови и програми, соособен акцент на енергетската ефикасност (ЕЕ) и користењето на обновливиизвори на енергија (ОИЕ).

Агенцијата за енергетика на Република Македонија има мандат да предводи,дава иницијативи, координира изработка на студии и проекти за ЕЕ во насока науспешно исполнување на акциониот план за реализација на Стратегијата за ЕЕна РМ, kako i da промовира и поттикнува заштеда на енергија и сеопфатна при-мена на ОИЕ. Taa е насочена кон подготовка на предлози за законски иподзаконски акти, технички прописи и стандарди во соработка со надлежнитеминистерства, образовни институции, стопански субјекти, невладини здруженијаи други, со што da се постигне побрзо усогласување со регулативата наЕвропската Унија.

Vo ramkite na svojata rabota, agencijata gi obezbeduva slednite uslugi:- Издавање на решенија за стекнување на статус на повластен производител наелектрична енергија произведена од ОИЕ и комбинирани постројки,- Издавање на гаранции за потекло на произведена електрична енергијапроизведена од ОИЕ и комбинаирани постројки, - Евалуација на проекти кои бараат средства кај банки и инвеститори,- Изработка на проекти за ЕЕ и ОИЕ, - Интелектуални услуги во сите енергетски области,- База на енергетски податоци потребни за првична проценка на проекти исоветување за инвестиции,- Управување на проекти од локален и регионален карактер во домен на ЕЕ иОИЕ,- Професионална обука на локално ниво за лица одговорни за спореведувањена плановите и годишните акциони планови за ЕЕ и ОИЕ.

Покрај наведеноto, Агенцијата за енергетика на Република Македонија, сосвоите по закон утврдени дејности, придонесува за успешна реализација наплановите и програмите на Владата на Република Македонија од сферата наенергетиката. Taa gi koordinira lокалната и регионалната реализација напроекти поврзани со примена na ЕЕ i системи на ОИЕ. На toj начин се обезбедuvaреализација на проекти во исти области без преклопувањa и со правилнонасочување на расположливите инвестициони средства. Posebno vnimanie eposveteno na обезбедuvawe na поефикасен трансфер на знаења, i примената наnovi технологии.- Vo izvr{uvaweto na svojata misija, Агенцијата за енергетика на РепубликаМакедонија активно соработува vo realizacija на повеќе странски донаторскипроекти, kako {to se ГЕФ проектот за одржлива енергија управуван од СветскаБанка, УЕНЕЦЕ проект за финансирање на инвестициите во ЕЕ, ЕНЕР СУПЛАпроект за собирање на податоци и obuka на локалните чинители за ЕЕ и ОИЕ,АДА проект за енергетска ефикасност во згради и проект за формирање на базана податоци за ветерна енергија подржан од Министерство за животна средина,земја и море на Република Италија.

36

25165926425165926425165926425165926425165926425165926

37