Transcript May 2012 Bsc(Hons) Renewable Energy Dissertation Authored by Sarah Cochetel Supervised by Dr.

May 2012
Bsc(Hons) Renewable Energy Dissertation
Authored by Sarah Cochetel
Supervised by Dr. Peter M. Connor
1.
Why Sub-Saharan Africa
2.
Traditional Cooking Methods
3.
Solar Cooking Technologies
4.
Barriers to their Dissemination
5.
Conclusions & Recommendations
Sub-Saharan Africa
As defined by dictionnaries: “The region of
Africa to the South of the Sahara Desert”
49 recognised nations
(incl. Sudan and South Sudan)
850 million inhabitants
Why Sub-Saharan Africa?
 70% have no access to electricity
 657 million depend entirely on
biomass and coal as primary
cooking fuels
 Corresponds to 58% of total
energy use in the region
Source: The World Bank 2011
• Three-Stone Fire
• Environmental Impacts
• Health Impacts
• Socio-economic Impacts
Three-Stone Fire
Key Points:
 Only 15% efficient
 Quick and simple way to cook
 Important part of the culture and family
bonding
 Source of heat and light
 Smoke keeps insects away (e.g.
mosquitoes responsible for death by
Three-Stone Fire. Source: Reed 2010
malaria of 600 000 Africans in 2010)
Environmental Impacts
Uncontrolled collection of firewood
Deforestation
Displacement
of people
Formation of micro-climates:
Desertification (expansion of the Sahara),
Floods and Droughts
Direct Health Impacts: Smoke
Combustion of Biomass releases:
Carbon dioxide and monoxide, nitrogen
oxides, benzene, sulphur, arsenic and
particulate matter
Indoor Air Pollution IAP
(1.6 million deaths per year)
Smoke in the kitchen. Source: Benanav N.d.
Women and children’s exposure levels:
•
100 times WHO’s recommendations
•
equivalent to 2 packs of cigarettes per day
•
2 to 4 times greater than men’s
Diseases and Illnesses:
Acute respiratory infections, chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease, lung
cancer, pneumonia, tuberculosis,
cataracts etc.
Direct Health Impacts: Wood Collection
Facts on these journeys:
 Implicated: Women and children
 Distance: 10km or more
 Load: avg 20kg per person
 Time: avg 40h per week
 Trips can last up to a few days
Health Risks:
 Heat strokes
 Back pain & other orthopedic injuries
 Animal attacks (elephants, snakes etc.)
 Others e.g. walking on landmines
Darfuri refugees gathering wood. Source: Farrow 2009
Social Impacts
Direct impacts:
 Risk to be insulted, raped, tortured
and/or murdered.
 Risk of creating political tensions
with other locals (especially for
refugee populations).
 Secondary impacts:
 From inactivity e.g. lack of incomegenerating activities or education. Leads
to gender inequalities etc.
 From climat change e.g. formation of
climatic refugees and displacement of
Malian women gathering wood. Source: Kev 2008.
thousands of people.
Economic Impacts
 Cost of firewood rapidly
increasing due to fuel scarcity
 Limited choice of alternatives
 Represents significant portion
of income
 Sometimes more money is
spent on firewood than food
Women purchasing wood at an Ethiopian market. Source: Donna N.d.
• Solar Resources
• History of Solar Cooking
• Most Common Designs
• Benefits from Solar Cookers
Solar Resource
Ideal latitudes for solar cooking
are between 40° N and 40°S.
In ideal areas, solar radiations
vary between
4.5
and
8.5
kWh/m2/day.
Ideal climatic areas are desertic
zones. In the Sahel, up to 300
sunny days per year.
African Solar Radiation. Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory 2010.
History of Solar Cooking
 Solar reflexion used thousands of
years ago by Greeks, Romans and
Chinese for military purposes.
 First publications on solar cooking in
1767 by Horace de Saussure, FrenchSwiss scientist.
 First practical applications: 1950’s.
 Full potential acknowledged after the
1970’s oil crisis.
 Solar Cookers International founded
in 1987.
 In the 1990’s, sporadic efforts from UN
sub-divisions.
Barbara Kerr and Sherry Cole with their first solar cooker. Source:
PCIA 2010
Most Common Designs: Parabolic Cookers
Key Points:
Focuses sunlight straight on the black pot
Most efficient (up to 1200W, 250°C)
Same cooking times and practices as
conventional cooking methods
Most expensive type
Complex structure and manufacturing
Bulky – requires a lot of outdoor space
Parabolic cooker. Source: SCI N.d.
Most Common Designs: Box Cookers
Key Points:
Insulated box making use of direct and
diffuse sunlight
Most widespread technology
Easy to construct and design
Can hold a few pots
Can be made of many materials e.g.
cardboard, wood, plastic or metal
Less than half the price of parabolic cookers
Lower ratings (200W, 180°C)
Solar box cooker. Source: SCI 2012
Most Common Designs: Panel Cookers
Key Points:
Reflective panels focusing light on
black pot contained within plastic bag
Cheapest design
Usually made of cardboard and
aluminium foil
Simplest design (CooKit) distributed
widely by NGOs in refugee camps
Easy to fold and transport
Lowest efficiencies
Panel cooker CooKit. Source: SCI 2012
Technical Advantages
 Save 1 to 2 tons of firewood per year.
 No negative health impacts.
 No fire i.e. children can safely attend
to the food.
 Save time and do not require stirring.
 Non-permanent structures and so
can be deployed quickly.
Panel cookers in Chad. Source: JWW 2012
 Can easily be made of recycled material (e.g. with Tetra Pak).
 No need for much water or oil so the food is healthier and contains more nutrients.
 Food doesn’t burn i.e. less cleaning is involved.
Socio-economic Advantages
 More time for women and children to attend to other
activities e.g. school, income-generating activities,
gather other fuels to meet the rest of the household’s
energy requirements etc.
 Potential for men and women to share familial tasks
and break down gender issues.
Women baking cakes. Source: SCI 2012
 Saves the household’s income and solar
cookers are quickly repaid.
 Lots of impacts on local economy and
creation of jobs.
Baking business. Source: SCI 2012
• Technical Barriers
• Public Perception
• Institutional and Political Barriers
• Weather & Other Environmental Issues
• Design & Material Related Issues
• Inaccessibility of Materials & Lack of Infrastructure
• Other Technical Issues
Technical Barriers:
Weather & Other Environmental Issues
Problems:
 Dependance on weather (intermittency, sunny hours, seasons etc.)
 For shortest cooking times, need readjustments
 Unsuitability of cooking times
 Rain, sand, dust and cleaning reduce rating by 25%
 Wind blows away some cookers (e.g. parabolic designs)
Solutions:
 Improve design
 Use higher quality materials
However, these lead to other financial barriers…
Technical Barriers:
Design & Material Related Issues
Comparison of Different Types of Solar Cookers
Type
Panel
Box
Parabolic
Cost
Lowest
4-7USD
Low
20USD
High
60USD
Safety
Safe
Safe
May
cause
burns &
eye
injury
Ease of build
Easy
Cooking speed
Several hours
Cooking
capacity
Longevity
Other
4-6
people
Lowest
(cardboard
susceptible to
moisture &
insect
degradation)
Need to
replace plastic
bag, no adding
or stirring
possible
Medium/
depends on
materials (glass
window can
break)
No adding or
stirring
possible
High/ depends
on materials
May burn
food, bulky
Easy
Several hours
Depends
on size
Complicated
(requires
specialised
materials)
Similar to
conventional
stove but
requires
adjustment to
the sun every
15min
Depends
on size
Technical Barriers:
Inaccessibility of Materials & Lack of Infrastructure
Problems:
 Need for local solar cooking business for after-sale service and
maintenance.
 Difficulties in obtaining aluminium plates or foil, glass, mirrors,
black pots or plastic bags.
 Supply and distribution issues due to lack of infrastructure
especially in rural areas and on islands (in 2004, only 10% of the
roads where paved, little access to electricity, literacy rare).
 Administrative and logistical issues often the reason behind the
slow development of such projects e.g. Burkina Faso vs. South
Africa.
Rural Population of Sub-Saharan Africa.
Source: The World Bank 2012
Solutions:
 Solving issues locally
 Action from governmental bodies (long and slow process)
Technical Barriers:
Other Technical Issues
 Long cooking times.
 Need to expose the food outdoor.
 Need outdoor space (in urban
dwellings, solar cookers go on the
roof).
 Risks of thefts, poisoning, damaging
from children and animals.
 Rarely used as stand-alone systems,
only saves up 40% of fuel on average.
Cooking times. Source: Hanna & McArdle 2012
•
Traditions & Beliefs
•
Gender Inequalities
•
Adoption Criteria of Energy-Poor Households
•
Perceived Financial Benefits
•
Image of Solar Cookers
Public Perception:
Traditions & Beliefs
Problems:
 More than 3000 ethnic groups with their
own beliefs and traditions (e.g. in Uganda, 3
stone fire strongly linked to marriage).
 Designs do not meet aesthetic standards
(e.g. square shapes).
 Where traditions are unshaken, adoption
Masai communities and solar cookers. Source: SCI 2009
levels are the lowest: due to educational
gaps, people do not believe the sun is
capable to cook.
 Involving communities to design their own cookers
 Turn to their beliefs for explanations: “work
of the devil” and “black magic”.
Solutions:
 Using their beliefs “against” them e.g. Sabbath
 Use appropriate promoting strategies
Public Perception:
Gender Inequalities
Problems:
 Financial/household decisions taken by men even for cooking matters.
 Gathering wood doesn’t have a real perceived value and its dangers are not recognised.
 Some men are scared for their wives to have free time and idle, are not ready to change
cooking hours/habits or beat up women if the food tastes differently.
 Others liked it because women can have more time to take on some of their own tasks.
 In some cultures, men and women have to be addressed to separately.
Sudanese boys attending school. Source:
Africa Educational Trust 2008
Solutions:
 Promotions and demonstrations to bring together men and
women concerned
 Getting men to acknowledge the danger of firewood gathering
Public Perception:
Adoption Criteria of Energy-Poor Households
Problems:
Field studies determined 3 key factors for the adoption of solar cookers:

Reduce fuel consumption (less than anticipated, not stand-alone system due
to technical barriers)

Similar cooking times (much longer than
other techs)

Similar or better functionality (impossible
to roast or fry)

Food has different texture and colour

Different criteria in rural and urban areas
Solution: Integrated Cooking Systems
(Solar cooker + heat retention basket + improved stove)
Integrated Cooking System. Source: Whitfield 2005
Public Perception:
Perceived Financial Benefits
Problems:
 Although heavily subsidised, price is
still high.
 Cooking not necessarily a priority to
invest in.
 Some refuse credits (“do not believe” in
being indebted).
 Concepts of “saving”, “investing” and
“ROI” are not fully understood.
Solutions:
 Give access to information & education
 Promote intelligently
Poverty gaps in sub-Saharan Africa. Source: The World Bank 2012
Public Perception:
Image of Solar Cookers
Problems:
• Some products have a low quality in order for NGOs to reduce their costs.
• When distributed for free, end-users do not have a sense of ownership.
• Why aren’t higher social classes buying too?
Designs considered as “cheap”, for lower-classes, people get “bored”
Solutions:
Promote the idea “simple is beautiful”
Food-related uses:
Pasteurizing water at 65°C, preparing hot
drinks e.g. tea, making jams and sauces,
drying vegetables and fruits, baking cakes,
heating milk, killing insects contained
within seeds…
Advertise additional uses of solar cookers:
Non-food uses:
Smelting, making wax, sterilising soil,
warming irons to iron clothes, making the
laundry,
making
cosmetics e.g. karité
butter, sterilising medical kit and distilling
water for batteries…
• Poor Project Planning & Promotion Strategies
• Financial Barriers: Subsidies or Market Development?
• Lack of Coordination & Linkage
• Other Political Barriers
Institutional & Political Barriers:
Poor Planning &
Promoting Strategies
Many solutions:
 Plan ahead for 5 years and do background
research with anthropologists and experts.
Problems:
 Poor image from the 1960’s, 1970’s and 1980’s due to:
o Weak implementation strategies
o Lack of training
o Immature/untested technologies
 Lack of background literature available for planning
(only 2 docs from 2004)
 Error of promoting just one design
 Come up with step by step development
with constant feedback.
 Carefully select promotion times and
places.
 Involve people together at village feasts etc.
 Make sure problem is well understood.
 Institutions e.g. SCI or JWW provide
training for volunteering promoters.
 ICS promoted only since 2008, need to
establish new promoting strategies.
Institutional & Political Barriers:
Financial Barriers: Subsidies or Market Development?
Natural progression of technologies:
R&D
Demonstration
Commercialisation





NGOs subsidise partially or fully but not viable: need funding.
Governmental grants and CDM mechanisms often have strict administrative conditions.
Subsidies sometimes get in the way of commercialisation.
Hard to find motivated local entrepreneurs which have enough funds and capacity.
Give access to micro-credits, low-interest loans, barter arrangements, layaway plans, hiring
“only on sunny days”.
 Remove gender barrier as women do not always have access to these services.
Solutions:
 National & inter-regional governments must collaborate with banking institutions and
propose adequate funding schemes e.g. aim subsidies at the poorest.
 Get involved with GEF Small Grant Programme?
 Follow China’s example?
Institutional & Political Barriers:
Lack of Coordination & Linkage
Issues:
• Internal problems (e.g. UNHCR in Aisha camp).
• Lack of collaboration on the field (e.g. JWW, CARE and WFP in Chad).
• Lack of coordination between agencies (e.g. UNHCR distributing firewood).
• Lack of monitoring & project follow-up.
• Lack of transparency in publications of results and lack of sharing information.
• NGOs compete against each other.
Some have collaborated:
 EG Solar and CARE in Chad
 Senegalese government and UNDP
 SCI and JWW, KoZon and GIZ in Kenyan and Ethiopian refugee camps
Solution:
 Connect everyone, reunite all efforts via the Solar Cooking World Network
 Formation of groups e.g. AFRECA
 China: considerable investments and collaboration between government and industry
Institutional & Political Barriers:
Other Political Barriers
Problems:
 After 1970’s, creation of many Energy departments/ministries but funding for
renewables dropped quickly.
 Other priorities e.g. electrification and consolidation of national utility
companies.
 Lack of willingness and corruption (e.g. Nigeria) from fossil-fuel lobbying
companies and others.
 Lack of access due to warfare, terrorism, kidnapping etc. Domestic transportation
problems.
 No clear strategies & policies (suggestion of housing plan but no follow-ups).
 Need set of standards, manufacturers must give guarantees.
Some initiatives:
 East African Community, with GIZ and UNDP, to give access to clean cooking
technologies to half its population by 2015.
 8 countries joined the ProBec.
 Clean Cookstove Alliance (worldwide).
Unknown outcomes!
 AFREPREN/FWD active since 1987.
•
Some issues too great to be solved by solar cooking strategies e.g. lack of education,
infrastructure etc.
•
Changes take time: need appropriate long-term mechanisms.
•
Need to promote intelligently and listen to the end-users’ needs (depending on
culture, religion, gender status, living areas etc.).
•
NGOs, governments, industry and local small-scale businesses need to work in
collaboration and total transparency e.g. China.
•
Governments must create partnerships with banking institutions and create
appropriate pro-poor energy policies to remove the barriers for NGOs.
•
Need to keep investing in better designs, but focusing more on reducing
production, marketing and end-users’ costs.
•
Advocate Integrated Cooking Systems and avoid repeating past errors.