bsc(hons) renewable energy dissertation authored by sarah cochetel may 2012 supervised by dr. peter...
TRANSCRIPT
Identifying the barriers to the deployment of solar cookers in the energy-poor households
of sub-Saharan Africa
Bsc(Hons) Renewable Energy DissertationAuthored by Sarah Cochetel
May 2012 Supervised by Dr. Peter M. Connor
Layout of the Presentation
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 regionSource: The World Bank 2011
Traditional Cooking Methods
• 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 malaria of 600 000 Africans in
2010)
Three-Stone Fire. Source: Reed 2010
Environmental ImpactsUncontrolled collection of firewood
Displacement of people
Formation of micro-climates:Desertification (expansion of the Sahara),
Floods and Droughts
Deforestation
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)
Diseases and Illnesses:Acute respiratory infections,
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung cancer, pneumonia,
tuberculosis, cataracts etc.
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
Direct Health Impacts: Wood CollectionFacts 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 ImpactsDirect 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 income-
generating activities or education.
Leads to gender inequalities etc.
From climat change e.g. formation
of climatic refugees and displacement
of thousands of people. Malian women gathering wood. Source: Kev 2008.
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 Cooking Technologies
• 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, French-Swiss 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 CookersKey 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.
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.
Panel cookers in Chad. Source: JWW 2012
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.
Saves the household’s income
and solar cookers are quickly
repaid.
Lots of impacts on local economy
and creation of jobs.
Women baking cakes. Source: SCI 2012
Baking business. Source: SCI 2012
Barriers to the Dissemination of Solar Cooker
• Technical Barriers
• Public Perception
• Institutional and Political
Barriers
Technical 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 IssuesComparison of Different Types of Solar Cookers
Type Cost Safety Ease of build Cooking speed Cooking capacity
Longevity Other
Panel
Lowest
4-7USD
Safe Easy Several hours4-6 people
Lowest (cardboard susceptible to moisture & insect degradation)
Need to replace plastic bag, no adding or stirring possible
Box
Low
20USD
Safe Easy Several hoursDepends on size
Medium/ depends on materials (glass window can break)
No adding or stirring possible
Parabolic
High
60USD
May cause burns & eye injury
Complicated (requires specialised materials)
Similar to conventional stove but requires adjustment to the sun every 15min
Depends on size
High/ depends on materials
May burn food, bulky
Technical Barriers:
Inaccessibility of Materials & Lack of InfrastructureProblems:
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.
Solutions:
Solving issues locally
Action from governmental bodies (long and slow process)
Rural Population of Sub-Saharan Africa. Source: The World Bank 2012
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
Public Perception
• Traditions & Beliefs
• Gender Inequalities
• Adoption Criteria of Energy-Poor Households
• Perceived Financial Benefits
• Image of Solar Cookers
Public Perception:
Traditions & BeliefsProblems:
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 levels are the lowest: due to
educational gaps, people do not
believe the sun is capable to cook.
Turn to their beliefs for explanations:
“work of the devil” and “black
magic”.
Solutions: Involving communities to design their own
cookers
Using their beliefs “against” them e.g.
Sabbath
Use appropriate promoting strategies
Masai communities and solar cookers. Source: SCI 2009
Public Perception:
Gender InequalitiesProblems:
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.Solutions:
Promotions and demonstrations to bring together
men and women concerned
Getting men to acknowledge the danger of firewood
gathering
Sudanese boys attending school. Source: Africa Educational Trust 2008
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 CookersProblems:• 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”
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…
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…
Solutions:Promote the idea “simple is beautiful” Advertise additional uses of solar cookers:
Institutional and Political Barriers
• 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
Problems:
Poor image from the 1960’s, 1970’s and
1980’s due to:
Lack of background literature available for
planning (only 2 docs from 2004)
Error of promoting just one design
o Weak implementation
strategies
o Lack of training
o Immature/untested
technologies
Many solutions:
Plan ahead for 5 years and do
background research with
anthropologists and experts.
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
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?
Demonstration
Commercialisation
Institutional & Political Barriers:
Lack of Coordination & LinkageIssues:• 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 BarriersProblems: 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). AFREPREN/FWD active since 1987.
Unknown outcomes!
Conclusions & Recommendations• 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.