[Stoves] Energy supply and use in a rural West African village

[Richard Stanley]

Ken, Mark and Nathan; 

I visited Mali twice in the interest of promoting the wet process biomass briquette. Once in 2001 for that enigmatically and uniquely humbly named Enterprise Works Worldwide ( it generally does not--at least as they intended it from the US perspective anyway ). There was proven viability for the technology then  and again in 2003 when invited to do a study for USAID for the feasibility of using it for urban areas. 

Both efforts flopped but not due to technical, economic, environmental, or even local user-acceptance: 

EWW was promotiLargeng its hourglass shaped clay stove the SEWA stove as it was adapted from East Africa. I was confidently told by the youthful EWW Director at the time that it is fuel efficient only because the user had to cut the wood into finger sized sticks to fit it. I.E, that created a far larger  large surface area to volume ratios, better air flow and improved mixing of gasses etc. but the labor involved in sizing the wood logs into finger sized sticks was never factored into the overall fuel "efficiency" assessment of the stove.  The briquette on the other hand proved quite efficient to make and use. This was due perhaps to the very dry climate and high prevailing temperatures which would dry them in only 3 days and ignite them, almost smoklessly. The abundant local rice straw bound up any sawdust and the scrap charcoal fines quite well The locally noted  Neem leaf, proved an interseting potential blend, because when pre heated next to the stove such a bleded briquette would emit a natural "vicks vaporub" like aroma. and the use of the neem tree for such was well known as an anticongentant already but its use in this way,  the aroma was generated  without  smoke.  
The point was, however that the briquettes of any of the five odd blends tested there, combusted quite readily without need for the SEWA stove. That posed a big problem for EWW. The project was scrapped, the reports were written and stove project limped along. The real test came of course years on, after EWW stepped out of the picture. I have no hard data, but frankly seriously doubt  how well it took up --on its own, unassisted by foreign largesse,  in the realities of the local marketplace. 

In USAID's case, it was keen to study the feasablity of utilising the whispy eyesore that 7 gram, six pac-sized shopping bag which created such an eyesore in Bamaco, that it was popularly known as the national flower of Mali. Again, the numbers prooved the briquette (utilising this national flower at the rate of one well shredded bag per 130 gram briquette) to be quite viable and, as structured as a micro-enterprise selling the briquette fuel, zero cost to the government as opposed to  setting up and maintaining a group of bag pickers throughout the city to collect and then dump these bags in a landfill somewhere nearby.   
We also knew that according to experts on this list and in separately published statements by Swedish and British scientists, that combustion of these bags above 400º C is relatively safe in terms of particulates and CO, as it is as polyethlene, a relatively simple short chained  polyethelyne molecule being combusted. 
But lingering around the hallowed halls of USAID staff was a nice recently retired staffer who just happened own a garbage collection company back home and there he was looking for contract work…You fill in the blanks.

Still after 16 years at it, in a network spanning about 53 nations, we find that it is being taken up locally on a self sustaining basis only about 60- 70% of the time– not for want of technical solutions– but because of a lack of understanding in depth, the  'socio-politics' of the setting. Thats the sticky stuff of the development arena one does not learn about in the test lab back home and sorely needs to appreciate) and that is what so often makes or breaks a technically good project initiative such as yours.  

Point of this diatribe is that it is not the fact of how you are going to gather the wood or even the tecnical or economic or even environmental efficiency of your stove, but the poliics around the process of integrating it  Who wins; Who loses, How do you work into or around that reality, so that long after you have left the scene,  it all continues.

I'd like to learn more about that end of the story: Maybe you have worked that part out as well: Your thoughts much appreciated .

Kind regards,
 
Richard Stanley
www.legacyfound.org
 

On Jun 2, 2012, at 9:10 PM, Ken Boak wrote:

Mark and Nathan,

Thankyou for a fascinating and important study into the energy usage of a rural Mali village.

As you state early in the report that many "water projects" have failed to deliver to sub-Saharan Africa - it is important that future village energy projects are systematically engineered - and thus stand a better chance of overall success.

It appears that just the harvesting and transportation of the primary wood fuel - is a significant time and labour burden on the women and children. Much of this wood is then burned in 3 stone fires - at minimal efficiency.

As motorcycles are already used by some villagers - perhaps a motorcycle based cart, capable of hauling say 250 kg of wood, would be an appropriate investment in technology.  Wood harvesting and hauling could then be set up as a micro-business.

As all stovers on this list will know - the successful introduction of a decent wood stove will significantly reduce this wood consumption - posssibly by as much as 40%, freeing the women-folk to engage in economic activity and the children to attend more schooling.

The processing of shea oil/butter appears to be not only labour intensive but energy intensive. Perhaps a co-operative could be formed - with additional equipment, such as large appropriate stoves, to enable this work to be carried out more efficiently.

A conversion from a wood energy economy to a charcoal energy economy, would allow an increase in energy efficiency, provide employment, and produce a sellable product. Whilst charcoal is already being used in the village - it's production is likely to be inefficient, and investment in a larger scale charcoal producing facility/enterprise could lead to a greater efficiency of wood use. Combining charcoal production - and it's waste heat and gas production, with shea oil processing could lead to a possible synergy.

Finally, the use of 340 litres per year of diesel fuel, to run the diesel grinder must represent a significant outlay of money - for a near-subsistence based economy. Conversion of the diesel to spark ignition and fuelling from a wood or charcoal gasifier could produce a major reduction in expenditure on diesel, and give the village a source of mechanical power, for agri-processing, power generation and water pumping, which is fuelled from local biomass and not wholly reliant on costly petroleum.


regards



Ken Boak
_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org

for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:
http://www.bioenergylists.org/