[Stoves] Designing for the affluent AND the poor.... this is NOT Re: ocean acidification

Rebecca A. Vermeer ravermeer at telus.net
Sun Jul 14 00:42:04 CDT 2013


Dear Stovers,
Let me introduce a kiln-fired clay stove from the Philippines that  was 
designed for the poor but ended up benefiting  the middle class and the 
affluent because of sky-rocketing  LPG prices.   Within the last 6 months, 
LPG prices in Dumaguete City, Philippines have fluctuated between US$1.70/kg 
and $3.17/kg.  Even when priced  below 50% of production costs (500 pesos or 
US$11.54 ), the poor cannot afford it.

The stove is the ECO-KALAN-C.  One stove can cook food for a small household 
or a crowd of 100 people.  In a recent  birthday celebration at Felipa 
Beach, Philippines,  the ECO-KALAN-C  cooked  83.5 kg of food (PORK & BEANS 
= 37.25 kg;  PANCIT (noodles, meat & vegetables) = 12.25 kg;  FISH = 4.25 
kg; and RICE = 29.75 kg )  in 3 1/2 hours of continuous cooking  using 6.95 
kg of wood  valued at   31.21 pesos (US$ 0.72).   See TABLE 6 and the 
Attributes of this stove in the link below:

COOKING ON ECO-KALAN-C  (for Belle's Birthday Party)
https://plus.google.com/photos/113101643783889350444/albums/5900103819444327585

At its subsidized price of 500 pesos, the payback period for this stove is 
less than a month, even for  small families.

If  interested to know more about the Project ,  please take a look at the 
link below.  I would appreciate  ideas on how to bring the cost of producing 
the ECO-KALAN to affordable & sustainable level.  Thank you.

ECO-KALAN PROJECT IN THE PHILIPPINES
Presented  to the Rotary Club of Sidney, British Columbia, Canada
https://plus.google.com/photos/113101643783889350444/albums/5898258706868741537

Regards,
Rebecca Vermeer
email:  ravermeer at telus.net

-----Original Message----- 
From: M. Nurhuda
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 6:41 PM
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Designing for the affluent AND the poor.... this is 
NOT Re: ocean acidification

Dear Cecil,

Thank for report.
Let me comment about the LPG.

As you might know, around 60% of LPG national demands are imported,
particularly from Aramco. Around 30% are distilled in Indonesian refinery
facility, but the crude oils are imported from other country. Therefore,
the economical price of LPG should  be at least Rp. 10.000,-/kg or US$
1/kg, with assumption that the LPG trading is tax free. However, people
get the LPG at price of Rp. 4500/kg.

In the last time, there were some discourses to replace LPG with Dimethil
Ether (DME), but we will see whether the next new president tends to be
populists, at all cost.

In my personal opinion, if should be not a problem with such populist
energy policy if we were still oil exporter country, as 20 year ago, but
in fact, we are now nett oil importer country.  Around 500.000-800.0000
barrels/day (nett) oils are now imported.

Kind regards
M. Nurhuda
(East Java, Indonesia)




> Continuing my contribution:
>
> Interestingly, with the arrival of electricity in most villages and the
> governments roll out of 55 million free LPG stove/3 kg canister kits
> several remarkable changes in rural kitchens are taking place:
>
> (i.)  better off families are buying electric rice steamers which they
> uses
> regularly thereby reducing the household cooking load by about 25%;
> (ii.) making limited use of the LPG stove (some families use less than 3
> kg
> of LPG a month) for quick cooking tasks such as reheating cold food, quick
> frying tofu and tempe, heating small amounts of water for tea, stir frying
> veggies, etc. The average use of LPG is about 6kg per month which only
> costs $.50 a kg because the government subsidizes the cost by +/- $.50 per
> kg.  The point is that households minimize their expenditure for LPG by
> deciding what stove work tasks they perform using free biomass and what
> tasks they perform using subsidized electricity and LPG.
> (iii.) heavy stove work tasks like boiling 20 litres of palm nectar down
> to
> 2 kgs of sugar which can take up to 3 hours is done using the traditional
> high powered stove fueled by free (collected) biomass
> (iv.) the introduction of the electric rice cooker and the LPG stove has
> made it possible for rural families to separate between the dirty part of
> the kitchen where the big pots and woks used for home industries are soot
> covered and a clean section or corner of the kitchen organized around the
> LPG stove and rice cooker where the pots are all scrubbed clean.
>
> What I observed in Yogyakarta Province is that the percentage of stove
> work
> performed using biomass decreases as one moves from deep rural areas into
> the peri-rural towns and peri-urban zones.  Households adjust their stoves
> and energy carriers to their income, kitchen sizes, and the availability
> of
> free biomass fuel.
>
> The World Bank is now carrying out a many paged questionnaire to attempt
> to
> differentiate the geographical zones and economic levels of the biomass
> economy in Yogyakarta.  It turns out to be very complex.  Strangely, urban
> families who no longer cook with biomass in their small urban kitchens,
> continue to eat traditional foods prepared with biomass because there are
> thousands of small vendors of traditional and regional foods available
> nearby or on their doorsteps. A significant percentage of the biomass
> economy has moved out of the small urban kitchen and has been taken over
> by
> small vendors and restaurants in the street.  In Yogyakarta there is a
> food
> vendor every 50 meters of urban corridor.
>
> The complexity of the provincial biomass economy is caused by the fact
> that
> there are about 10 different major biomass stove using constituencies
> which
> expect their stoves to perform specific functions well.  Some food vendors
> use charcoal, firewood, LPG and electricity cooking technologies and
> energy
> carriers to prepare food for sale to customers.
>
> In Indonesia with its 250 000 000 people and +/- 65 million households, I
> estimate there are more than 100 million biomass stoves in use.  These 100
> million biomass stoves are divided up among farming households who mainly
> use them for household cooking and ceremonial functions, households that
> use stoves to process crops and generate revenue, peri-rural/peri-urban
> (intermediate) households which use biomass to minimize expenditure on
> LPG,
> food vendors in all zones who prepare large volumes of food for sale,
> urban
> households that have converted entirely to a clean kitchen using
> electricity and LPG that still buys traditional foods from street vendors
> and small restaurants. Each of these different stove use constituency has
> its own preferences in terms of what stove work functions it prioritizes.
>  In such a potentially enormous biomass stove market as Indonesia, it will
> be necessary for designer, producers and marketers to target specific
> stove
> using communities.  We need to first understand what stove work functions
> they use their stoves to perform and once we know how well their
> traditional stoves perform these functions we can begin to design and
> produce stoves that out perform the baseline stove technologies.
>
> Hope these remarks do not give you a headache. Anthropologists have a bad
> reputation because we tend to make solutions that work for the people more
> complex and difficult to deliver.  It turns out that reality is normally
> more complex than we want it to be.
>
> In service,
>
> Cecil
>
> In service,
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Cecil Cook <cec1863 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear stovers,
>>
>> Ron asks:
>> *Kevin mention's Cecil Cook doing interviews on consumer stove
>> preferences. Anyone know if making money while cooking was a stove-user
>> question that Cecil asked?*
>>
>> The World Bank is currently conducting a many paged questionnaire to
>> identify the full spectrum of stove use and stove work functions in a
>> range
>> of different stove use constituencies. My fieldwork in agricultural
>> villages in Yogyakarta and Central Java clearly indicated that
>> traditional
>> self constructed multi-pothole stoves are used for the following
>> functions:
>>
>>    1. household cooking and water heating (for bathing and
>>    pasteurization) (2 pots cooking/heating  at the same time) ,
>>    2. income generation (making palm sugar, frying chips, crackers and
>>    other snack foods for sale),
>>    3. drying crops such as corn, peanuts, root crops, herbs for home use
>>    and sale on racks above the stove,
>>    4. space heating in households that are more than 500 meter ASL,
>>    5. drying damp firewood and clothes during the rainy season,
>>    6. cooking large quantities of food to feed the extended family
>>    (woks/pots with 10 to 20 litres of water to boil meat, cook rice,
>> cook
>>    soups and vegetables) at wedding, funerals (7 observances over 3
>> years),
>>    and village gatherings (the stove needs to be big enough to deliver
>> 10 to
>>    15 kW of power to the pot),
>>    7. creating a social hearth or focus for the household including
>>    emitting enough flickering light to cook by
>>
>> So the traditional stove is versatile multi-functional 'workhorse'.
>>
>> Interestingly, with the arrival of electricity in most villages and the
>> governments roll out of 55 million free LPG stove/3 kg canister kits
>> several remarkable changes in rural kitchens are taking place:
>>
>> (i.)
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:36 AM, <rongretlarson at comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Kevin,  Paul, Steve,  AD,  List etal
>>>
>>> 1.    I concur with Steve Taylor re congratulating AD (in message just
>>> received in this thread) for wisdom on developing country desires to
>>> emulate developed countries on consumer products.  I believe we can go
>>> further and say this applies to incomes.
>>>
>>> 2.  Mainly  I write to note that Kevin (appropriately) places making
>>> money first on the producer side of the seller-buyer lists.  But it
>>> appears
>>> nowhere on Kevin's list for the buyer side - even though about half of
>>> the
>>> messages on this list relate to TLUDs, with all TLUD purveyors well
>>> aware
>>> that charcoal can be sold by TLUD stove  users.  Both of Kevin's lists
>>> are
>>> below
>>>
>>> 3.  Kevin mention's Cecil Cook doing interviews on consumer stove
>>> preferences. Anyone know if making money while cooking was a stove-user
>>> question that Cecil asked?
>>>
>>> Ron
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From: *"Kevin" <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
>>> *To: *"Paul Anderson" <psanders at ilstu.edu>, "Discussion of biomass
>>> cooking stoves" <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>> *Sent: *Sunday, July 7, 2013 2:27:19 AM
>>>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [Stoves] Designing for the affluent AND the poor....
>>> this
>>> is        NOT Re: ocean acidification
>>>
>>> Dear Paul
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Paul Anderson" <psanders at ilstu.edu>
>>> To: "Discussion of biomass cooking stoves" <
>>> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>> Cc: "Kevin" <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
>>> Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2013 4:26 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Designing for the affluent AND the poor.... this
>>> is
>>> NOT Re: ocean acidification
>>>
>>>
>>> Kevin and all,
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Should it [Stoves List discussion] be driven by "Producer Push" or
>>> > "Customer Pull"?
>>> Considering that "customers" (local people in poverty, not NGOs) are so
>>> few on this Listserv, the very worthy attention to "Customer Pull" is
>>> likely to be viewed through the eyes of the "Producers".
>>>
>>> # An astute Producer will find out what the Customer REALLY wants, and
>>> will
>>> configure his Product Offering  to meet the wants to the greatest
>>> extent
>>> possible. Stove design involves compromises, and the trick is to get as
>>> many
>>> of the wanted features as is possible, without building in "unwanted
>>> features", such as "too costly", "too flimsy", "unacceptably ugly", too
>>> unsafe", etc.
>>>
>>> I think that Producer Push is not as bad as it is thought to be, at
>>> least not when by Producers who have substantial overseas experience
>>> and
>>> are not driven by the monetary reward.
>>>
>>> # "Prioducer Push" can be both "good" and "bad". It is "good" if the
>>> producer aagressively and effectively promotes a product that
>>> accurately
>>> addresses the Customer Wants. It is "bad" when the Producer
>>> incorporates
>>> features that are now wanted by the Customer.
>>>
>>> Example:  When the target Customers are quite unaware of some advances
>>> that could be beneficial to them, there is zero "pull". And any
>>> attempts
>>> to inform them of such advances would certainly be a form of Producer
>>> Push or Push from Outside of their societies.
>>>
>>> # This is where work of the calibre being done by Cecil is so
>>> important.
>>> He
>>> sets out to identify the features of a stove that are REALLY important
>>> to
>>> the customer. Then, a Stove Producer can configure a Stove Product that
>>> best
>>> meets the "Customer Wants". This is where the Stove producer can shine,
>>> with
>>> new technology, better materials, better design, etc.
>>>
>>> # The 'Policy People" at "Head Office" may want to Customer to buy a
>>> stove
>>> that reduces "Ocean Acidification", or "Improves climate Conditions",
>>> or
>>> "Produces Char", but if the Customer does not want these features, the
>>> stove
>>> will not sell. Clearly, with so many potential Customers out there,
>>> some
>>> will want these features, and will be willing to pay for them. While
>>> most
>>> people buy bicycles, there is still a market for unicycles, but it is a
>>> small percentage of the bicycle market. This is where "Producer Push"
>>> can
>>> go
>>> wrong.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Kevin
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> Paul S. Anderson, PhD  aka "Dr TLUD"
>>> Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu   Skype: paultlud  Phone: +1-309-452-7072
>>> Website:  www.drtlud.com
>>>
>>> On 7/6/2013 8:41 AM, Kevin wrote:
>>> > Dear Paul
>>> >
>>> > This is the STOVES list.
>>> >
>>> > Should it be driven by "Producer Push" or "Customer Pull"?
>>> >
>>> > I would suggest the Stoves List should be driven by "Customer Pull."
>>> >
>>> > The Boy Scout who helps the proverbial "Little Old Lady" across the
>>> street
>>> > does a good deed only when the Little Old Lady" wanted to go across
>>> the
>>> > street.
>>> >
>>> > In my opinion, the Stoves List should focus on providing Stove
>>> Customers
>>> > with what they want.
>>> >
>>> > Just what do "Stove Customers" want?
>>> >
>>> > There are many facets to "Stoves". There is no such thing as "THE
>>> perfect
>>> > stove", but there are as many "perfect stoves" as there are stoves
>>> that
>>> > perfectly meet the wants and needs of the Stove Customer.
>>> >
>>> > Some factors that may be of importance to Stove Customers are:
>>> > * Initial cost
>>> > * Portability
>>> > * Appearance
>>> > * Cooking capability
>>> > * Space heating capability
>>> > * Fuel efficiency
>>> > * Durability
>>> > * Visual access to flame
>>> > * Pride of ownership
>>> > * Cleanliness
>>> > * Safety
>>> > * Smoke free living space
>>> > * Particulate free living space
>>> > * Etc.
>>> >
>>> > There are MANY more factors of importance to the Stove Customer.
>>> There
>>> are
>>> > MANY, MANY combinations of factors that are of importance to Stove
>>> > Customers.
>>> >
>>> > Stove Producers produce stoves for many different motivations. Some
>>> > motivations or "drivers" include:
>>> > * To make money
>>> > * To feel good
>>> > * To do good
>>> > * To create a market for a particular fuel or technology
>>> > * To create an economic base for community development
>>> > * To address a health concern
>>> > * To address an Environmental Concern
>>> > * To further another Agenda
>>> > * Etc.
>>> >
>>> > To the extent that the interests of the Customer and the Producer
>>> overlap,
>>> > their mutual interests will be served.
>>> >
>>> > Perhaps there should also be a "Stoves Policy List", where the
>>> interests
>>> > and agendas of Stove Promoters and Producers were discussed, and
>>> perhaps
>>> > the "Stoves List" should focus more on the interests of the Stove
>>> > Customers?
>>> >
>>> > What do you think?
>>> >
>>> > Best wishes,
>>> >
>>> > Kevin
>>> >
>>> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Anderson"
>>> <psanders at ilstu.edu>
>>> > To: "Discussion of biomass cooking stoves"
>>> > <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>> > Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2013 1:54 AM
>>> > Subject: [Stoves] Designing for the affluent AND the poor.... this is
>>> NOT
>>> > Re: ocean acidification
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Thank you Richard and Andrew,
>>> >
>>> > I agree with your comments below EXCEPT that you did not change the
>>> > Subject line.   And therefore List readers who are fed up with the
>>> > oceanic acidity discussion are unlikely to have read your comments.
>>> By
>>> > the way, I did NOT read those messages.   But I do read whatever
>>> Andrew
>>> > and Richard contribute to the Listserv.
>>> >
>>> > Now, about designs for the affluent AND the poor.   This relates to
>>> > "trickle down technology" that believes that by helping the rich, the
>>> > poor will benefit.....  EVENTUALLY benefit.   Sure.   a few years or
>>> > decades or lifetimes later.
>>> >
>>> > I am glad that affluent societies financially supported cell/mobile
>>> > phone development.  A great example of trickle down technology coming
>>> > rather quickly.   But it reached the poor societies because business
>>> > found that it could make money off of the needs of poor people to
>>> also
>>> > communicate.   And microchips etc are really inexpensive.   We are
>>> > unlikely to see similar benefits relating to cookstoves.
>>> >
>>> > Even as it is today, MUCH of stove work/efforts are targeted to the
>>> more
>>> > affluent of the poor, those who are in the upper parts of the BASE of
>>> > the pyramid (BOP).   That makes more sense than trying to get biomass
>>> > fuel stoves into typical American and European households.   But that
>>> > approach (well established and supported by the GACC and the World
>>> Bank
>>> > ACESS programs) still leaves a massive lack of attention to the needs
>>> of
>>> > the true base of the BOP.   But at least the distance to trickle down
>>> > from the upper BOP to the lower BOP is less (and should be faster)
>>> than
>>> > trickle down from the Top of the Pyramid to be base of the BOP.
>>> >
>>> > If you decide to reply to this Thread of messages, please stick to
>>> this
>>> > topic.   (Or change the Subject line to reflect what you are actually
>>> > talking about.   After all, the Subject line has at least two
>>> > purposes:   One is to continue the Thread, and the other is to inform
>>> > the reader what is the actual subject being discussed.)
>>> >
>>> > Paul      with 4 more days in Uganda, then I bring home over 300
>>> pounds
>>> > of stove progress (available baggage allowance for 3 people) to show
>>> at
>>> > Stove Camps and biochar meetings in late July, early Sept and mid
>>> > October in Oregon, Tennessee, and Massachusetts, respectively.   I
>>> hope
>>> > to see many of you as I cross the USA by car from my home base in
>>> > Illinois.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Paul S. Anderson, PhD  aka "Dr TLUD"
>>> > Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu   Skype: paultlud  Phone: +1-309-452-7072
>>> > Website:  www.drtlud.com
>>> >
>>> > On 7/5/2013 7:01 PM, Richard Stanley wrote:
>>> >> Hi Andrew.
>>> >>
>>> >> Climate "discussions" aside,   I wanted to elaborate on the
>>> implications
>>> >> of your observation about where" designing" is easier:
>>> >>   I agree with you that it is easier to design anything "for
>>> someone"
>>> (
>>> >> especially those less equipped to express their opinions and
>>> experiences,
>>> >> needs and resources)…... than to do it with them in their context…
>>> >>
>>> >> My own experience tells me that the latter is the sticky part that
>>> few
>>> >> really want to get into and it's a huge part of determining whether
>>> or
>>> >> not ones best intentions stick or not. That sticky part makes really
>>> >> designing from within a good bit more challenging that simply
>>> designing a
>>> >> technical object and selling it here….
>>> >>
>>> >> Richard Stanley
>>> >> NW part of the Americas
>>> >> ==================
>>> >> On Jul 4, 2013, at 12:14 AM, ajheggie at gmail.com wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> [Default] On Thu, 4 Jul 2013 05:41:33 +0700,Paul Olivier
>>> >> <paul.olivier at esrla.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> It is easy to design stoves for poor people in Third World
>>> countries.
>>> It
>>> >>> is
>>> >>> a much bigger challenge to design them for use each day in our own
>>> >>> kitchens.
>>> >> Stove design and use is on topic for [stoves] but there are other
>>> >> forums on which it is better to discuss world changing effects,
>>> >> important as they might be.
>>> >>
>>> >> AJH
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> 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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> 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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>
>



_______________________________________________
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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/ 





More information about the Stoves mailing list