[Stoves] Rwanda charcoal (Was Thai Bucket Stove)

[Crispin Pemberton-Pigott]

Dear Nikhil and Ron

It is reasonable to ask what the current situation is when assessing what to do or building an argument in favour of a certain intervention.

The situation with respect to the productivity of charcoal in Rwanda is not now what it was 13 years ago. By 2009 there were already 5 major charcoal production improvement projects under way. It became the thing to do to “save the forest” even though the area under forest had increased dramatically as noted below.

The selective citing of national forests housing gorillas is an emotive plea that raises money but does not reflect the national situation at all, and never has, even if true for that locality. Robert told me last year there was no further cutting going on there – it was simply too valuable a resource for tourism and the government put a stop to it.

The facts are that the area under forest has been increasing save for the interruption noted below, and that as the population increased, the forest area continued to increase even as the use of charcoal expanded. Now, the situation is that charcoal is produced sustainably once again, the area of trees is expanding and there are improvements both in the efficiency of charcoal production as well as stoves using it. What’s not to like?

All the waste material from the charcoal production can be used: some fraction is left in the kiln, some branches are not charred, some roots perhaps could be added to the process. The point is that all the biomass should be charred. If the process heat can be used for something, great. No one is objecting to that as far as I know. If a stove can produce $0.035 worth of charcoal per cooking event (assuming it has the same value per ton as lump char) and people find that return acceptable, they will do it. Ten cents a day is better than nothing.

A major contributor may be the cost of wood compared with charcoal. Meaning wood fuel at the market – it may be more expensive than charcoal per kg, we should not be surprised.

I would like a recent figure for charcoal production in wet tons of wood per ton of saleable lump charcoal.

Regards
Crispin


Ron:

The GEF 2005 report is available under "Project Concept" at https://www.thegef.org/project/sustainable-energy-development-project-sedp<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegef.org%2Fproject%2Fsustainable-energy-development-project-sedp&data=02%7C01%7C%7C88e2b6cec37a4645fd9e08d53b92bef5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636480423803420043&sdata=R9myTAjn%2BtP8GPvCPyNFdMYWCIfHSWy56Oh0E3CRQAw%3D&reserved=0>.

I quote the full two sections about charcoal-making:
"It is primarily the charcoal demand in urban areas and some pockets of wood demand by small/medium industrial users – in addition to charcoal-making, brick and tile-making and some agroindustry – that have elevated concerns about accelerating deforestation. Charcoaling efficiencies are also typically very low – about 9 kg of wood for 1 kg of charcoal – so that an average household annual use of 1.8 tons of fuelwood, if substituted by charcoal for the same level of final energy service provided would imply equivalent fuelwood use of about 3.5 tons (adjusting for efficiency in charcoaling as well as end use).

Substantial real increases in the price of charcoal, in the transport distances, and in the use of substitute or inferior biomass fuels – e.g. sawdust, coffee husks, and other residues in peri-urban areas – indicate that urban charcoal supplies are not met by sustainable exploitation of woodfuels in rural areas. A study for charcoal supply chains to Kigali, potentials for community-based sustainable forest management, efficiency improvements in the charcoal production and use, and promotion of substitute fuels (including gas supplies from Lake Kivu), is warranted."

That study for charcoal supply chains to Kigali, etc. was by Robert van der Plas later in 2004.

In terms of suggested actions, the Concept Note said (emphasis added):

"Promotion of Improved Stoves, Ovens and Kilns:

Rwanda also has an impressive history of activities to ameliorate the environmental impacts of woodfuel use. A program of forest plantations – many on marginal lands, some as buffer zones around the protected natural forests – began soon after independence. It is estimated that between 1960 and 1990, area under forest plantations grew from around 24,500 hectares to 247,500 hectares. During the same period, the protected national forests – in particular the Akagera National Park – suffered small (about 10%) loss of their resource base, while lands designated as hunting areas and forest galleries suffered a very heavy loss (about 75%). The population was also encouraged to plant trees wherever and whenever possible, at the community as well as individual levels. However, large areas were lost during the war and genocide – primarily for fuel needs of armies and displaced persons - and since then for agriculture and resettlement (as well as fuel).

In the early 1990s, a small ESMAP-funded Improved Stoves and Carbonization program was undertaken[1]. More than 300,000 improved cookstoves were sold and used and more than 600 professional charcoalers[2] were trained and engaged operationally. Nearly all of the trained charcoalers were killed during the war and genocide, as also the GoR staff associated with the program. However, knowledge of the improved stove designs survived; these stoves continue to be produced and used, and have spread from Kigali and other cities to other locations. These stove designs promised – and are generally thought to have achieved – about 25-35% reduction in specific charcoal use on individual basis. Apparently the rapid increase in charcoal prices – e.g. in Kigali, rising from around US$60/ton in around 2000 to US$170/t currently – continues to provide ample economic justification to the customers. The former “trade association” of charcoalers has not yet been revived, though some charcoalers were provided training by the MinInfra and KIST in the late 1990s.

Institutional (schools, hospitals, prisons) and commercial (restaurants and other food processing enterprises) customers account for relatively small but concentrated demand for charcoal. Larger institutional-size cooking devices and other technologies have also been tested and used. For instance, researchers at the Kigali Institute of Science and Technology (KIST) have developed and used improved ovens for bread-baking. Biodigesters are in use at some prisons. Currently, the Government of Netherlands is considering a program to expand the use of biodigesters for a broader market development."

The key point here is that people grew biomass and exploited it for charcoal-making. Young boys rode "wooden bicycles" down the hills to deliver charcoal to the Kigali valley. With adequate wood supplies, probably it didn't matter that charcoaling used 9 kg of wood per kg of charcoal. Distances are short, and wooden bicycles or manual labor don't add much to delivery cost.

During 1994 and post-genocide rehabilitation period, charcoaling may have become less efficient due to short-term availability of waste biomass from land clearance. (Think mass graves, residence colonies for returning exiles and refugees, infrastructure and real estate construction.)

To my recollection, this was the first time GEF Secretariat accepted a project proposal about improved stoves and charcoaling.

There is really no systematic data collection on the size of the charcoal market, sources (geography, type of wood, suppliers) of wood feedstock, and charcoal transport, inventories, prices. Fifty years after independence from Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa biomass energy situation is still characterized by ad hoc reports, anecdotal evidence.

We are all getting used to the term "cooking sector". There is no such sector. There is no study of the industrial organization of biomass energy supplies, just as there is no national study of stove emissions, residence types, pollutant exposures and disease incidence. (WHO claims are bogus, but on supplies, demands and prices, I would be hard-pressed to find even bogus numbers for the major countries and sub-national areas.)

I agree with you on the employment potential. In general, modernization of the entire biomass fuel cycle from primary production to combustion and ash management can reduce costs and generate better, modern, jobs.

Nikhil


________________________________

[1] See “Why Better Biomass Stoves Sold in Rwanda, World Development Report 1998-99, p. 39, and Barnes et. al. What Makes People Cook with Improved Biomass Stoves? A Comparative International Review of Stove Programs. World Bank Technical Paper Number 242, p. 22, 1994.

[2] In Rwanda, much of the urban charcoal market is semi-organized and charcoaling is carried out in small/medium rural enterprises. Charcoalers are usually employed as laborers; i.e., they are paid for the carbonization job by the owner of wood/charcoal.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171205/9e9f6c4f/attachment.html>