[Stoves] Follow-up about clean biomass fuels

Nikhil Desai pienergy2008 at gmail.com
Mon Oct 9 12:20:05 CDT 2017


Paul:

I think a "Declaration of Clean Cooking with Wood" is a great idea.  A
broader, more emphatic claim needs to be made that improving combustion of
solid fuels is possible, has a long history, just that adapting the
principles to particular contexts takes time and that there are many other
possibilities for biomass energy for small-scale thermal applications -
BESSTA?

Circulate a draft well in advance, say by the 20th?

Let me caution you, however, that the talking heads of SE4All and SDGs
aren't paying much attention to biomass cookstoves, except to point out
that nobody else is doing either. I did some research; see below, in
particular the text "What can policymakers do?" in the  Energizing Finance
report.

Policy-makers ultimately means finance ministers. If Kirk Smith marshals
health sector budgets for LPG and electricity subsidies, all power to him.


------------------------------------------------

SE4All proudly touts a Guardian September 2013 piece - Sustainable energy
for all is not just about dishing out cookstoves.
<http://www.se4all.org/2013_09_23_sustainable-energy-for-all-is-not-just-about-dishing-out-cookstoves>


Actually, it is NOT AT ALL bothered with biomass cookstoves, despite the
rhetoric of GACC CEO at the UN General Assembly time:
<http://cleancookstoves.org/about/news/09-26-2017-champions-and-advocates-shine-a-light-on-clean-cooking-at-unga.html>


"Addressing Clean Cooking: CEO Radha Muthiah stated that clean cooking is
at the core of central issues in the developing world: “If the Sustainable
Development Goals are truly not going to leave anyone behind, we have to
address this issue of clean cooking. If we are looking to ensure a world
where growth is sustainable for our planet, we have to address the issue of
clean cooking. If we are to engage women inclusively and equitably in all
of our societies and all of our productive engagements, we have to address
this issue of clean cooking,” she added.

Behavior Change: Raising awareness and behavior change becomes a central
part of the equation. Getting consumers to change their behavior regarding
their cooking needs comes down to making them aware of the overarching
benefits of switching to cleaner, more effective cooking solutions.

The solution starts with the user: Developing clean cooking solutions
through innovation and expansion of the cookstove marketplace will provide
consumers with ample options, and meet their core needs and wants."

Reading between the lines - with a jaundiced eye such as mine - this "clean
cooking solutions" is code for LPG and electricity, with some charity for
biogas, ethanol, solar, what not.

I don't mind that thrust, but I also consider that to be an explicitly
anti-poor approach, in line with the  fine-wine-dine-and-shine philosophy
of UN Foundation.

See the combined Energia-GACC submission in early 2016 Urgent: Getting
Cooking Energy Right in the Post-2015 Indicators
<https://cleancookstoves.org/binary-data/ATTACHMENT/file/000/000/258-1.pdf>.
They proposed SDG 7.1.2  as “Percentage of households primarily using clean
and efficient cooking fuels and technologies” because the earlier goal
“Percentage of population with primary reliance on non-solid fuels (%)”
allowed kerosene. This change was also supposed to allow for better
combustion of solid fuels, but it needs to be shown that "clean efficient
cooking fuels and technologies" may include biomass cookstoves.

In an accompanying piece, Why We Must Ensure the SDG Indicator Framework
Includes Cooking Energy
<http://cleancookstoves.org/about/news/02-26-2016-why-we-must-ensure-the-sdg-indicator-framework-includes-cooking-energy.html>,
Energia and GACC say that the SDG 7.1 indicator was promoted by WHO. As if
WHO knows what clean efficient cooking fuels and technologies are.

When it comes to solid fuels stoves, I  think GACC is pursuing the EPA
script in using the ISO TC mechanism the way EPA generates its NSPS.  And
has become an ambassador for LPG and electricity.

I happen think it simply means they saw the writing on the wall and chose
to go where the winds have taken them, whereas we have failed.

This CCF 2017 is an opportunity to take them to task - if you feel up to it
- or simply deliver a positive message - wood can be burned cleanly. (Even
if that means plantations for biomass power. At least,  the message that
emissions are not inherent to fuels, no matter what Kirk Smith and WHO say.

I doubt GACC can be an implementation agent for Tier 4 LPG and electricity
stoves with complete and irreversible transition by 2020 of the first 100
million households, with 600 million more to go in the following ten years.

The next phase of GACC has to be something other than chasing SDGs. It's an
elitist, anti-poor game just like "clean energy" has generally been over
the last ten years.

++++++++++++++++

If at all, I think UN Foundation - which was involved with SE4All from the
very beginning  and also with SDGs -- made sure the SDG 3.9.1 was DEFINED
as reduction in % of households using solid fuels as the principal energy
source for cooking. (Tim Wirth was on a high-level group by Ban-Ki Moon
around 2010-12, if my memory serves me  right, and got some contracts for
UNF.)

With UN SDG - which SE4All is supposed to be aligned with -  ruling out
solid fuels, the task of cleaning up the solid fuel stove "enough" (Tier 3,
if they mean anything) is a tough challenge.

Can there be a table for four to five regions, households and non-household
customers for cooking and heating? I am guessing potential coal users for
heating worldwide are some 400 million people, even if they have
electricity for lighting; potential market of about $200 billion over the
next 15 years to change over to better, clean enough stoves. Electricity
and gas cannot compete in these niche markets.

For biomass stoves - potential market of about the same size can be
envisaged. Recognizing that biomass fuels are also used for heating in and
outside homes; you might find some in Delhi and Ahmedabad (if you are
taking the trip) though it's not cold yet.


++++++++++++++

SE4All's new Missing the Mark
<http://www.se4all.org/sites/default/files/2017_SEforALL_FR1.pdf> report
mentions "stoves" only once, in connection with LPG. It mentions "clean
fuels and cooking technologies" a dozen times. It does mention that
the AfDB"seeks to "provide 150 million households with access to clean
cooking energy by 2025."

However, the Taking the Pulse
<http://www.se4all.org/sites/default/files/2017_SEforALL_FR3-F.pdf> report
does talk about stoves and fuels with this conclusion:

"The clean cooking sector requires significantly more attention from
governments, donors, customers, NGOs and private investors. *The finance
needs for the cooking sector—when fuel supply costs are factored in—are
significant. In Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Kenya and Nigeria, the cumulative
costs of meeting government targets for the cooking sector (Tiers 1-5) by
2030 are estimated to be in the order of $258.2 billion. Through 2030, over
95 percent of the sector is found not in the stoves, but in the fuels in
these four countries*. "


 That's just for those four countries.

In general, they  claim annual cost per household for these countries:
[image: Inline image 2]

Based in turn on these assumptions (I hope the numbers show up).

[image: Inline image 4]

So, get a wood stove in $23 range and charcoal stove for $33.

+++++++++++++

In the third report Energizing Finance
<http://www.se4all.org/sites/default/files/2017_SEforALL_FR4_PolicyPaper.pdf>,
which is for 20 "high-impact countries", Kyte says in the Foreword,
"Finance commitments for clean cooking access are especially abysmal" and
further, "And on clean cooking, my wish is that this opens-up a frank new
dialogue around bold market-based strategies that can deploy clean fuels
and technologies for cooking, rapidly and at the required scale. If this
does not happen, the millions of women and children who suffer and die
every year from dirty cooking fuels will not diminish. We will have fallen
at the first hurdle of leaving no one behind."

Under Recommendations, the report says,

*What can policy makers do? *

• Immediately prioritize efforts to scale and accelerate clean cooking
solutions to address the needs of all consumers in rural and urban areas.
Translate this intent through appropriate policy, planning and regulatory
signals for diversified cooking fuels and technologies (across all Tiers of
access), *including LPG, natural gas and ethanol*, and cookstove, to
catalyze action from financiers, investors and consumers. Assess the
crossover benefits of eliminating kerosene subsidies and the strong
connections with *biomass management and deforestation*.

• Recognize that investments in e*thanol, LPG and natural gas for cooking*
require long-term, “industry-building” perspectives and plan and invest
accordingly. Transactions need to be sized in the tens—if not hundreds—of
millions of dollars, with long-tenor debt and a variety of risk mitigation
instruments. The regulatory interactions, financial and professional
service providers and organizations driving *ethanol, LPG and natural gas
cooking fuel opportunities* are substantively different from the rest of
the clean cooking sector.

• Acknowledge the specific role of women in meeting the clean cooking
challenge. Facilitate the development and scaling of opportunities for
women’s participation as service users, engineers, designers and
businesswomen, including greater access to finance for women.


And it is the Understanding the Landscape
<http://www.se4all.org/sites/default/files/2017_SEforALL_FR2.pdf>paper that
says,

Estimates for required investment in clean cooking vary considerably (Box
1.1); *this report uses an annual target investment level of $4.4 billion
per year to 2030 (SEforALL, 2015)*. Other estimates are substantially
higher—in the region of $36-41 billion required per annum (IIASA,
2012)—once fuel costs subsidies for cleaner cooking fuels are included.
This report shows quite clearly that investments are not keeping pace with
this need. Unless action is taken, predicted population growth and
industrialization in developing countries will further intensify energy
demand (IEA, 2016), exacerbating the investment gap.

Its Figure 2.18 (p. 56) has an erroneous headline - says $32 billion as an
average for 2013-14 "Finance for residential clean cooking access by
instrument to the high-impact countries".

Of course, they only mean a thousandth as much $32 million, with  much of
it going to Kenya as in Figure 2.19.


[image: Inline image 5]





------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nikhil Desai
(US +1) 202 568 5831
*Skype: nikhildesai888  *

>
>
>
>
> *From:* Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Paul Anderson
> *Sent:* 8-Oct-17 11:26
> *To:* Stoves and biofuels network <Stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> *Subject:* [Stoves] Follow-up about clean biomass fuels
>
>
>
> Stovers,
>
> Over a week ago I sent a message (attached as a Word document) with this
> title and first paragraph:
>
> *Recognize Clean Cooking with Renewable Solid Fuels 2017-09-29*
>
>
> We need to deliver *a message to the world* that any discussion of access
> to clean fuel sources for cooking MUST include recognition that renewable
> solid fuels (mainly wood / pellet / chips, but including some forms of
> agro-refuse) are also highly clean burning in modern advanced cookstoves.
> So, the topic is correctly stated as "clean cookstoves and fuels", but it
> is often reduced to be only "clean fuels," which is very misleading.
>
> Is this not one of the top five issues of this Stoves Listserv????
>
> Well, the response has been totally UNDERwelming.  TWO.   Yes, a total of
> 2 people sent comments directly to me (without wanting to become involved)
> and ZERO comments on the Stoves Listserv.
>
> Does that tell us something about ourselves?   Maybe:
> 1.  People  do not read the Stoves List messages.
> 2.  My message content is not clear, or maybe too long, or maybe something
> else.
> 3.  The topic is really not of interest to biomass Stovers.
> 4.  Biomass Stovers have given up and now accept biomass being regarded as
> a "dirty fuel".
> 5.  Readers are in such total agreement with what I wrote that they feel
> no need to comment.
> 6.  Something else:   ________ fill in the blank _________________
> 7.  All of the above.
>
> So, I am writing again.   (Stupid Anderson, he will never learn.)
>
> I conclude with what is at the end of my document from last week:
>
> 7.  What next????
> a.  Discussion will be at the Stoves Listserv.  (If comments are sent
> directly to me at   psanders at ilstu.edu  , I might post them with your
> name attached.)
>
> b.  Who will help carry this message forward?   Please speak up.  Some
> assistance is needed.
>
> c.  To whom should this message be sent (as is or improved):   One person
> is Sophie Edwards <https://www.devex.com/news/authors/1253453>   the
> journalist who wrote the 18 September 2017 item about Rachel Kyte..    And
> also send to Rachel Kyte.
>
>
> d.  Perhaps a "Declaration of Clean Cooking with Wood" could be prepared,
> and presented for endorsement / adoption by organizations and persons.
> (Suggest a better name??)
>
>
>
> e.  Whatever is next, we need to utilize the format and facilities of the
> GACC, including the Forum in Delhi.  This is what the GACC is all about:
> With emphasis on the word CLEAN, we are all seeking to have clean
> cookstoves reaching even those people who only have biomass fuels for daily
> cooking.  And this can be done with existing methods, etc., that will be
> further improved with the feedback from the woodgas stove users.
>
> Paul
>
> --
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171009/c1263544/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 49893 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171009/c1263544/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 26031 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171009/c1263544/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 35653 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171009/c1263544/attachment-0002.png>


More information about the Stoves mailing list