Main knowledge bank page | Recent additions | Recent changes | What links here | Categories | Category cloud
How-to guides | Organisation profiles | Project profiles
 

edit this page

Consumer response to mobile solar water heating in the low-income sector, South Africa


Table of Contents

Boiling Point
Front cover of Boiling Point issue 45
Issue 45 (2000) Low-cost electrification for household energy
ArticleConsumer response to mobile solar water heating in the low-income sector, South Africa
AuthorKetlametswe Nkambule

[top] [end]Introduction

15.5 million people in South Africa live without indoor water and modern electric or gas geysers in their homes. The absence of such plumbing, as well as the cost of the systems themselves, generally precludes a fixed water heating system for this population. As a result of this situation, water most often is heated by burning traditional fossil fuels indoors, and at very low efficiencies.

This article presents a summary of results of a small consumer acceptance survey of mobile solar water heaters, conducted by IIECAfrica during December 1999. The survey was conducted in Ivory Park, a low-income township in Midrand, North of Johannesburg. IIEC chose to test mobile solar water heating devices for their potential benefits, which include zero operating costs, and zero emission characteristics. IIEC focused on consumer response as an unexplored feature of market change in the solar arena.

[top] [end]Objectives

The primary objectives of the study were to profile energy use for residential water heating amongst low-income households of South Africa, and collect consumer response to passive, mobile, solar water heating devices.

Warm water is essential for the preparation of many staple foods, and even more relevant to proper hygiene. The fuels used to meet these water heating needs have direct impact on the health of their users, as well. When fuels are burnt inside the home, air quality and safety deteriorate. Fires are a frequent event in such households, as is paraffin poisoning. Smoke causes respiratory and eye, nose and throat ailments. The carbon monoxide from poorly designed and serviced stoves deteriorates brain functions, impacting productivity, and the ability to learn.

IIEC collected the following information to reach the primary objectives:
  • Baseline information relating to residential water heating;
  • Consumer responses to mobile solar water heating devices and their features, as well as information on conditions under which consumers would use solar water heaters;
  • Data regarding the conditions under which households that own more than one water heating device would tend to use solar water heating devices; and
  • Data on consumer willingness to pay for such devices, needs in terms of consumer finance, and conditions under which that willingness might change.

[top] [end]Background of Ivory Park

Of the estimated 292 000 people living in Midrand, about 233 000 (80%) live in households located in Ivory Park. The energy consumption patterns in these households are typical of many lowincome developing communities, i.e. they use a wide range of energy sources, including electricity, in an inefficient manner, and in ways that are detrimental to their health and the local and global environment. Household energy use in Ivory Park is one of the major contributors to local air pollution, primarily due to the burning of low-grade coal for heating and cooking purposes. The preferred use of low-grade coal is due to the low cost of this fuel (1).

[top] [end]Methodology and sample

[top] [end](a) Household Selection

Thirty households participated in the survey. Though the group contained participants from both formal houses on formal stands (a brick house on a designated, registered lot) and informal houses on formal stands (i.e., a shack on a designated, registered lot), it did not include any informal houses on informal stands (i.e., shacks on an unregistered lot). The households also mirrored the township’s varying income levels, diverse energy use patterns and range of water supply sources (i.e., water available on stand and inside the house). The ideal desired sample of households were those that varied in terms of energy profiles, income, number of residents, home structures, age and gender.

[top] [end]b) Equipment Selection

The selection criteria for the equipment used for the study was commercial availability, ease of use of the equipment, sturdiness and affordability. IIEC also gave preference to devices that were locally manufactured. IIEC selected three different devices and tested each of them over a period of three weeks. IIEC obtained thirty devices in total; ten of each of the selected products. The devices obtained were:
  • A ‘wheel barrow’ type solar water heater, purchased at a cost of R766 (± $120 US) per unit at the time of the study (December 1999). This device has a filling aperture at the top of the device near the handles. Water runs through a PVC zigzagging pipe in the body of the 1 metre long device to heat, and continues to heat in the holding tank (25-30 litre) whilst the device in strong direct sunlight. The device stands at a permanent angle of 45 when on flat ground, and has two wheels for ease of mobility. A tap at the bottom of the holding tank supplies water from the filled device.
  • A soft tank shower at a cost of R60 (± $10) per unit. This shower also known as a ‘pillow case’ device or ‘bladder’, is made of black soft plastic sheeting on the one side and a transparent plastic sheeting on the other side. It has a short transparent plastic outlet pipe with a small red shower-head at the end. To open and close the shower, the user pulls the shower-head vertically up and down. The volume is 18 litres.
  • A third device, almost identical to the solar shower but with a different aperture device, R70 (± $11 US).
Figure 1: The Wheel Barrow Type Device
Figure 1: The Wheel Barrow Type Device


[top] [end]Study methodology

IIEC designed a survey tool to gather information from the community and relied on structured face-to-face interviews to gather data. IIEC’s rationales for relying on interviews were: the multiple languages of the community; the high degree of illiteracy in the target community; and cultural issues such as unfamiliarity with answering surveys. Before distributing the solar geysers, IIEC interviewed study participants to gather information on residential energy use and water heating. These interviews provided IIEC with a baseline against which to compare participant’s responses to the solar water heaters. The baseline interview sought data (both hard facts and perceptions) of fuel use. Thereafter, each participant was interviewed once a week on their use of that week’s solar water heating device.

[top] [end]Summary of findings

The baseline interview indicated that:
  • All participating households use hot water for bathing and most also for cooking. A small percentage uses hot water for laundry.
  • Although the households were electrified, only 13% of the participants use electricity as their sole fuel for water heating. Twenty percent rely solely on paraffin for water heating, and the remainder (67%) use a mix of fuels to meet their water heating needs.
  • Few of the formal households have electric water heaters/geysers installed. The few households that have these installed do not use them often, or at all, because of the high cost related to their use.
  • Households use various appliances such as electric kettles, ordinary kettles and pots to heat water on either electric, coal or paraffin stoves. None of the households used gas.
Figure 2: Soft tank shower
Figure 2: Soft tank shower


The survey further indicated that:
  • Participants welcomed the energy savings associated with mobile solar water heating devices.
  • The devices met almost no resistance in terms of the cultural or status perceptions,
  • Many participants were unimpressed with the low volume device. They found the time/volume trade off unappealing.
  • Participants indicated an interest in purchasing the higher volume system “wheel barrow” through a financing mechanism. The commonly mentioned financing mechanisms were through savings clubs, credit with national chain department stores and lay-away programmes at preferred stores.
  • Survey participants offered few comments on design or features of the systems tested.
  • Solar water heaters meet many, but not all water heating needs in low-income households surveyed.

[top] [end]Conclusion

Solar thermal devices make use of the sun’s radiation in a direct heat transfer format. Simple devices such as solar cookers and mobile solar water heaters require the most minimal acquaintance to the product, and in most cases are self explanatory. No technical training or literacy is necessary to use them effectively. Like solarelectric systems, solar thermal systems require an adequate duration and strength of irradiation to supply service. Due to their simplicity, utility, and low generating costs, simple, low-cost solar water heaters offer a superb service to consumers. To date, however, both suppliers and government policy have largely overlooked this serviced market. Survey participants, were prepared to seek these devices through existing commercial avenues, as long as standard consumer finance was possible. None were aware of the devices before the survey. The bladder devices are well-hidden in the camping section of stores. Meanwhile consumers bath via a splash-bath from small buckets and await affordable and accessible water heating solutions.

The report compiled by IIEC on this work has several recommendations following the results obtained. For more information contact IIEC-Africa.

Winrock International commissioned and sponsored this study with generous support from the US Agency for International Development. IIEC gratefully acknowledges the collaboration of the Midrand Eco City projects, and of the survey participants.

[top] [end]References

  1. Hochmuth, F.: “Thematic Paper on Household Energy Use”, MEPC, pp1-4, October 1999

[top] [end]Bibliography

  1. Energy Development Group: “Solar Water Heating System market Potential Study - Ivory Park”, July 1998.
  2. Thayer, B.M.: “Recommendations to the United nations Commission on Sustainable Development”, International Solar Energy Society, April 1995.
  3. Vis, M. et al; “Market Survey on the Possibilities of Locally Produced Solar Water Heaters in Ghana”, Project Number: TC-T1240 EAP, Student Report, Accra-Amsterdam, April-July 1998.

[top] [end]Download the original article

pdf file link Consumer response to mobile solar water heating in the low-income sector, South Africa by Ketlametswe Nkambule (43 KB)

[top] [end]Contents: Boiling Point 45: Low-cost electrification for household energy

.
.
Low-cost electrification - the need for access to energy services - Rural energy development - an integrated approach in Nepal - Gaining ground in community micro-hydro power development in Kenya - Tariffs for rural grid electrification - Fuel for lighting - an expensive commodity - Demand side management for rural Nepal - Micro-privatising rural power distribution - mass produced community development in Orissa, India - Electricity for the Urban Poor - Windpower - Small is beautiful - Management of sustainable photovoltaic solar energy in the semi-arid region of the State of Pernambuco, Brazil - Rural electrification in Nepal - Experiences of an integrative social contextual approach - From candles to compact fluorescents - Consumer response to mobile solar water heating in the low-income sector, South Africa - Clay Grate Development in Chibau Khera

edit this page

Page created: 12 July 2007; Last edited: 16 December 2008; Version: 1
Knowledge Bank text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.

Pagename: ConsumerResponseToMobileSolarWaterHeatingInTheLow-incomeSectorSouthAfrica @HEDON: AUFA