| Main knowledge bank page |
Recent additions |
Recent changes |
What links here |
Categories |
Category cloud How-to guides | Organisation profiles | Project profiles | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Energy needs of tourist lodges in two mountain communities in Nepal: A case study
This case study analyses two areas, Ghandruk and Ghorepani, which are located in the Annapurna Conservation Area Programme (ACAP). Information collected in 1994 from twenty-two community-based tourist ledges in Ghandruk and eighteen lodges in Ghorepani form the basis of the case study. The study was undertaken to assess the impacts of alternative energy and technology. Ghandruk has relatively better access to new energy sources and efficient technologies whereas Ghorepani is largely dependent on firewood; both are heavily dependent on tourism. ACAP has introduced a number of fuel-efficient technologies and alternative energy sources in the area in order to reduce pressure on the forests. These include:
The energy consumption pattern differs significantly between Ghandruk and Ghorepani, particularly as Ghandruk has access to electricity. In Ghorepani, firewood supplemented by kerosene meets the bulk of the energy requirement. Both these areas are almost equally important in terms of tourism. The average annual consumption of firewood by lodges in Ghandruk is much lower than in Ghorepani: Ghorepani uses much more kerosene. The total energy supplied to each room each year is shown in Table 1. Table 1: Total energy supplied per room per year
Total energy requirements per room per year are shown in Table 2 as percentages. Table 2: Fuel pattern uses in tourist lodges in Ghandruk and Ghorepani (%)
The primary energy generated in the lodges as a whole has been calculated and this is compared with the useful energy. The results are given in Table 3. Notice that the efficiency of space heating is very high in both cases, but is higher in Ghandruk than in Ghorepani. The cooking efficiency is almost twice as high in Ghandruk as in Ghorepani; this is because of the improved technologies available in Ghandruk (Bijuli Dekchi, rice cookers etc.), which also has improved stoves and back-boilers. ACAP has played an important role in the diffusion of efficient technology and new sources of energy. Its intervention has been critical in developing an institutional base for energy planning and forest conservation in an area where tourism plays an important role. Key grassroots institutions have been established for sustaining various conservation related programmes as well as development and dissemination of alternative energy. In addition, a great deal of awareness and training programmes have been introduced. Forest conservation efforts alone would perhaps not have been successful in the absence of affordable energy and end use technology and alternative energy sources. Table 3: Primary energy and total useful energy for tourist lodges in Ghandruk and Ghorepani
[top] [end]Contents: Boiling Point 38: Household energy in high cold regions
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Page created:
07 August 2007; Last edited:
07 August 2007; Version: 0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pagename: EnergyNeedsOfTouristLodgesInTwoMountainCommunitiesInNepal @HEDON: PJGA | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
