| Main knowledge bank page |
Recent additions |
Recent changes |
What links here |
Categories |
Category cloud How-to guides | Organisation profiles | Project profiles | |||||||||
Fuelwood: A South African View
The increasingly rich literature on fuelwood issues indicates more and more that there are a host of complex sociological and economic issues which need to be tackled to ease the fuel burden on poor families, for example, labour scarcity, lack of transport, competing demands for wood products, access to trees, land tenure rights, and population settlement patterns. Fuel scarcities, while serious, are only one of many shortages which threaten survival. Women's time is taken up primarily in food processing and preparation, then in water collection, and generally, much less time is spent on fuelwood collection. Fuelwood scarcities are a symptom of widespread rural poverty and are linked with the more fundamental aspects of survival, production and land management. Fuelwood policy initiatives clearly have to take account of these issues. In areas of fuelwood shortages, rural households adopt simple coping mechanisms such as the construction of mud-wall windbreaks, and lowering the height of metal grates above the fire. In South Africa, there is also a great deal of evidence that fuel substitution, particularly the use of kerosine, is now widespread. Conventional approaches to the fuelwood crisis have always focused on fuel-efficient stoves, which have aimed to improve on the poor efficiency of open fires, and thus to conserve scarce fuelwood resources. But there has been growing scepticism of this approach, reflected in Foley and Moss's influential review of improved cookstoves (Improved Stoves in Developing Countries, Earthscan 1985). 'How much wood could a woodstove save if a woodstove could save wood?', they asked, intimating that many so-called efficient stoves were less efficient than a well-protected three-stone fire. That was certainly the case for many of the early design efforts, characterized by every volunteer aid-worker, committed to the notion of appropriate technology, trying her or his hand at constructing a new fuel-efficient stove. But there has also been a serious design effort which has produced a documented range of improved stoves, capable of effecting wood savings. Stoves, however, cannot adequately provide one of the valued properties of an open fire - its social focus - and many do not have the same power output possibilities, or effectiveness in space heating and lighting. Another major problem is that insufficient effort has been given to mass production. A poor dissemination record would seem to indicate that there is hardly a burning desire or demand for these stoves, although the picture is not consistent. More than 10,000 improved jikos are sold each year in Nairobi. The pilot production of our Energy for Development Research Centre's fuel-efficient stove was snapped up and enquiries continue, but it fails to convince the largest wood- and coal-stove manufacturer in South Africa that there is a lucrative market. Mass production of low-cost improved stoves in South Africa is caught in a dilemma: the informal sector cannot compete either in terms of quality or cost of production, and established industry can not perceive a new market of semi urbanized families living in the invisible, settlements on the periphery of metropolitan centres. Considerable disagreement currently exists on the efficacy of continued investment in stove programmes. Woodstove designers and disseminators, and reviewers such as Leach and Mearns assert the benefits of improved stoves and argue that they constitute an important component of strategies aimed at reducing fuelwood shortages. On the other hand, many people remain sceptical. In a detailed review article, Gill argues that improved stoves have failed to achieve widespread dissemination. Often they are less efficient than traditional designs, and many do not remove smoke. Improved stove programmes have focused on fuel economy, whilst stove users regard versatility and the ability to cook quickly as being more important. The lack of effective dissemination of improved stoves is ernphasised by a recent review of seven woodstove programmes in Zimbabwe which reported that the average number of stoves distributed during the past ten years was only 1,500 per year. One useful way forward in fuelwood conservation is to learn from and popularise the fire management strategies adopted by women cooking in areas of fuelwood scarcity (see Boiling Point 32). A second strategy would be to focus on the production of improved stoves for urbanising families, ie, those living in informal or periurban settlements, but who are still sufficiently rural to have ready access to fuelwood and not to contribute to urban smoke pollution problems. There is an increasing demographic shift into this settlement category. Households are subject to modernising influences, and desire more convenient and cleaner cooking facilities with effective smoke removal. Disposable income is also likely to be higher here than in remote rural areas and stoves would thus be more affordable. Many of these households would be beginning the process of energy transition or fuel-switching, but because of kerosine or liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) distribution problems, or cost considerations, are likely to retain wood-cooking practices. As with tree-growing programmes, an indirect approach incorporating multiple needs may be the most fruitful. Fuel efficiency may not be the primary concern of the user: smoke removal from the kitchen may be much more important. It is vital that the stove is pleasing, durable and low-cost, in addition to being fuel-efficient. To overcome initial market barriers, the state could consider highly targeted interventions, such as capital subsidies for tooling-up for new, fuel-efficient designs, and initial incentives for increased sales. In parallel with the foresters who responded to the fuelwood 'crisis', engineers (particularly those converted to the notion of appropriate technology) sought to substitute renewable energy technologies in the form of solar cookers, biogas digesters and briquetted, agricultural wastes. So far, nowhere in Africa have these technologies made any impact and numbers produced and disseminated can be counted in tens rather than in the tens of thousands required. Fuel switching away from fuelwood is much more of an option within the context of urbanization. It will be driven not so much by fuelwood price increases as a result of fuelwood scarcity (which experience elsewhere in Africa shows does not necessarily occur), but by the availability of other fuels and the desire to improve living standards. [top] [end]Contents: Boiling Point 35: How Much Can NGO’s Achieve
| |||||||||
Page created:
20 August 2007; Last edited:
20 August 2007; Version: 0 | |||||||||
Pagename: Fuelwood-ASouthAfricanView @HEDON: | |||||||||
