Analyzing the costs and benefits of clean and improved cooking solutions- Notes
Background
2.8 billion people (40% of the global population) depend on solid fuels like coal and wood for cooking and heating.
Most use low-efficiency traditional stoves, especially in rural areas. Traditional stoves are favored for their homemade construction and easy access to local solid fuels, unlike cleaner but less accessible commercial options.
Negative Effects of Traditional Cooking
Emission of carbon dioxide and black carbon.
Deforestation
Air pollution
Time loss due to fuelwood collection
Household Air Pollution
Defining Improved and Clean Cookstoves
Clean Cookstoves
Improved Cookstoves (ICS)
This term encompasses technologies that reduce household air pollution (HAP), irrespective of the fuel type, without necessarily guaranteeing health improvements.
Reserved for stoves that are clean in terms of household air pollution (HAP), including options like LPG, electric stoves, or highly efficient biomass-burning stoves.
Dose-Response Function
Describes the relationship between exposure (dose) and a health effect (response).
Dose in this Study
Refers to exposure to fine particulates, specifically PM2.5, emitted at high levels by traditional or solid-fuel burning stoves
Modeling Dose Reduction
he study models the reduction in this dose based on the usage of cleaner-burning alternatives and data on PM2.5 emissions associated with those cleaner-burning options
Understanding GWP and Regional Variability
Global Warming Potential (GWP)
It is a measure comparing a gas's heat-trapping capacity to carbon dioxide over a specific time period.
Regional Variability
Black carbon (BC) emissions impact regions differently. For instance, in South Asia, BC on Himalayan glaciers causes warming, but residential biomass burning elsewhere may have a cooling effect due to atmospheric dynamics and organic carbon (OC) emissions.
Cookstove-related parameters
Technical Performance Parameters:
Specific to stove and fuel combinations
Behavioral Parameters
Relate to household usage behaviors
Challenges in Obtaining Fuel Prices
Obtaining fuel prices, especially for less-studied fuels like charcoal and LPG, can be difficult. Prices can vary significantly within a country due to supply chain challenges or regional market differences.
Methodology
Unit of Analysis
Net Benefits Criterion
Stove Alternatives
Perspectives
Methodology Basis
Discount Rates
This study closely follows the approach outlined in JP (Jeuland and Pattanayak, 2012).
It evaluates the costs and benefits of households transitioning from traditional wood-burning stoves to improved wood-burning stoves, improved charcoal-burning stoves, LPG stoves, and electric stoves.
Individual households are the focus, with calculations considering monthly costs and benefits.
To assess the attractiveness of stove alternatives, a net benefits criterion is used, comparing them to unimproved wood-burning stoves as a baseline.
The assessment is conducted from both private (household-focused) and social (societal) perspectives, with the social perspective considering wider impacts like carbon emissions and forest loss.
Private analysis uses discount rates based on private time preferences (5 to 15%), while social analysis employs a real social discount rate ranging from 1 to 6%.
Costs & Benefits of Adoption
Capital investment in new devices or ventilation systems.
Program expenses for stove distribution and marketing.
Operation and maintenance costs.
Net change in fuel costs (potentially a benefit if it reduces fuel expenses).
Learning costs in terms of time and reduced food preparation quality.
Valuation of Time Costs
Time costs (and benefits) are valued at a fraction of the unskilled market wage, considering that non-work time spent on cooking usually has a lower opportunity cost compared to the wage rate.
Typology of Costs and Benefits (from Jeuland & Pattanayak 2012)
Costs
Operation and Maintenance
Fuel
Program Cost
Learning
Capital Cost
Inconvenience
Benefits
Morbidity & Mortality Reductions
Time Savings
Aesthetic Gains
Improved Social Standing
Environmental
Health Valuation Concepts
For valuing disease risk reductions
Chronic Illness- COI per year
Reduced Mortality-Value of a Statistical Life (VSL).
Acute Illness - Cost-of-illness (COI) per case:
Productivity Measure of Mortality Benefits
It quantifies the worth of saved lives by estimating the income that won't be earned due to premature deaths.
Valuation of Environmental Benefits
The study values environmental gains using the social cost of carbon for emissions and tree replacement costs for deforestation. It doesn't include the cost of unsustainable forest harvesting, making the estimated benefits from reduced deforestation conservative.
Composition of Benefits and Costs for Mean Parameter Values
Major Costs
Common costs across stove types are stove and program costs, while operation, maintenance, and learning costs are relatively minor.
Fuel Savings
Biomass stoves result in substantial fuel savings due to wood collection. LPG and charcoal stoves show negative savings as fuel purchase costs outweigh savings. Electric stoves have no net fuel cost change.
Benefits
Key benefits include time savings and health improvements, with cleaner fuels (LPG and electricity) offering more significant health benefits.
Net Benefits
At mean parameter values, all stoves deliver positive net benefits, except for LPG stoves, mainly due to their higher fuel costs.
Incorporating Social Benefits into Net Benefits
Outcome Improvement
All stoves, except electric ICS, show improved results when Kyoto pollutants are considered. Electric stoves perform worse due to significant greenhouse gas emissions from coal production.
Emissions Reductions
Charcoal and biomass ICS offer modest emissions reductions, while LPG provides the greatest reductions.
Social+ Perspective
In the social+ perspective (considering emissions reductions), all stoves yield substantial social benefits. Electric stoves perform well in this context, even outperforming biomass ICS.
Private Net Benefits Variability
Charcoal and Electric ICS
Study's Analysis
LPG and Biomass ICS
Recognition of Benefits
Yield positive benefits in about 37% and 40% of trials, respectively, primarily due to high LPG fuel costs.
Perform better, with approximately 50% and 64% of trials showing positive private net benefits.
Favors electric stoves more than a previous study (JP) due to lower prices and realistic parameters.
Households may not fully realize all ICS benefits, particularly future gains like health improvements or non-market benefits, which can affect adoption rates.
Sensitivity Analysis on Private Net Benefits
Time-Related Parameters
Such as wage rate, time spent cooking and collecting fuel, and stove efficiency, significantly impact net benefits.
Biomass ICS
Fuel Collection
Fuel Costs
If it requires more cooking time than traditional stoves, net benefits turn sharply negative.
Easy biomass fuel collection or low time value can also make net benefits negative, especially for commercial fuel stoves.
Fuel costs are crucial for the net benefits of commercial fuel stoves.
Influence of Parameters on Net Benefits
Time-Related Parameters
Wage rate, cooking/fuel collection time, and stove efficiency significantly affect net benefits for biomass, charcoal, and electric stoves.
Health-Related Parameters:
Health Benefits Importance
Sensitivity to VSL
Particularly PM emissions levels and the value of statistical life impact biomass ICS net benefits, though less so than in previous studies.
Health benefits, especially for electric and LPG stoves, are substantial. Removing them makes most options unattractive, highlighting their significance.
The value of the statistical life parameter has some impact but remains secondary in the sensitivity analysis for all stoves.
Challenges and Outcomes of Cleaner Cookstoves Adoption
Social Net Benefits
Including social benefits, especially related to climate mitigation and reduced tree loss.
In the social net benefits analysis, electric stoves perform less favorably (30% positive outcomes), indicating they may not be as advantageous in areas with coal-based electricity generation.
Key Considerations for Promoting Cleaner Cookstoves
Cookstove Prices
Affordability is a concern for the rural poor; local manufacturing can reduce upfront costs.
Time Savings and Fuel Costs
Time-related factors significantly impact private benefits; improving time efficiency is essential for non-traditional stoves.
Social Benefits
Most stoves show significant social benefits from reduced emissions, but biomass ICS need better combustion and fuel efficiency.
Carbon Credits
The lack of carbon credits for cleaner stoves (e.g., LPG or electric) is a crucial gap to address.
Adoption Challenges
Promotion involves more than cost-benefit analyses; cultural preferences, aesthetics, and supply-side challenges matter.
Location-Specific Solutions
Biomass stoves may not fit all locations; customized approaches and participatory methods enhance effectiveness.
Cleaner cookstoves are aimed at improving efficiency, offering private (time and fuel savings), and social benefits (emissions reduction, less forest pressure). Low adoption despite favorable cost-benefit analyses due to miscalculations, variable outcomes, and real-world differences.
Biomass, charcoal, and LPG stoves often result in negative net benefits for households. Electric stoves more frequently yield positive private net benefits. Helps clarify low adoption rates and highlights challenges like fuel supply and taste preferences.