outcomes from the 2013 charcoal production workshop
TRANSCRIPT
OUTCOMES FROM THE 2013 CHARCOAL PRODUCTION WORKSHOP
Co-‐organized by Takachar, Entrepreneurs Resource Center, and Y-‐Global; July 2013, Nairobi, Kenya
1. The technology 1.1 Overview of the process
The green charcoal production process consists of four key steps. First, the organic waste must be harvested and dried. Second, through a process called pyrolysis, where the organic waste is treated at an elevated temperature, the biomass is converted into a black charred intermediate. This charred intermediate is very easy to crush into powder, which, in the third step, is mixed with a binder and compressed into briquettes. Finally, sufficient packaging and marketing effort should be invested in order to make sure that there is a market for such a product.
The picture above illustrates the key steps in the charcoal process.
1.2 Pyrolysis technologies
There are various technologies that can perform pyrolysis. Here, we focus mostly on the small-‐scale, low-‐cost, and simple technologies that have a wide dissemination potential. Essentially, nearly all pyrolysis technologies adhere to two principles: (1) there is an availability of dry biomass that can readily be lit on fire and releases heat for the pyrolysis process to take place, and (2) there is sufficient air intake control so that pyrolysis can turn biomass into char as opposed to ash. Below, we describe three representative technologies, noting that there are more that have been developed by other efforts.
The first type was developed at MIT’s D-‐Lab in collaboration with its partners. This kiln consists of a 200-‐L oil drum that has a top opening as well as a few openings at the bottom, from which the biomass is lit (bottom-‐lit design). The pyrolysis time is about 20 minutes, yielding 2 kg of charcoal per batch. The cost of the kiln is about 1,500 Ksh/kiln, with the downside that such kiln can release copious amounts of smoke during pyrolysis.
The second design, known here as the top-‐lit design, was developed by Takachar in response to the need to reduce the smoke released during pyrolysis. This kiln also is based on a 200-‐L oil drum concept, but has an adapter and a chimney that direct smoke upwards. In addition, unlike the bottom-‐lit design described previously, in this design, biomass is lit from the top and the flame eventually reaches the bottom of the kiln. The pyrolysis time is also about 20 minutes, with a slightly better yield than the bottom-‐lit design. The advantage is that the design releases less smoke, under windless conditions and given sufficiently dry feedstock. The kiln costs about 2,500 Ksh/kiln.
Finally, the third design, as practiced by a farmer group in Mwea, is suitable for densely packed materials such as rice husk, which may not be easily carbonizable using the two designs mentioned above. This method consists of a chimney (with holes in its wall) which is lit with easily flammable biomass. Then a dense material is piled around the chimney so that all the holes are blocked. The
An open drum kiln, of the MIT D-‐Lab design, in operation. This version is low-‐cost but the downside is that the smoke emission during carbonization can be excessive, as seen in the photo.
The top-‐lit kiln, developed by Takachar, is intended to reduce the smoke emission during the carbonization process. However, the entire assembly is slightly more expensive than the open drum kiln illustrated previously.
pyrolysis process, in this case, takes longer (up to 1-‐2 hours), but there is also more biomass that can be carbonized in one setting/batch. The kiln costs about 2,000 Ksh/kiln.
As KEFRI pointed out, there are also other pyrolysis technologies available for other types of feedstock (such as sawdust), as well as larger-‐scale drums (such as those practiced by ARTI-‐Tanzania) that are able to uniformly carbonize a larger batch of materials. A uniform process and design are desired in the effective scaling of the process, and a technical knowledge pool should be gathered regarding the relationship between the different technologies and the different feedstock types in order to facilitate effective training.
The chimney kiln, used by farmers such as those in Mwea, is designed to carbonize densely packed materials such as rice husks.
Various other carbonization technologies on display at the Kenya Forest Research Institute (KEFRI) in Karura, Nairobi.
1.3 Briquetting technologies
There are also various types of briquetting technologies available. The lowest-‐cost press consists of a simple manual press developed by MIT’s D-‐Lab which consists simply of three metal parts welded together. This press costs about 800 Ksh to make in the jua kali sector, and when operated full time can produce about 40 kg/day of charcoal briquettes. More expensive hand-‐operated presses are also available, such as those marketed by the Giraffe Centre, for a price point of around 5,000 Ksh to 20,000 Ksh. A larger-‐scale production will call for electric extruders, which typically have a price range of 100,000 to 150,000 Ksh. Such extruders require electricity, but have an output of 500-‐1000 kg/day of charcoal briquettes. When investing in a charcoal production process, it is important to match the amount of available waste with the type of briquetting technology used, so that operation occurs most effectively.
A simple manual briquette press, which can be made for about 800 Ksh apiece by the jua kali in less than one day. The output capacity is up to 40 kg/day when operated full time by a skilled worker.
Briquettes produced in Mwea using an electric extruder.
1.4 Binding methods
As there is a wide variety of pyrolysis and briquetting technologies available, there are also many binding methods to press charcoal dust into briquettes. Some binders range from cow dung, soil,
Two versions of the manual briquette press, costing between 8,000 to 40,000 Ksh apiece, in operation at the Giraffe Centre.
cassava, gum arabic, to some more proprietary processes. KEFRI and MIT’s D-‐Lab have done extensive studies on the appropriate ratios of different binders to make optimal briquettes. Takachar has also done extensive studies on the effect of different binders on the emission qualities of combusted briquettes (such as smoke and carbon monoxide), which will be described in the next section.
1.5 Briquetting validation
As mentioned above, both MIT’s D-‐Lab and Takachar have done some laboratory-‐grade analysis of sample charcoal briquettes to ensure the safety of usage in a household level. This is necessary because as we have seen, many alternative briquettes, when poorly made, can have undesirable emissions such as smoke which can be a chronic respiratory health hazard when inhaled by the household over long periods of time. We were able to demonstrate that, given the proper briquetting technique, the amount of smoke emitted during combustion is comparable to wood charcoal, which is minimal compared to alternative solid fuels such as firewood and some other varieties of non-‐carbonized briquettes. In addition, the carbon monoxide emission for our briquettes, when densely packed together, is considerably less compared to regular wood charcoal, therefore making it safer to use in a household-‐cooking setting.
Gum Arabic is a possible binder for briquetting.
1.6 Carbonization demonstration
One of the highlights of the morning session is the live demonstration of the carbonization process, by one farmer from Rumuruti on maize husks/cobs, as well as two farmers from Mwea on rice husks, using two different technologies.
0 20 40 60 80 100 1200
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Combustion time (minutes)
Parti
cula
te e
mis
sion
leve
l (m
g m−3
)Comparison of particulate emission levels
Takachar briquettes, Takachar recipeFragmented wood charcoal, Takachar recipeTraditional wood charcoal
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Combustion time (minutes)
Car
bon
mon
oxid
e le
vel (
ppm
)
Comparison of carbon monoxide emission levels
Takachar briquettes, Takachar recipeFragmented wood charcoal, Takachar recipeTraditional wood charcoal
A comparison of carbon monoxide emission levels over the course of the combustion experiment illustrates that charcoal briquettes, when properly packaged, is safer than wood charcoal to use indoors for cooking/heating. Lab test done by Takachar.
A comparison of particulate emission levels over the course of the combustion experiment illustrates that charcoal briquettes, when properly packaged, is as safe as traditional wood charcoal, whose smoke emission is minimum. Lab test done by Takachar.
Tabitha Wangare, from Rumuruti, explained the carbonization process to the workshop attendants.
Matthew Kamanu and Patrick Muya, from Mwea, demonstrated the carbonization process using rice husks to the workshop attendants.
After the charcoal dust is produced from carbonized biomass, workshop attendants tried their hands at making briquettes using a simple hand press.
2. A micro-‐enterprise commercialization model
In section 1, we have discussed at length about the different options and approaches regarding the charcoal-‐making technologies that utilize organic waste. In this section, we explore how such technologies can fit into a proper commercialization model in order to ensure wide-‐scale dissemination and social impact.
2.1 User experience
Numerous conference participants shared their experiences with briquettes, which are summarized below.
Giraffe Centre: The Giraffe Centre supports conservation/environmental initiatives, and under this purview it trains and supports various groups on briquette-‐making activities from waste. One common feedstock, for example, is a mix of paper and sawdust. One challenge that the Giraffe Centre has encountered with its briquettes is that they release tremendous amounts of smoke, which makes them unsuitable for many households conditions unless a new jiko is designed specifically for such briquettes.
Takachar has been working with the Giraffe Centre to establish the pyrolysis technologies in order to improve the quality of briquettes, and currently a test drum kiln is being housed at the Giraffe Centre, which has graciously agreed to provide training and demonstration for the technologies on behalf of Takachar. Furthermore, the Giraffe Centre has also experienced with various manually operated presses, ranging from 5000 to 40000 Ksh. Notably, the Giraffe Centre publishes a booklet on briquetting practices for the different groups that may wish to be engaged with briquetting.
Inventors and Innovators Association of Kenya (IIAK): IIAK has various chapters in different towns in Kenya. It develops and disseminates various innovations. For example, one focus has been based on waste management, and from this angle IIAK has done some support and training on various youth groups on briquetting. IIAK echoes some similar findings about briquette quality as the Giraffe Centre. Takachar has also been working with IIAK to become a centre for technical innovation, training, and demonstration, especially amongst groups.
Carolina for Kibera (CFK): Carolina for Kibera, in partnership with Takachar, trained one of its youth groups in summer 2012 in procuring a drum pyrolysis kiln for briquette production. The project collects organic waste from the nearby Toi Market, and made some promising headways such as (1) selling the product to households at a rate of 20 Ksh/kg, (2) being demonstrated at the Nairobi International Trade Fair, (3) being certified by the Kenyan Ministry of Agriculture, and (4) being invited to various trainings and demonstrations. The main challenges with this project include: (1) lack of access to a high-‐throughput briquette press, and this limitation restricts the scalability of the production unit; (2) without sufficient income from the small-‐scale briquetting process, the youth group also maintains other
Sample briquettes manufactured by the Giraffe Centre. As can be seen, the briquettes were not carbonized (judging by its colour), and the Giraffe Centre confirmed that these briquettes emitted very much smoke, which made them unsuitable for indoor cooking.
income-‐generating activities such as car-‐washing; (3) because of the various activities that may compete for time, there is an overall lack of bandwidth to troubleshoot the various difficulties that arose in the charcoal production process. However, recently CFK trained another youth group on briquette-‐making and supported the group in getting an electric extruder press. Currently the group is making briquettes from charcoal dust and beginning to market to the local households, with future hopes of using carbonized materials such as maize cobs.
Moses Ojwang, standing, from Carolina for Kibera, shared his experience about the briquetting project undertaken by a youth group that he worked with in Kibera.
Sanchat Trust: The Sanchat Trust, based in Gilgil, has done some innovative work on briquetting. Notably, it sources charcoal dust from nearby places, mixes the dust with paper and a proprietary binder, and presses the dust into briquettes of various qualities. The fuelette briquettes, which target the households, are of the highest quality in terms of density and burning characteristics, and are made by increasing the binder ratio. Briquettes sold to its own school, lodges in Maasai Mara, and a temple in Nairobi are of slightly lower quality, which involves increasing the paper content in the briquettes. The current production level is around several tons per month, with an ambitious expansion plan to more than 100 tons/day in the long term. This is expected to come in large part due to the availability of biomass in the form of rose farm waste.
World Community Students for Sustainable Development: This organization supports and trains various groups in green initiatives. It has had experience with charcoal briquette production in the past, and has a few key lessons to share. Firstly, in order to reach a commercially viable scale, a production capacity of at least 500 kg/day is required. If the youth group is not initially set up at this level with the right technological capacity, then it is likely to fail. Ultimately, many members of the youth group are not really keen in using labor-‐intensive methods of briquetting if there is a higher-‐throughput method available. However, the difficulty is that in order to access technologies at scale, considerable amount of investment is needed, and the youth group may not be in a position to make this investment. In its view,
sufficient incubation and resources need to be input to a youth group to set up the briquetting operation at a commercial scale in order to succeed.
Kenya Forest Research Institute (KEFRI): KEFRI has done some extensive research and promotion in terms of green charcoal production, both from various types of biomass, as well as from sustainably harvested plants (such as bamboo). Resources are available to match different types of biomass to different types of pyrolysis technologies, and training is available to facilitate setting up of the process. Likewise, KEFRI has done some extensive work characterizing binder ratios and the resultant calorific value of the briquettes. KEFRI believes that the briquette market is large, but the lack of a standard makes proper marketing and sales difficult. A household, for example, can become jaded by a product if the behavior changes from day to day. Therefore, a standard is needed not only in terms of briquette quality/density, but also in terms of the various technologies, if possible.
Nellie Oduor, the Deputy Centre Director at the Kenya Forest Research Institute (KEFRI), spoke about the research and implementation initiatives undertaken by KEFRI, and underscored the need to standardize the briquetting industry.
Economic Projects Trust Fund (EPTF): EPTF incubates various enterprises by providing an office space and entrepreneurship training, including potentially those which may involve briquette-‐making and selling.
2.2 Overview of other commercial briquetting enterprises
Takachar undertook a broad market survey in East Africa of various prominent briquetting enterprises, and described the learning from the different operations.
Chardust: Based in Nairobi, Kenya, and started in 1999, Chardust takes charcoal dust and converts it into fuel briquettes at a scale of 8 tons/day currently. Chardust has in the past experimented with carbonizing various organic wastes to make charcoal dust, but has been unsuccessful due to technical issues. Currently charcoal dust is still relatively easy to procure, though the process is becoming more and more competitive as more groups are starting to use the dust. The briquettes are sold for about 700 Ksh in a 50-‐kg gunea bag. The customers are mostly supermarkets, restaurants, and poultry farmers. Attempts in the past with selling at the household level has not been successful.
Green Bio Energy: Based in Kampala, Uganda, and started in 2011, Green Bio Energy currently produces 6-‐8 tons of briquettes from charcoal dust. According to the company, the minimal profitable level of production is around 1-‐2 tons/day. Currently its customers are a mix of hotels, poultry farms, supermarkets, petrol stations, and households, and it is experimenting with a franchising model to sell its branded product, briketi. A 50-‐kg bag of charcoal sells for about 1200 Ksh. While Green Bio Energy does not currently use carbonized biomass for its briquette production, it envisions doing so in the intermediate future, and believes that there is a positive profit margin in this process (albeit less when compared to sourcing charcoal dust directly).
AEST: Based in Soroti, Uganda, and started in 2009, AEST engages rural farmers to produce briquettes from carbonized agricultural wastes. It has a main distribution centre near the production site, but also has three outlets near markets. It delivers only in large volumes to hotels/schools, which accounts for 25% of the customer segment. The other 75% consists of about 250 households. For the households, one key lesson is that price trumps quality in terms of briquettes. The product is offered at 800 Ksh per 50-‐kg bag.
Wildlife Works: Based in Mombasa, Kenya, the operation uses twigs and tree trimmings to carbonize into briquettes, which are sold to houses (10%) and hotels/lodges (90%). Hotels have a delivery of about 30 kg/week. For households, the key lesson is that price trumps briquette quality. However, Wildlife
A branded briquette-‐transporting vehicle from Green Bio Energy in Kampala, Uganda. Photo courtesy of Takachar.
Works is able to charge institutions (such as lodges) a premium price even higher than charcoal, most likely citing the environmental and social benefits. The organization does not distribute its briquettes. Rather, customers come to it. The production level is around 500 kg/day.
Envodev: Based in Moundou, Chad, and started in 2010, this organization sources raw materials 40 km away from production. The carbonized biomass is then briquetted and sold to households (90%) as well as shops/hotels (10%) within a 5-‐10 km range (delivery is made using a pushcart). Envodev found that the greatest industry in Chad for the briquette demand is brick-‐making. In general, the demand for the briquettes greatly outstrips the supply, and currently the production seems limited by the availability of binders. Merchants often buy briquettes from Envodev and sell these in the urban centres. The product prices are such that the briquettes fetch about 1700 Ksh/bag in Moundou and 6500 Ksh/bag in N’Djamena. Because the Chadian government outlawed the use of wood-‐derived briquettes, the prices, as seen above, are very high.
Envirocoal: Based in Kampala, Uganda, the organization sources its feedstock from two sources: in rural areas, this comes from carbonized agricultural biomass, and in urban areas, this comes from charcoal dust. Both types are briquetted and sold in sales centres, where most customers come. There are also trucks that sell directly to customers within a 10-‐km radius, which include households (45%), restaurants (30%), schools (15%), and supermarkets (10%). The popular marketing strategy involves giving free samples to households to try. Each briquette is priced at 100 UGX in urban areas and 50 UGX in rural areas, which represents about 50% the price of regular wood charcoal.
Eco-‐Fuel: Based in Kampala, Uganda, Eco-‐Fuel was started 2-‐3 years ago by a Ugandan entrepreneur. The business model consists as follows: Eco-‐Fuel leases kilns to farmers, and provides training on operating the kilns. The farmers pay back over time, and eventually the kilns belong to them. The farmers carbonize their own biomass and sell the charcoal dust to micro-‐franchises which make briquettes (the training is once again provided by Eco-‐Fuel Africa). Then Eco-‐Fuel Africa centralizes the briquettes for sale via women retailers to final consumers.
ARTI-‐Tanzania: ARTI-‐TZ uses a similar business model as Eco-‐Fuel Africa. So far, ARTI-‐TZ has trained over 700 rural farmers in operating kilns for pyrolysis. The kilns come in various flavors. According to Gideon Mandara, recently ARTI has abandoned the large-‐scale pyrolysis kilns in favor of single-‐drum kilns. The charcoal dust is then purchased from the network of farmers and briquetted at a centralized location. The briquettes sell for about 800 Ksh per 25-‐kg bag. By September 2013, ARTI expects to have a 8 tons/day capacity. ARTI-‐TZ has agreed to do a training in Nairobi on setting up a green charcoal production operation in the near future.
2.3 Key lessons in commercialization strategies
From the discussions in the two sections above, there are some key lessons which we can draw from the commercialization strategies to date. In terms of customers, households prefer high-‐quality, high-‐priced briquettes which are also perceived to last longer and cook more meals. However, in selling the briquettes to the households, the price per perceived weight unit makes the most important factor in product acceptance. On the other hand, hotels/industries place a smaller emphasis on quality, and
rather are looking for a product that is low-‐cost. Therefore, any briquettes targeted towards this market segment must be able to compete with the current wood charcoal wholesale price and must be able to deliver to the hotels/industries (which is the current practice). Ultimately, it is clear that the urban market often has a price premium due to both the higher demand and the scarcity of trees nearby, which makes this market potentially easier to enter to make an initial profitable case.
In terms of operations and scaling, there are two key facts which affect the commercialization strategy. Firstly, kilns can be made cheap to invest and operate, which make them able to be widely disseminated to various groups/individuals in close proximity to waste. This disseminated kiln approach is also prefer to an approach where the organic waste is first centralized then carbonized, because transportation of the bulky waste (as opposed to the charcoal dust) can add greatly to the production cost. The second fact is that if high-‐quality briquettes are desired, then briquette presses are expensive. Such presses cannot be easily invested by groups that have the power to own and operate a pyrolysis kiln. Therefore, there should be a centralized location where the carbonized charcoal dust from various groups/individuals can be gathered and briquetted. This centralized briquetting also ensures quality control as well as uniform branding/marketing, which increases the likelihood of product acceptance.
2.4 Proposal of a micro-‐enterprise model
In consideration of the key lessons as summarized above in the previous section, we propose for consideration a micro-‐enterprise model for the dissemination of green charcoal production. This model consists of some key features:
(a) Decentralized pyrolysis: Kilns are distributed (or leased, with some financing model in place) to individuals or groups living in close proximity to waste, so that it almost costs them nothing except labor to carbonize the waste into char. The individuals/groups sell the char to the briquetting facility, thereby gaining some income from the organic waste that is otherwise unmanaged.
(b) Collection of char: The char is then collected and centralized to a briquetting facility. (c) Briquetting facility: The briquetting facility produces at least 500 kg/day of charcoal dust into
high-‐quality and branded briquettes for distribution into urban areas. (d) Marketing and sales: Anchors in specific communities/customers will assist in the sales of such
briquettes.
We see each micro-‐enterprise as consisting of a briquetting facility and a network of kiln operators who supply the charcoal dust. A city such as Nairobi or Dar es-‐Salaam can easily support at least 5-‐10 of such operations. Each micro-‐enterprise model is sufficient to support one micro-‐entrepreneur as well as 3-‐4 workers hired, in addition to the network of farmers/waste groups that can increase their income by supplying the charcoal dust. Over time, as this mode of production grows and spreads, we will aim to create a conducive environment for the proper incubation, start-‐up, and certification/commissioning of such groups in new sites, through resource mobilization and key partnerships.
Ultimately, if such micro-‐enterprises spread, then what we can offer is (1) a network/platform for coordinated learning and training, (2) a branded variety of technologies (kilns and presses) for such groups to invest in.
2.5 Initial incubation
Takachar’s offering during this session is to provide the resources to support the initial incubation and start-‐up support of one or two such micro-‐enterprises. In recognition that as a new industry, this enterprise may represent a risky proposition to the micro-‐entrepreneurs, Takachar offers to pay such entrepreneurs an initial 6-‐month stipend to enable him/her to solely focus on building the enterprise and generating revenue for sustainability. Takachar also offers the oversight of a project coordinator so that the learning from the start-‐up process can be properly captured and documented. After a period, it is expected that the micro-‐enterprise should generate enough profit to pay the entrepreneur without an external stipend.
The workshop participants grouped together for a photograph with a carbonization kiln at the end of the workshop