The Charcoal Project

Marketing Black Gold / Photo: Len Abrams

Everyone knows that telling people to voluntarily use less fossil fuels because CO2 emissions are harming the planet is a very weak motivator.

But tell them they can save money, even make money, if they switch to a sustainable alternative fuels, THEN they start paying attention.

In some ways, that’s what a Tanzanian non-profit is asking the country’s producers and consumers of wood and charcoal fuels to do: take biomass waste, convert it to briquettes using a simple mechanical process, and, voila, you’ve got yourself a cleaner burning, more environmentally friendly fuel for personal consumption or sale!

Making briquettes from char using a simple mechanical press.

ARTI – Tanzania is the non-profit behind the green jobs/clean fuel idea. In addition to its briquette-making initiative, ARTI-TZ, whose mission is to promote sustainability and entrepreneurship through the use of “appropriate rural technologies,”  also promotes on its website a line of clean cookstoves, biogas digesters, and photo-voltaic charging devices.

As we’ve reported here before, Tanzania is a country that urgently needs a crash program for improved cookstoves, better charcoal-making kilns, and sustainable, alternative solid biomass fuels.

According to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the country’s forests are disappearing at a whopping rate of 4,200 square kilometers (1,620 sq. miles) annually. That’s about four times the size of New York City or  half the size of Virunga National Park in the DRC,

To find out more about ARTI’s briquette program, we submitted a list of questions to Dennis Tessier, Programs Director for ARTI- Tanzania.  Here’s what he had to say about their own charcoal project. 

The Business of Briquette-making

The Charcoal Project: So, Dennis, how did the briquette-making program come to be?

Dennis Tessier: Initially we envisioned the project with an environmental focus to reduce deforestation.  After some time we realized that it was very difficult to ask people engaged in the charcoal industry to stop cutting trees when it was their only source of income.  As one villager once told us, “you cannot ask someone to think about the future when they can’t even see past their next meal.” We also quickly realized that urban consumers used charcoal because of its low cost and availability and would only switch if the alternative was cheaper and equally available.  Keeping this in mind we developed our project with a focus on market development for charcoal briquettes with the following objectives:

• To reduce deforestation by providing a sustainable alternative to tree-based charcoal
• To generate “green jobs” by providing training and equipments to existing charcoal producers and rural households engaged in agriculture
• To facilitate and support “green “enterprise through the establishment of charcoal briquette producers and sellers
• To produce a cheaper alternative to wood charcoal
• To sensitize institutions, industry, and urban consumers on the benefits and quality of charcoal briquettes.

A briquette press churning out the goods.

DT: Our project is a synergy of non-profit and commercial activities.  Appropriate Rural Technology Institute Tanzania (ARTI-TZ) works on the non-profit side and focuses on training, education, and sensitization.  ARTI-TZ also provides training on the fabrication of charcoal kilns, pryolyzing of dry biomass, briquetting, and basic business and marketing skills, as well as assists with market linkages.

ARTI-TZ also works to sensitize consumers used to wood-based charcoal to the benefits of charcoal briquettes.  Joint Environmental Techniques (JET), a commercial enterprise, provides a buy-back guarantee for char powder and briquettes from producers in rural areas.  JET processes the briquettes, packages them, and sells them in urban centers. The hope is to create thousands of entrepreneurs who will start their own briquetting businesses.

The raw material for briquettes would normally be burned or left to rot in the field.

The Market

TCP: Who are you targeting and how many people have benefited from the program so far?
DT: Since 2006 ARTI-TZ has trained over 1000 people from Tanzania, Uganda, and Burundi on charcoal briquetting. Building on this success we will start the Waste to Wealth Project with support from the World Bank’s Biomass Energy Initiative for Africa (BEIA) in 2010. The project will train and equip 1800 Tanzanians in 60 villages from the 4 districts surrounding Dar es Salaam.  The project will target existing charcoal producers and facilitate their charcoal transition from forests to fields.  The project will also provide market linkages to ensure existing transporters and other stakeholders are included in the transition.

TCP: What can you tell us about your startup costs and your launch?

DT: To date the project has been financed through fees charged for training and through the personal funds of the founders of ARTI-TZ.  The World Bank will provide 136,000 USD for the Waste to Wealth Project.  ARTI-TZ will provide 60,000 USD in co-financing.  On the commercial side, JET has received some funding from private investors.  Further investment is required to generate the necessary market development of charcoal briquettes.  For an individual wanting to start an SME in his or her community they would require an investment of around 500 USD to buy all the equipments and receive the necessary training.  The cost is based on the training being conducted in Dar es Salaam.

TCP: How competitive are briquettes on the streets of Dar es Salaam?

DT: Joint Environmental Techniques (JET) currently sells a kilo of briquettes in Dar es Salaam at 500 Tanzanian shillings, or about 30 US cents. The char powder is usually purchased from rural producers at 100 shillings per kilo, 320 shillings is used for transportation, production, packaging and marketing and the balance is administration and profit.  We hope to reduce these costs as the production volume and efficiencies increase.

Several 55-gallon oil drums have been joined to make the frame of an improved char kiln.

After stuffing it with waste biomass, the kiln is outfitte with a stove and its contenty pyrolyzed over many hours.

The Product

TCP: What do you use to make the briquettes?

DT: Basically any dry biomass can be used to make charcoal briquettes.  The most common materials are maize stalks, leaves, grass, small branches, coconut husks, saw dust and wood shavings.

TCP: Tell us about the briquetting process. What type of technology do you use? Who owns the briquetting presses?

DT: For JETs operation smaller extruders that have a capacity of 500kg per day are used.  This type of extruder produces a sausage like briquette.  We prefer it because the char powder and binder blend sufficiently to make a briquette that does not break easily and has a good density.  The extruders are owned by JET.  If other people wish to purchase an extruder they can purchase either a manual one that producers approximately 20-40kg per day and costs around 90$ or a larger extruder that ranges from 2300 USD and up depending on the capacity.

TCP: What is the calorific value of briquettes? How does it compare to wood and/or charcoal?
DT: The quality of the briquette depends on the type of biomass used to produce it.  Grass, leaves, rice husks, etc produce a lesser quality briquette, maize stalks, saw dust, coconut husks, small branches produce a better quality briquette.  When asked to compare to wood based charcoal, the answer is it depends on what type of tree is used.  Soft wood trees produce lower quality charcoal than hard wood trees, but generally speaking, the briquettes made from better quality biomass are as good as wood charcoal in terms cooking heat.

TCP: On the website you say the agricultural residue left over from the harvest is “trash.” Agronomists would say there is a good reason for leaving that waste in the fields. That biomass turns over to become much needed nutrients for the next cropping season. Is your business model depriving the land of much needed nutrients? How do you know that the removal of the biomass from the field is not having unintended, negative consequences?  Is this something you are monitoring?

DT: When we say “agricultural waste” we speak of the material that is burned off in the fields after the harvest season.  This is a common practice for pest control and preparing the field for the next season.  While, on the surface, it would seem that pyrolyzing the waste for briquettes is harmful, the truth is actually the opposite.  We have learned from our trainings that producing char powder encourages farmers to control the burning they conduct in their fields rather than setting a large fire.  This protects the micro-organisms and allows some material to remain as mulch.  Furthermore, the activity encourages farmers to better use their land through expanding the area cultivated and gives them an additional income upon which they can reinvest in their land.

The Social Marketing

TCP: What’s your plan to get people to switch from charcoal to briquettes?

DT: The most effective way to sensitize people about charcoal briquettes is to get them to try it and see it working. We do this through live demonstrations at public events, exhibitions, conferences and other gatherings of people.  We support this through media, such as radio programs, and newspaper articles and through trainings.  Government Institutions, such as the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism (MNRT), the Rural Energy Agency (REA) and the Tanzanian Commission for Science and Technology (COSTECH) have provided valuable support in this sensitization process through access to key venues and provision of transport of equipments and supporting trainings.

We are currently working on a comprehensive social marketing strategy.  Initially our focus will be on sensitizing schools and other institutions using charcoal, which represent 11% of all charcoal consumption in Tanzania.  We will combine this with live demonstrations and trainings.

TCP: What are the main benefits you hear from end users? Any idea of what percentage returns to using charcoal after trying briquettes? (I.e.: what’s your retention rate?)

DT: Our business is still young and we do not really have any statistics on it yet.  The Waste to Wealth Project will be our first opportunity to collect such data. What I can say is that people are very interested in switching to charcoal briquettes because they welcome a lower-costing product and they know the destruction wood charcoal is causing.  That said they are reluctant to switch because of fear of the product not performing to their satisfaction and the regular availability of the product.  This is a challenge and call for greater sensitization and ensuring quality briquettes are produced for the market.

Hot from the oven!

TCP: What have you learned in the process of developing and perfecting the briquettes?
DT: The principle complaints when the briquettes are made from grass or leaves is the ash content and the strength of the briquette.  When the briquettes are made from a better quality biomass the complaint is that they burn too hot.  We try to avoid using lesser quality inputs to reduce ash content and improve performance.  The burning too hot is a result of the user putting too much briquettes in their stoves.  Briquettes are denser and pack better than wood charcoal and therefore less volume is required to cook the same amount.

TCP: What types of public policy or legislation has been enacted to favor the adoption of briquettes by urban populations?

DT: The Government of Tanzania, through various institutions and with key stakeholders, including ARTI-TZ, have been working on streamlining its policy on charcoal with the aim of creating market incentives for alternatives and increasing the cost of wood charcoal to reflect its true cost.  Stricter enforcement of existing laws and taxation are also a key component. A great deal of this discussion can be found in a recent publication by the World Bank entitled, “Environmental Crisis or Sustainable Development Opportunity?  Transforming the Charcoal Sector in Tanzania: A Policy Note.” The greatest challenge is providing an alternative to replace charcoal as these measures are put into action.  I direct ban will not work without a ready alternative, as has been proven in the past.

TCP: What can the government and other organizations does to support you?

DT: Consumer sensitization and market development are the greatest areas where is support is needed.  We all have to work together to mainstream alternatives, especially charcoal briquettes.  One way this can be done is to begin switching government institutions, such as schools and offices, to charcoal briquettes.  Briquettes offer an immediate replacement to wood based charcoal and creates jobs in rural areas rather than eliminating them.  It also keeps transporters and sellers in business.  This will allow the Government and other organizations to make the switch without causing any real disturbance to the charcoal value chain.

TCP: Any plans to sell carbon offsets?

DT: We do not have any accurate statistics on carbon offsets as of yet.  We are currently working with stakeholders to generate this information in the near future.  We have not received any carbon credits for our briquettes.

TCP: What would consider success?

DT:Currently Dar es Salaam alone consumes 50% of all charcoal in Tanzania, which amounts to 500,000 tons or 325 million dollars annually.  Charcoal briquettes represent less than .01% of this market.  Success within 2 years would be surpassing 1.0% of the total Dar es Salaam market and 5% after 5 years.  5% sounds small, but we are talking about 25,000 tons of charcoal a year.  Changing the market will be a slow and gradually process.

We thank Dennis for taking the time to answer our questions and we look forward to following up on ARTI-Tanzania’s briquette program. And we wish them the best of luck!

The Charcoal Project

No one knows exactly how many social enterprises were founded around the world over the last 12 months but the conventional wisdom is that about 95% of these will go bust in the first year.

Re:char is an ancient company by these standards.

The four year-old scrappy startup thinks it can improve the livelihood of the world’s energy poor by converting 6 billion tons of agricultural farm waste[1] produced annually in developing countries into sustainable biomass fuel (like briquettes or biodiesel, for example) and biochar, a valuable soil additive that can dramatically boost a farmer’s crop yields.

Biochar is best described as charcoal created by pyrolysis of biomass, and differs from charcoal only in the sense that its primary use is not for fuel, but for capturing essential soil nutrients and for storing CO2 in the ground.

Another important distinction is that biochar is produced at a very strict temperature range (450-500C). This temperature range gives biochar a much higher surface area than fuel charcoal. This important factor gives biochar its soil amendment properties.

Re:char’s idea is simple: manufacture low-cost kilns that pyrolyze crop residues and turn them into char, which can be added to soil to boost crop production or converted to fuel briquettes for sale as a sustainable alternative to wood, charcoal, or animal dung.

Re:char’s potential impact on energy poverty relief, Climate Change through carbon sequestration, and poverty alleviation caught the eye of Echoing Green, a group that invests in social enterprise startups through its annual fellowship program.

Jason Aramburu is re:char’s founder and one of 16 recipients of this year’s Echoing Green fellowship. (See Echoing Green’s 1:30 YouTube video of Aramburu explaining re:char)

We talked to Aramburu to find out more about re:char.

The Charcoal Project: Jason, walk us through this. How will re:char make money and provide social benefits to its recipients?

Jason Aramburu: re:char is an effort to promote low-cost, sustainable production of carbon-negative energy technologies. We think our technology can help produce energy and biochar, two commodities with huge potential for the base of the pyramid.

Right now we’re working on two lines of products, a low-cost kiln aimed for the typical 1-acre farmer, and a “fast pyrolysis” kiln for large-scale production of char for urban areas. These would most likely be adopted by actual charcoal-producers.

TCP: Let’s take the biomass fuel first. What’s the big idea here?

JA: The idea is that by adopting the kiln technology, the small farmer can choose to produce biomass briquettes for sale or for personal consumption. The briquettes will need to be price competitive with existing alternative fuels, of course. But the farmer will have the choice to use the kiln’s char production as either biochar or convert it to fuel briquettes.

We realize the local price of charcoal will play a key role in the farmer’s decision on how to use the char. That’s why we are also working on larger “fast pyrolysis” kilns that will provide sustainable, alternative biomass fuels for urban areas. The rationale is that by providing a less expensive fuel alternative to urban populations, the demand for traditional wood charcoal will diminish. This allows farmers to hedge against fluctuations in the price of biomass fuels. That is, if the price of alternative sustainable fuel briquettes is to high compared to, say, charcoal, the farmer can use or sell the biochar as a soil additive. But if the price of biomass briquettes is high, he can use the char to make briquettes.

UNEP published this valuable resource:  Converting Waste Agricultural, Biomass into a Resource — Compendium of Technologies.

TCP: Tell us more about the larger, “fast pyrolysis” kilns?

JA: Increasing the temperature of kiln has different results on the pyrolysis of biomass.

The “fast pyrolisis” process is useful because it generates biocrude oil, which can be used to power a diesel-type electric generator, for example. The large kilns will be able to carbonize biomass more efficiently, in greater quantities, and with fewer emissions. And all this while also generating energy for the larger community.

TCP: What about deployment and prices of these technologies?

JA: Right now we’re in the pilot state for both technologies. Our plan is to begin testing the smaller kilns by deploying 500 of these in Kenya and Tanzania over the next 12 months. The goal is to validate the technology and make sure people want to use them. We’ll also be using this first batch to refine the education and social marketing strategies.

Despite our progress, we want to make sure we get it right, which is why we are still probably 1 to 2 years away from large scale deployment.

We don’t have a date set yet for the larger kilns. We’re still fine-tuning the technology.

As to the price, we’re still studying the issue but our best guest right now is that the smaller kilns it will go for between $20 and $50. The larger units will be more expensive, obviously, but they will also provide higher margin products. To keep costs down and avoid local tariffs (which can significantly add to the final cost) we are contemplating local production of the units, so we’ll be looking for local partners.

TCP: How are you financing re:char?

JA: Right now it’s self-financed. We have some angel investing and some grant money, too. The Echoing Green Fellowship has really helped drive attention to our work, so perhaps that will translate into financing down the road, too.

TCP: What about selling carbon offsets?

JA: We think the kilns have the potential to capture and sequester large quantities of CO2, but we’re not basing any of our business model around the sale of carbon credits. However, if it does happen, it will be icing on the cake!

TCP: Switching gears, let’s talk about the biochar. How’s the acceptance of biochar as a valuable sustainable development tool going?

JA: Biochar is a tougher sell in industrialized countries but not in the developing world where there is limited access to modern fertilizers and technology. One reason is that labor is less expensive in developing countries, so the overall cost of producing biochar is cheaper. We’re reaching out to policymakers to talk to educate them about biochar. We’ve been to the World Economic Forum, the UN, and we were in Copenhagen. We’re trying to get more attention from other influential development groups like the Clinton Global Initiative and the Gates Foundation.

[1] Biomass wastes include agricultural wastes, such as corn stalks, straw, sugarcane leavings, bagasse, nutshells, and manure from cattle, poultry, and hogs; forestry residues, such as wood chips, bark, sawdust, timber slash, and mill scrap.  Municipal waste, such as waste paper and yard clippings, are also part of the cellulosic biomass waste stream.

A lesson in Coca Cola's World Cup video.

Does anyone know someone at Coca Cola?

We sure could use their deft marketing expertise as displayed in the video above made by the corporate giant for the World Cup! (Click on the image to play the video.)

Granted, selling the beautiful game loved by billions is easier than promoting energy efficiency technology and policies for the base of the pyramid.

Still, making a video that mists the eyes of the most hardened anti-soccer mysanthrope is no small feat.

While we wait for Coca Cola to helps us produce the perfect video that will help the energy-efficiency-technology-and-policies-solutions community tell its story (we can start by giving it a real name!) , we’ve compiled four slideshows recently published in the New York Times that we think help visualize the energy hunger/energy obesity world we live in.

Two of these four slideshows appear in Andy Revkin’s weekly roundup of green news on the NYT’s website.

Finding Design Solutions for the forgotten ones

William Kamkwamba attended the MIT sessions

The first piece is a slideshow narrated by the Time’s Andy Revkin reporting on the great work being done by Amy Smith at MIT’s D-Lab. We are thrilled to see that her annual sustainable design workshop has this year brought together folks from around the world to think about simple design solutions to many of the challenges faced by those living at the base of the pyramid.

This is a good opportunity to note that Smith was an early booster of our work here at The Charcoal Project.

No, really. These photos are worth more 1000 words!

Tibetan glaciers' vanishing act

The second piece is a more sobering slideshow about the dramatic recession of Asia’s Tibetan glaciers. The images are taken from a current photo exhibition at New York-based Asia Society. The idea of documenting receding Tibetan glaciers by matching photographic images taken from the same vantage point is not new. In fact, one of our scientists at The Nature Conservancy did this back 2005 using photographs taken in the first half of the XXth century.

Read New York Times columnist Nick Kristoff’s take on the images.

Add concrete, mix, and voila!

The third slideshow is titled China’s Instant Cities and the images speak for themselves.

Pizza delivery for Apt. 1,288,757 - A? (Photo: Christoph Gielen)

Quoting from the story intro: This year China will add more than 17 million people to its urban population. To house this unprecedented wave of migration from the country side, cities like Shanghai and Guangzhou are building countless high-rise residential towers at breakneck speed.

Climate Change? What Climate Change?

Finally, the last slideshow is a collection of images documenting the record-breaking heatwave that is baking many parts of the world, including our hometown, New York City.

We hope this selection of New York Times slideshow will help people who have the power to effect change to connect the dots because the time to take action is now!

Kim & Nina

A group of Latin American NGOs has called on the World Bank and IDB (InterAmerican Development Bank) to pay greater attention to energy efficiency and Climate Change mitigation and adaptation.

According to a story reported in IPS, a news service that does a great job of covering the Global South, a group of 10 NGOs from Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru and United States told the regional bank “it should reduce its projects’ contribution to climate change, respect communities’ rights, make accounting more transparent, finance the development of renewable energy sources and phase out fossil-fuel sources and hydroelectric dams.”

The IDB, headed by Colombian Luis Alberto Moreno, opened a first phase of consultations with NGOs from Apr. 26 to May 26, and will begin a second stage, Jul. 30 to Oct. 30, centred on drafting a strategy against climate change.

IPS quoted Astrid Puentes, co-director of the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defence (AIDA, in Spanish), and a signatory of the letter as saying, “access to sustainable energy should be a priority.”

In November and December, the bank — which was created to promote development and reduce poverty in the region — is to receive more comments, and has slated April 2011 for the release of the final climate change plan.

IPS said the NGO’s called on the the IDB “to put the priority on investments in energy efficiency and truly renewable and clean energy, which effectively promote climate change mitigation and adaptation, and discourage those investments that cause serious impacts.”

“Hey, watch out Robert Zoellick, they’re coming your way, too!”

– Luis Alberto Moreno, President of the IDB.

This time, 13 different NGOs told the World Bank it needed to consider its energy strategy, emphasizing communities’ rights, green energy and transparency in the elaboration, execution and accounting of the projects the bank supports.”

IPS said, “groups from Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico, Peru and United States want the World Bank to make equitable and sustainable energy a priority, and to take into account the past, present and future effects of its financing on the environment, the climate and the communities.

In a timeline similar to the IDB’s, from February to June, the World Bank collected comments from civil society around the globe, and from July to September it is drafting a strategy, and will conduct more consultations in November and December.

Tranquilo, Luis, I have it under control.

The World Bank plans a public debate of the final document in February-April 2011 amongst its top officials.

The Charcoal Project hopes Mssrs. Zoellick and Moreno will take a personal interest in ensuring that access to energy efficient biomass technologies and sustainable alternative solid fuels for the base of the Latin American pyramid becomes a reality in this decade.

Africa's ubiquitous "jiko" stove

Nairobi, Kenya (Xinhua) – July 9, 2010

A recent report compiled by the Kenya Integrated Household Budget Survey reveals that a staggering 76.4 percent of households in the country’s rural population, rely predominantly on firewood and charcoal for cooking and heating the homes.

These households still cook using the traditional three-stone open fire hearths, which require huge loads of fire woods to function.

Apart from the wanton destruction of the forest cover, these energy sources also contribute significant pollutants harmful to the environment.

Alarmed by the building up disaster, the Kenyan government and some stakeholders have embarked on a project to mitigate the challenge.

The project, named Promotion of Private Sector Development in Agriculture (PSDA), is designed to disseminate energy saving technologies, geared to improve rural livelihoods.

Speaking to Xinhua in a recent interview on the measures the government has embarked on, Nancy Nguru, the project’s cluster manager for Central Kenya, explained that the core objective is to provide environmental-friendly technologies to improve cooking facilities, reduce fuel intake and pollution.

The first step will be the provision of user friendly technologies to develop energy saving stoves (jikos) for use in ordinary households, hotels and institutions.

The project, she told Xinhua, will be implemented by empowering people in the communities with knowledge, technology and skills on energy saving stoves making process. (Read more)